Roethlisberger v Palmer

Ben Roethisberger is better than Carson Palmer.
I can see where people can make the argument the other way around. It's not ludicrous to think differently. But a simple comparison of statistics mixed with circumstantial evidence can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the former Miami of Ohio Redhawk is better than the former USC Trojan.

First and foremost, let me say that Carson is a wonderful quarterback. Most teams would kill to have him as a signalcaller. But a debate over the top QB's in the league last week got heated over this simple exchange: "After Brady and Manning, Ben Roethlisberger is the best quarterback in the league."
"What about Carson Palmer?"
"Better than Carson."
That set off a good fifteen minutes of callow, infantile mudslinging. For some reason, unintelligent sports fans enjoy saying that a player is better without saying a SINGLE STATISTIC to back it up. Just name calling. Good show. Got me thinking that it'd be a solid idea for a column- Big Ben vs. Carson. Both have started the same amount of years, so it's completely fair to debate based on numbers.

First, the argument for the former Heisman Trophy winner:
His total passing yardage outstrips Roethlisberger's 14899 to 11673. That's a decent amount. He leads 64 63 in completion percentage. His touchdown total tops Ben's 104 84. Landslide victory for Palmer, right?
Wrong.
The passing yardage can be thrown out the window. His 3000 yard advantage in yardage is nullified by the fact that he has had 600 more attempts than Ben. It's the Jon Kitna theorem: throw a lot, get a lot of yards. Not too hard to figure out. In fact, Roethlisberger wins the yardage argument by throwing for 8.12 yards per attempt compared to 7.31.
Completion percentage? Hooray, Carson- out of 100 passes, you throw 64 complete, as opposed to Ben's 63. Such a whopping victory. Go get yourself a slice of cake and pat yourself on the back. It's a push at best- considering the receivers Ben's had to throw to compared to Carson.
Touchdown total? Carson indeed has him beat soundly. Coincidentally, Carson also has him beaten in interceptions thrown- 63 to 54.
So that's Carson's argument? Those three stats?
Here's a stat for you: Ben Roethlisberger has a higher career Quarterback Rating, 92-90. Only a two point difference, you say? Well take into consideration that this is a tight argument numbers wise, and QB rating is the BEST measure of statistics for Quarterbacks, bar none. The tie breaker goes to Roethlisberger. Also, Ben quintuples him in rushing yards (515 to 135), meaning he's not only a more efficient passer, but a far superior runner.
Up until this point, it's relatively even. Here's where the argument gets lopsided. Ben Roethlisberger has a Super Bowl ring. Carson Palmer has never won a playoff game. For all of you out there who base every argument on wins and losses and championships, there is no more incentive to read on.
"But 4and26, Ben had a great rushing game to fall back on LOLZ!!!!111!"
Yeah, and he also had who to throw to? His starting receivers were college quarterbacks. Hines Ward is one of the greatest blocking receivers of all time, but doesn't even sniff the top echelon of pass catchers. Randel El was and is a raw talent who never will amount to anything more than a decent slot man. Willie Parker was a third stringer who was just finding his groove. Heath Miller was a rookie. Ben Roethilsberger was a vital part of that Super Bowl champion team, contrary to popular belief.
And who did Carson have to throw to? Oh, only two all-pro talents by the name of Chad Johnson and TJ Houshmanzadeh, one of the top three receiving tandems in the league (with Moss/Welker and Boldin/Fitzgerald). Both of their talent far surpasses anything Ben has ever had. And for those of you who don't remember, their running back, Rudi Johnson, had approximately 4400 rushing yards from 2004-2006. He was no slouch either. So yeah, he had a team- he just couldn't get it done.
Not to mention the fact that Ben has never had a serious injury. Being a McNabb fan, I hear all the time how being "injury prone" makes a quarterback that much less effective. So why the excuses when, after Carson's knee was utterly obliterated, his QB rating drops seven points a year over the past three?

So is the argument really that much of a lark? Do I really "fail"? Besides all these points, does 4and26sports.com have no business talking about athletics?
And I don't even like the Steelers. I just appreciate talent when I see it.