So at the end of the day, both Romo and Flacco have won playoff games behind great defenses and Flacco >>>> Romo because he's been fortunate enough to have a great defense behind him every single year he's been in the league. I finally get it!
And if you really think that if you put a passer who is statistically on another level from Flacco in behind a great defense and you wouldn't get similar, if not better results....well then, I have nothing more to say.
Once again, Romo has won a playoff game behind a top 3 defense too (2009)!
And it's not just 1 playoff game where Flacco didn't show up!
His first 5 playoff games he threw ONE touchdown and SIX interceptions and had a 3-2 record!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And behind your clouded logic it's impossible to draw the conclusion that a quarterback is a little bit overrated (and worse than Romo) because he was fortunate enough to win some playoff games that he had ZERO to do with? ONE TOUCHDOWN, SIX INTERCEPTIONS. 3-2!!!!
You think he's greater than Romo because he's been fortunate enough to have a top 3 defense in his first 4 seasons and a top 12 defense last year, despite him being statistically much worse? Really? If you put Romo behind a top 3 defense on a consistent basis with one of the best head coaches in the league the Cowboys wouldn't have a shot at having the success that the Ravens had? Really? Romo's won a playoff game behind a top 3 defense? What was that? Fluke? And if Rahim Moore isn't a complete moron are you seriously making this case for Joe Flacco today? If you can't get it past your thick head that Romo is at the very least equal to Joe Flacco in terms of QB ability, I'm sorry that logic has failed you and you have to be a stubborn mule to accept it.
Bookmarks