Romo is a top 10 QB

[Lazyking]

Pretty much all the advanced QB stats say he had an avg. season at best.

But it's not about stats with Romo. Sure, would I rather have him over half the leagues QBs? Yeah, thing is there is alot of crappy QBs or at least young ones out there.

Again, it's not about stats. Romo came up lame when we needed him most. That is all that matters.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

Romo-loyalty: The ability to see stats as the end all and to put one player above an entire team.

The passing game was head-and-shoulders above the rest of the team.

Again.

[TwoDeep3]

Originally Posted by DFWJC

Romo has a had the oddity of having almost all of his "elimination" games on the road.
If you look at all the great Qbs from the past, you'll find their records for road elimination games are pretty bad too.

I think Romo has had two home elimination games and is 1-1 in those.

I'm not excusing is crappy game this past weekend, just pointing out some facts.

The fact you leave out is that Romo and company did not win enough games to play a home game and avoid this dreaded elimination road game.

Ergo, he still has a problem.

There is this thing that runs around the internet about players that have the most come backs for wins. Roger Staubach is one that did this a lot. Elways comes to mind.

But in each case of great comeback players, they also were the starting quarterbacks that got behind in the game in the first place.

I happened to have seen most of Staubach's games. And I can tell you his performance in the first three quarters was one of the reasons they were behind.

Not saying he was bad. But those teams had a habit of getting behind by playing half-***** football.

Charlie Water's comment that you just gotta believe really meant, you just gotta believe Roger is going to get tired of this losing crap and pull it out himself. Or chew enough butts in the huddle to get people's minds right.

I like Romo and think he can have a future here.

But tossing out stats as if that exempts him from his piss poor play is ridiculous.

[TwoDeep3]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

The passing game was head-and-shoulders above the rest of the team.

Again.

Until the passer threw three picks in the win or go home game.

If you leave that part off you are being disingenuous.

[Disturbed]

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

Romo-loyalty: The ability to see stats as the end all and to put one player above an entire team.

Awesome quote. Helps to explain the blind following...

[TwoDeep3]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

People look at Romo's six consecutive top 10 seasons in passer rating and conclude that it's an empty stat because we haven't won anything.

They aren't looking at the other side of the stat.

Would that other side be the costly interceptions.

This is an example of Romo-loyalty.

Percy puts the player above the team and will take the losing as long as Romo is under center.

[Lazyking]

Passer rating is a flawed stat anyway.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

Until the passer threw three picks in the win or go home game.

Right, those three picks mean the passing offense is no longer the strength of the team.

[Super_Kazuya]

Originally Posted by Lazyking

Pretty much all the advanced QB stats say he had an avg. season at best.

But it's not about stats with Romo. Sure, would I rather have him over half the leagues QBs? Yeah, thing is there is alot of crappy QBs or at least young ones out there.

Again, it's not about stats. Romo came up lame when we needed him most. That is all that matters.

"when we needed him most" is an arbitrary point of reference that you just pull out of thin air because the media tells you. To enhance terms like "choke" and "clutch" which also are just media terms. It's like saying that a basketball player who scored 60 points while the rest of the team shot 30% lost the game because he missed two free throws at the end. Romo played fantastic in November and December when his team needed him most, and Sunday doesn't change that.

[TwoDeep3]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

Right, those three picks mean the passing offense is no longer the strength of the team.

It means the team lost and Romo threw them.

Now tell me Percy how it wasn't Romo that lost the opening night Jet's game a whole back, and that it wads the blocked punt and not the pick at the end that was the reason the jets took the lead for good.

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

The fact you leave out is that Romo and company did not win enough games to play a home game and avoid this dreaded elimination road game.

Ergo, he still has a problem.

There is this thing that runs around the internet about players that have the most come backs for wins. Roger Staubach is one that did this a lot. Elways comes to mind.

But in each case of great comeback players, they also were the starting quarterbacks that got behind in the game in the first place.

I happened to have seen most of Staubach's games. And I can tell you his performance in the first three quarters was one of the reasons they were behind.

Not saying he was bad. But those teams had a habit of getting behind by playing half-***** football.

[View Full Quote]Charlie Water's comment that you just gotta believe really meant, you just gotta believe Roger is going to get tired of this losing crap and pull it out himself. Or chew enough butts in the huddle to get people's minds right.

I like Romo and think he can have a future here.

But tossing out stats as if that exempts him from his piss poor play is ridiculous.

Like I said...not excusing that last game. It was atrocious.

I also agree with the point that you have to win more in the regular season to get those home PLAYOFF elimination games. Or win more so the last game that always seems to be on the road will not make a difference.

In that light though, you then do have to give credit for great play that actually got the team in a position to make this year's last game meaningful.

I guess if he would have played slightly worse vs Pittsburgh and Cincy--enough for us to lose---then ironically we are then not having this "elimination" game conversation.

[TwoDeep3]

Originally Posted by DFWJC

Like I said...not excusing that last game. It was atrocious.

I also agree with the point that you have to win more in the regular season to get those home PLAYOFF elimination games. Or win more so the last game that always seems to be on the road will not make a difference.

In that light though, you then do have to give credit for great play that actually got the team in a position to make this year's last game meaningful.

I guess if he would have played slightly worse vs Pittsburgh and Cincy--enough for us to lose---then ironically we are then not having this "elimination" game conversation.

Credit?

No, this team has the components to win those games and more.

I don't grade on the curve.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

Would that other side be the costly interceptions?

No, as a matter of fact, it would not. If you really want to know, I'll go into it.

Hell, I'll even do it without character attacks or talking to you in the third person.

[HowAboutThemCowboys]

Originally Posted by DOUBLE WING

Such as...?

Never said I had someone in mind. Just saying that I would trade in all the Romo stats for a QB that would give us playoff wins.

[HowAboutThemCowboys]

Originally Posted by percyhoward

So you think teams that have QB with lesser stats have playoff wins because of their QB?

Read into it what you want. All I am saying is that I would take a QB with lessor stats if it meant playoff wins over Romo and his top ten stats and a total of 1 playoff wins. It's a pretty simple statement, what's the confusion?