OT: Roethlisberger better than Warner?

Lol thats nonsense. So Trent Dilfer is a better QB than Dan Marino, because he has won a Super Bowl, right? Given, Id take Kurt over Ben any day of the week, thats just not a fair way to compare the two.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14228759#post14228759 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Jflip2002
I dislike both equally..... I dont think theyre in the same conversation. Warner is a probable hall of famer, Ben just has good defenses to bail him out. Ben can hardly be trusted to not lose a game.... Kurt will win you a game. Give me Kurt any day of the week.
Click to expand...

Agreed :D

Let's put this way, if you put two of them on the same team, let's say steelers, do you think ben will better than Warner? enough said...
 
Re: Re: Every team spies ...

Re: Re: Every team spies ...

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14223646#post14223646 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by LCN
Recording drills, practice runs, pre-game and half time tune-ups, and camera angles that are not allow is consider spying. Telling your camera guy to keep quiet should raise some questions. Watching footage of a game is legal and is done by all teams. The Pats got caught and dealt with the fines, which was a slap in the hand for what they gain from cheating.
Brady is over-rated and his career is basically over after this injury. The next time he senses a lineman in his area, he will release the ball a couple hundreds of a second too early. Trade Brady and keep the backup.
Click to expand...

Braddy is over-rated? Through out his career, he didn't even have a good WR. As soon as they got Moss, he popped 49 TDs. Imagine he has those guys Peyton has, he'd probably have 40 TDs every year.
 
Dude Kurt Warner has played what 10 years in the league. Is a proven gun slinger, comes to play when it's time. Look at his stats after week 10. Better yet look at his QB passer rating for a CAREER. He #4 in passer rating. Doesn't the passer rating put together pass%/tds/etc? He throws the rock MORE than Big Ben. Ben is in a controlled pass offense, Pit is a run first throw 2nd offense. I am not saying that if you win a bowl you are a great QB Marino is one of the greatest along with Joe/Steve. Other than that.... WARNER over BEN any day.
 
First off I want to say I'm impressed at the amount of discussion we are having about this. I'm glad we all can find something to talk about other than reefs.

That all said, let's see if we can bring this debate back to facts. Most of the arguments I have read do not contain any "facts". Examples:
1. Let's put this way, if you put two of them on the same team, let's say steelers, do you think Ben will better than Warner? enough said...

2. Ben just has good defenses to bail him out. Ben can hardly be trusted to not lose a game.... Kurt will win you a game.

3. Look at his (Warner's) stats after week 10.
Click to expand...

1. Why wouldn't Ben do better than Warner? We all have to admit Warner has much better receivers than Ben. Even so last year Ben put up a 104 rating compared with Kurt's 97 this year.

2. What? First off, he has GREAT defense supporting him. :D Kurt throws more INT in the last 2 minutes of a half, has more turn overs, a lower QB rating, throws fewer TDs and alower completion percentage than Ben. Also, Ben performs better than Kurt when he's losing. So, how can a guy who performs so badly in the last two minutes possibly and performs worse when they are losing be trusted to win the game while the one who performs better in the clutch?

3. Stats for weeks 11-17:
Ben
Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck Rate
138 230 60% 1619 7 7 4 18 84.3

Kurt
Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck Rate
163 261 62.4% 1823 7 11 8 10 84.5

Look pretty comparable to me.

So, once again here are some facts:
Ben
*Most Regular Season Wins in a Season, Rookie QB - 13 (2004)
Longest regular season win streak to start a career for a NFL QB - 15 games
*Highest Passer Rating, Rookie Season - 98.1 (2004)
*Highest Completion %, Rookie Season - 66.4% (2004)
*First QB to start two Conference Championship games in first two seasons in the NFL (2004 & 2005)
*Youngest starting QB ever to win the Super Bowl (2005)
*Roethlisberger became the second quarterback in NFL history, along with Peyton Manning, to register 3 perfect passing games during the regular season and only quarterback to ever register 2 perfect passing games in one regular season.
*Most wins as a starting quarterback in first 5 NFL seasons - 51 (from 2004-2008)

Kurt[/i]
* Second Highest Completion Percentage, Career - 65.75%
* Highest Average Passing Yards Per Game, Career - 261.2 yards/game
* Most Yards Passing, Super Bowl - 414 yards
* Highest Rate of Games w/300+ Yards Passing - 45.2%
* Most Consecutive Games w/300+ Yards Passing - 6
# Most Games with a Perfect Passer Rating, Career (regular season only) - 3 (tied w/Peyton Manning and Ben Roethlisberger)

So, Kurt is good and Ben is good. They are in different situations with their teams and their careers. But, looking at the numbers it looks to me that Kurt is streaky at best. First off he's only started 3 full seasons, being a backup or getting benched in the other seven. When he is good, he's really good. But, he can't handle sacks, pressure, the last two minutes or being behind. He's only succeeded when surrounded by all-star talent (2001 Stl, 2007-2008 Az). Ben, on the other hand, has proven to be one of the best young QBs ever in a system that does not throw as much and has only one REALLY good WR. He scrambles well, handles sacks, does well when behind, on the road and in the last two minutes. Sunday and time will tell how he evolves as a QB but so far, in my opinion, he looks to be the better QB.
 
Cardinals clinched in week 14 after going 3-3 following their bye week. Then they lost to Minnesota and lost home field advantage in week 15. So, at best they were slackers for two weeks.

Thought so.......:lol:
 
Technically they clinched in week 14. But they bagged it after the 49ers coaches had brain farts in that Monday Night game in week 10.
 
Let's assume this is true. That they got lazy and arrogant and floated through after week 10. What does it matter anyway? My point was simply the irrelevance of some statements being made.

I'm enjoying the debate a lot. As you can guess, I like football. I'm just trying to keep things in perspective by using useful information. I'm not saying anyone is wrong in their opinions, but let's back things up with some facts.
 
You made very sound argument :). That being said, if we all rely on facts, stats and numbers then the Cardinals should not be in this SB. Same thing happened in 05 when Steelers went through Denver, Cincy and Indy to reach the SB; they were dogs in all 3 games.
Back to topic: I can't call a QB that averages 208 yds/game in his career being dominant; not in the same class as Warner when it comes to pure passing. Better defense, better offensive lines, better offensive coaching...blah. I like gun slingers and passing offenses.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14256186#post14256186 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mdt178
You made very sound argument :). That being said, if we all rely on facts, stats and numbers then the Cardinals should not be in this SB. Same thing happened in 05 when Steelers went through Denver, Cincy and Indy to reach the SB; they were dogs in all 3 games.
Back to topic: I can't call a QB that averages 208 yds/game in his career being dominant; not in the same class as Warner when it comes to pure passing. Better defense, better offensive lines, better offensive coaching...blah. I like gun slingers and passing offenses.
Click to expand...

Sure, you dont make PREDICTIONS based on stats alone. If that were the case, Payton would be the MVP every year, the Saints would win the SB, etc. BUT, you DO use numbers to support your arguments, i.e. Ben is better than Warner because...

No one ever said Ben has more TDs, therefore he is better.

A QB doesnt need to be dominant to be good and conversely, dominant QBs arent always good. Good example that has already been used is Ben v. Marino. Like you, many people prefer gun slingers and passing offenses so naturally, the pick between who is "better" is going to be Kurt. I think the argument in favor of Ben has been that:
1) His stats arent as bad as everyone makes them out to be. Sure, Warners are better but the difference is negligible. If you are arguing simply from a numbers perspective that Warner is better, the facts just dont support that.
2) He has been able to win, despite being on average teams with average offenses, while Kurt has not won unless hes been surrouned my MVP caliber offenses.
3) My contention has always been that Warner can only be succesful if you put him on a team that caters to his style of play, while Ben can be put on nearly any team and be succesful. IMHO, the meaning of great is being able to play on any team, with anybody and still be succesful, i.e. Lebron James. Not simply being succesful with you have an MVP running back and hall-of-famer recievers. No doubt that Warner has been succesful but if you compare the two, Warner has always had better offenses surrounding him, hence the more passes and more yardage and more TDs.

Again, on Warners best day and on Bens best day, I would take Warner but if im building a team and need a QB that can perform consisitently week after week, my nod goes to Ben. He has proven with his stats, or otherwise, that he can consistently win with anyone around him. I cant say that Warner has done the same.
 
I can see it going for dayssss beyond the superbowl :). That's football fans for ya. I will say that I wish we were debating over something more exciting. In the past 5-10 years, the superbowls haven't been THAT exciting either because the outcomes were predictably lopsided or because one or both the teams just weren't that fun to watch. I suppose that's a good and bad thing. Good because that shows how competitive and unpredictable the NFL has become and bad because teams in smaller markets that less people care to see make it to, arguably, the most recognizable championship game in all of sports
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14256884#post14256884 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Solitaryensis
In the past 5-10 years, the superbowls haven't been THAT exciting either because the outcomes were predictably lopsided or because one or both the teams just weren't that fun to watch.
Click to expand...

I actually have to disagree with you for once in this whole thread. Last year's Super Bowl was AMAZING! Come on, the ball on the helmet catch? The comeback win by the Giants over the HEAVILY favored Patriots was one of the best Super Bowl moments ever. And, as a Steelers fan, I have to say Super Bowl XL with the Steelers going from wild card to champion was pretty amazing as well. Sure, Big Ben stunk up the place but that run through Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Denver was incredible. I also have to give a nod to the 2001 Rams. Kurt Warner going from nobody to MVP and leading the greatest show on turf was pretty cool to see. But, that one was pretty lopsided so might fall under your description. ;)
 
Let me rephrase. What I meant was that I wasnt excited about many of the games to begin with. Some had turned out to be great games, like last years, but for the most part, I havent really felt excited about the start of a game in quite some time. In hindsight, last years game was between two great teams but I remember many thinking "THE Giants made it to the superbowl?" The year before that, you had the lopsided game between the no-offense bears vs. the only offense Colts. The year before that it was the SEAHAWKS v. Pitt. Need I say more? Couple years before that it was the Raiders v. Bucs.

I guess my point is that with most NFL games, you never know what will happen and so many games that people didnt think would be exciting, turned out to be great games. But I just dont recall being THAT excited about the start of a game, where the outcome wasnt very predictable and where the two teams seemed evenly matched. This year is no exception to that rule :)
 
OK, this one hit page two and seemed to be losing steam so I'm kicking it back to the top with a twist. Since we can't agree on the better QB, here's a question Keith Oberman posed to Mike Tomlin:

Who will win between your (the Steelers) OFFENSE and their (the Cardnials) defense? The debate about Cards offense vs Steelers defense is common place right now but what about the other way? Will the Cards actually be able to play defense on Sunday?

BTW, Roethlisberger is still better than Warner. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top