I love that Houston's starting QB right now is Tom Savage. Talk about wasting the prime years of your defense.

---

IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS

Boselli is the only tackle named to an all decade team not to be in the Hall Of fame.

---

Apples and oranges. 

 

Boselli had multiple years where he was the best player at his position and had to retire early due to injury. 

 

Boselli is more similar to someone like Gale Sayers or Kenny Easley, who got in this year. 

 

Romo was never close to being considered the best QB in the league.

Romo had years where he led the league in passer rating, completion %, yards per attempt, net yards per attempt, and TD%. 

 

They both had years where they could have been considered the best at their position for the season. 

---

You can say the same exact thing about Philip Rivers.

 

And both are in a clear third tier of quarterbacks of their era.

 

"third tier"

 

just... lol

 

Both are among the best of their era.  They just don't have the rings to show for it.

 

The distaste some have for guys like Rivers and Romo is quite baffling.  Both are extremely good QBs.

 

Both better than Luck (not close,) yet Luck seems gets excused for everything while the others get an undue share of criticism.

 

I'd compare Rivers and Romo to Esiason or Ken Anderson.  Both are very, very good QBs who aren't given their due by many.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

"third tier"


just... lol


Both are among the best of their era. They just don't have the rings to show for it.


The distaste some have for guys like Rivers and Romo is quite baffling. Both are extremely good QBs.


Both better than Luck (not close,) yet Luck seems gets excused for everything while the others get an undue share of criticism.


I'd compare Rivers and Romo to Esiason or Ken Anderson. Both are very, very good QBs who aren't given their due by many.

Rivers is so disgustingly under-appreciated

---

"third tier"

 

just... lol

 

Both are among the best of their era.  They just don't have the rings to show for it.

 

The distaste some have for guys like Rivers and Romo is quite baffling.  Both are extremely good QBs.

 

Both better than Luck (not close,) yet Luck seems gets excused for everything while the others get an undue share of criticism.

 

I'd compare Rivers and Romo to Esiason or Ken Anderson.  Both are very, very good QBs who aren't given their due by many.

 

Brady and Peyton are on the top tier.

 

Would you rank Romo or Rivers on tier with Rodgers or Roethlisberger? I wouldn't.

---

;

;

Romo had years where he led the league in passer rating, completion %, yards per attempt, net yards per attempt, and TD%. 

 

They both had years where they could have been considered the best at their position for the season. 

 

What "years" would you say Romo could have been considered the best at his position? What years was he better than Brady, Manning and Rodgers?

---

;

;

Good move by him, he shouldnt have to be on a Michael Jackson cocktail before every game.

---

What "years" would you say Romo could have been considered the best at his position? What years was he better than Brady, Manning and Rodgers?

2014 he led the league in YPA, AY/A, completion %, TD%, and QB rating. 

---

Brady and Peyton are on the top tier.

 

Would you rank Romo or Rivers on tier with Rodgers or Roethlisberger? I wouldn't.

 

Good for you.

 

He's certainly worthy of being behind Brady and Peyton (two of the best in history) and certainly alongside Rodgers and Roethlisberger.

 

Would you put Eli Manning with Rodgers and Roethlisberger simply because of his rings?

 

For the same reason, you shouldn't discount Romo or Rivers because they're without them.

 

The thing about these mythical "tiers" is that the user of the term gets to define the boundaries.  Which makes "tier" talk typically worthless (as in this case.)

 

Romo and Rivers are certainly at the top of their era and below Brady and Peyton like everyone else.  No one is close to Brady and Peyton.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Good for you.


He's certainly worthy of being behind Brady and Peyton (two of the best in history) and certainly alongside Rodgers and Roethlisberger.


Would you put Eli Manning with Rodgers and Roethlisberger simply because of his rings?


For the same reason, you shouldn't discount Romo or Rivers because they're without them.


The thing about these mythical "tiers" is that the user of the term gets to define the boundaries. Which makes "tier" talk typically worthless (as in this case.)


Romo and Rivers are certainly at the top of their era and below Brady and Peyton like everyone else. No one is close to Brady and Peyton.

I agree with you there but Romo is just not HOF worthy.


His lack of playoff success and injury history will keep him out without much debate.


If he remained healthy and didn't win in the playoffs he probably still would have had a shot to get in because he was a stat machine. I'd imagine if he remained healthy more often he would have been near the top for most passing stats.


The argument of boselli not getting in either is different. Anyone who watched boselli play could tell you that guy might have actually been the best to ever play his position. No one has ever said that about Romo. No one will.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

2014 he led the league in YPA, AY/A, completion %, TD%, and QB rating. 

 

And yet Rodgers got 31 votes for MVP and Romo got 2.

 

And by the way, Rodgers led in AY/A that year. 

---

;

;

Good for you.

 

He's certainly worthy of being behind Brady and Peyton (two of the best in history) and certainly alongside Rodgers and Roethlisberger.

 

LOL, sure. 

---

;

;

LOL, sure. 

 

Great argument!  I'm convinced!

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

1) Brady

2) Manning

3) Rodgers

4) Brees


Then you have Big Ben, Rivers and Romo. Not sure what order to put them in. I'd probably go Big Ben, Romo then Rivers but can see other ways to rank them

---

That's like saying Boselli doesn't deserve it because Jones/Pace/Roaf. Maybe there were just that many hall of fame caliber players. Rodgers completely annihilates the field, but after him Romo's rates are on par with anyone's including Brady/Brees/Peyton. 

The difference is that you could make an argument that Boselli was better than all three of those players when he played. That's primarily why he's getting consideration

---

THERE IS A SKELETON INSIDE OF YOU.

 

RIGHT NOW. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

Boselli is the only tackle named to an all decade team not to be in the Hall Of fame.

He's also the only starter on his all-decade offensive team that isn't in the Hall.

---

THERE IS A SKELETON INSIDE OF YOU.

 

RIGHT NOW. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

Great argument!  I'm convinced!

 

Do you honestly believe Romo is even in the same stratosphere as Rodgers?

 

Rodgers is better at nearly every statistical category.

 

Rodgers has thrown only 300 more career pass than Romo but has 45 fewer interceptions.

---

;

;

You could make an argument IMO (if you ignore the rings) that Big Ben and (healthy) Romo are on the same level/tier.

 

But Rodgers is a much better QB than Romo. I can't think of a single situation where I'd think about taking Romo as my QB over Rodgers. 

---

You could make an argument IMO (if you ignore the rings) that Big Ben and (healthy) Romo are on the same level/tier.


But Rodgers is a much better QB than Romo. I can't think of a single situation where I'd think about taking Romo as my QB over Rodgers.

Yep Big Ben, Rivers and Romo are pretty interchangeable. I prefer Big Ben as a QB but that's only personal preference.

---