Tony Romo is better than Matt Schaub

s0liddy wrote:

at least I hope you're trolling, if not I would guess you're 13-17 yrs old.

What's the problem with 13-17 year old people?


Ahh, old football was more special because players weren't always in the gym; they were natural. Guys like Jim Brown would still own in today's league.

Oh and Bronko Nagurski is THE BEST football name. If I had a bull I'd probably name him Bronko.

back then when players didn't have helmets they knew not to hit anyone hard i've never seen an old football clip where someone get's laid the f*ck out some old commentators say sh*t like "oh back in my day we would hit a QB until he would bleed" thats bull sh*t some of them were straight p*ssy im sure there was a hard hit here and there or every once in a while but back then if you were smart you wouldn't hit someone hard cause you would hurt your self c'mon now these old timers were smarter than that i've never seen an old football clip were it shows them old players hitting somene hard.

every old football clip i see their just doing soft tackles football today is alot rougher even with the penalties football is still rough the sport is known to be agressive so when you hear someone say "back in my day we didn't have helmets or pads" etc etc so it sound like it was rougher but it really wasn't those old players weren't gonna hit someone hard they would hurt them selves in the process they just say sh*t like "AWW man i was a mean son of a gun back in my day there would be blood all over the place when i hit someone" they just say that sh*t.

have you ever seen chuck benarik's hit on frank gifford? probably one of the hardest hits of all time. plus, back in those days, guys played BOTH WAYS. something most players CAN'T do nowadays. football is going in a safer direction, which is great. but in those days, the hits were harder and guys didn't take breaks. asking for breaks was considered weakness, players played through the pain. you can look up old AFL hits, too. that league barely had any rules on hits.

super_mario90 wrote:

back then when players didn't have helmets they knew not to hit anyone hard i've never seen an old football clip where someone get's laid the f*ck out some old commentators say sh*t like "oh back in my day we would hit a QB until he would bleed" thats bull sh*t some of them were straight p*ssy im sure there was a hard hit here and there or every once in a while but back then if you were smart you wouldn't hit someone hard cause you would hurt your self c'mon now these old timers were smarter than that i've never seen an old football clip were it shows them old players hitting somene hard.

every old football clip i see their just doing soft tackles football today is alot rougher even with the penalties football is still rough the sport is known to be agressive so when you hear someone say "back in my day we didn't have helmets or pads" etc etc so it sound like it was rougher but it really wasn't those old players weren't gonna hit someone hard they would hurt them selves in the process they just say sh*t like "AWW man i was a mean son of a gun back in my day there would be blood all over the place when i hit someone" they just say that sh*t.

Watch from about :26 to :40. You're wrong. Again.

i was talking about when they didn't have helmets!!!!

and let's stop talking about old school football and talk about the boys and texans again

super_mario90 wrote:

i was talking about when they didn't have helmets!!!! and let's stop talking about old school football and talk about the boys and texans again

But its the same conversation, you can't be a great football player until after you earn it.

You can't be a ProBowl QB til you go to the ProBowl, just another reason why:

Tony Romo is better than Matt Schaub.

Ps Bronco Nagurski is a great football name, if I remember correctly he was always against new safety improvements like better helmets and faceguards. He thought they were for puss!es and it took away from the game.

So if you name your Bull - Bronco, you gonna name your horse - Maverick

schaub is having a better season though

super_mario90 wrote:

schaub is having a better season though

21/11 is not better than 17/7. Neither is 5 wins vs 8.

schaub ranked 3rd in passing yds with QB's like peyton and brady need i say more.

So he has 300+ more yards passing than Romo. Big f-ing deal. Thats only because he throws the ball more than Romo because the Texans running game isnt doing so hot this year, and the Cowboys are one of the top teams in rushing I believe. Romo is better than Schaub, no question.

FelixdaCat wrote:

So he has 300+ more yards passing than Romo. Big f-ing deal. Thats only because he throws the ball more than Romo because the Texans running game isnt doing so hot this year, and the Cowboys are one of the top teams in rushing I believe. Romo is better than Schaub, no question.

And that's coming from an Eagles fan, Mario. You better believe he wouldn't defend Romo unless he really believed it.

i never said schaub was better than romo what are ya'll reading.

i said "SCHAUB WAS HAVING A BETTER SEASON THAN ROMO"

Well thats the thing. I think the rest of us don't agree that Schaub is having a better season either.

look at the stats

super_mario90 wrote:

look at the stats

No he's not, look at their team's records.

hof8231 wrote:

super_mario90 wrote:

look at the stats

No he's not, look at their team's records.

Therefore, Jake Delhomme had a better '08 season than Drew Brees who almost reached the passing yards record because Carolina finished 12-4 and NO, 8-8.

Bad argument.

phillip rivers should have been the MVP last season

Romo is better than Schaub, and is having a better season than Schaub. Romo has a better TD:INT ratio, not as good WRs to throw to, and 8 wins. If he threw the ball as much as Schaub his numbers would be better. But because the Texans can't run the ball for $hit, Schaub is constantly throwing. Also, Romo is naturally more of a winner than Matt Schaub; he has the intangible winning quality (at least before mid December hits) that Matt Schaub does not posses. This is the reason why the Texans are missing the playoffs again, and why the Boys are well on their way. (BTW i freakin hate the Cowboys and i root for the texans to do well every so often but they never come through).

and btw old time football (before the super bowl but when they had real helmets on) like the 1950s-mid 60s is some of the hardest-hitting football ive seen. Deacon Jones would slap the offensive tackle in the head to stun him, then attack the QB at the head level, something like a clothesline to try to INJURE him. Dick Night Train Lane played a similar style. These types of players were common, as the NFL truly was a brutish game back then.

Romo is better right now but matt has steped it up this season there both good qb but ill give it to romo right now

schaub plays better in december than tony homo. did you know last season schaub went 5-1 in dec last yr and tony homo..........well not so good.

lol i know but i thought we were talking about who is better overall (T Homo) and who is having a better season (T Homo), not who has been better in years past in december (Schaub)

super_mario90 wrote:

schaub plays better in december than tony homo. did you know last season schaub went 5-1 in dec last yr and tony homo..........well not so good.

I am not even gonna go check the record

It is not possible for the Texans to go 5-1 in December

This statement is incorrect

super_mario90 wrote:

schaub plays better in december than tony homo. did you know last season schaub went 5-1 in dec last yr and tony homo..........well not so good.

You're basing this off of 1 year? Really? Get consistent stats then come back. And Romo didn't lose in December...the TEAM did.

And how the **** did the Texans play 6 games in December last year? That's not even possible.

they finished 5-1 at the end of last season (thats what i meant to say)

there go them boys losing in december romo already f*ckin up he had a good game but when he had a chance to put the game away he couldn't do it.

super_mario90 wrote:

they finished 5-1 at the end of last season (thats what i meant to say)

there go them boys losing in december romo already f*ckin up he had a good game but when he had a chance to put the game away he couldn't do it.

You've GOT to be fucking kidding me. Anybody who blames this loss even partially on Romo is completely and totally retarded.

Romo's numbers

41/55, 392 yards, 0 picks. That's a game that Brady, Manning or Brees would be proud to have. The Cowboys lost in spite of Romo, not because of him.