A year-by-year look at how the Romo era has been wasted thus far

[Super_Kazuya]

How do you figure? I've never disputed that he played a good game until the very end (when we needed him the most). I've also never once said that he's the worst QB in "these types of situations". Now you're just struggling to keep up, and thus putting words in my mouth. I've also never claimed to be a "hater", I quite like him and think that we're lucky to have him as our QB (considering how little we gave up to get him), but I'm not going to just blindly throw support his way when he screws up. He is what he is, he's a 12-15 QB that's aging, is part of a "core" of players that has never, and will never win anything worth talking about, and is not a championship caliber QB.

Stop lying so much. You said he "cost" us the game... which is an entirely different proposition than saying he failed to win it. Stop trying to weasel out of it. And stop acting like you're not one of the biggest Romo haters on here. Every time you open up your mouth, it's obvious to see. At least wear it proudly like the other Romo haters do.

 

[Section446]

Stop lying so much. You said he "cost" us the game... which is an entirely different proposition than saying he failed to win it. Stop trying to weasel out of it. And stop acting like you're not one of the biggest Romo haters on here. Every time you open up your mouth, it's obvious to see. At least wear it proudly like the other Romo haters do.

He did cost us the game, he threw the game ending INT. It's not all that complicated. He was put in a position to win, and he chose to throw a poor pass. Oh well, we're going in circles at this point. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[rangers71]

Those guys are definitely in a tier above guys like Romo. Amongst the QB's without a ring though, Romo still isn't in the top five. If Romo was 26, I'd be pumped about our future with him, but he's not. We have seen enough of him to know exactly what he is, a guy who will put up stats, but can't be relied on when the game is in his hands. I'll give him credit, sometimes he pulls a rabbit out of his hat (Washington game), but he's far too inconsistent to be reliable. Let me ask you, what's Romo's defining moment of his career?

His career isn't over yet so he has no defining moment. And the idea that he can't be relied on when the game is in his hands is dumb. If this was the case how do you explain the most 4th quarter comebacks in the league in the last 5 years. You can't pick and chose which games you want to compare, no one wins them all just like no one loses them all. And I will say it again all of the quarterbacks in the NFL with the exception of the ones that I mentioned above are freaking bums and need to be replaced because they have exactly as many championships as Romo does.So spare me the crap about WIlson, Kapernick, Rivers, Stafford and whoever else you want to throw at me because all that matters is Super Bowls right? Well they are **** just like Romo is then.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

He did cost us the game, he threw the game ending INT. It's not all that complicated. He was put in a position to win, and he chose to throw a poor pass. Oh well, we're going in circles at this point. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

He did not cost us the game, and all QBs do it multiple times over a season and their careers so it's a useless observation. You have no point, and you're just babbling now. You're done here.

 

[rangers71]

He did not cost us the game, and all QBs do it multiple times over a season and their careers so it's a useless observation. You have no point, and you're just babbling now. You're done here.

Makes your head hurt doesn't it?

 

[DFWJC]

I used your parameters and looked it up. By "small lead" I assumed you meant "one score."

From the 10 QB with the most attempts in each situation since 2006.

Since 2006, 4th quarter, margin 0-8 points
Rodgers 13 td 1 int 9.4 ypa 122.2
Romo 20 td 9 int 10.0 ypa 110.9
PManning 12 td 3 int 7.7 ypa 99.4
Brees 10 td 5 int 7.4 ypa 96.3
Rivers 9 td 4 int 7.7 ypa 94.3
EManning 88.4 Flacco 87.6 Brady 86.6 Roethlisberger 84.5 Ryan 81.8

If by "small lead" you meant 3 points or less...
Rodgers 9 td 1 int 9.5 ypa 125.7
Romo 11 td 7 int 10.4 ypa 104.9
Rivers 7 td 2 int 7.0 ypa 97.1
Flacco 6 td 0 int 6.8 ypa 88.8
Palmer 4 td 3 int 7.9 ypa 88.1
PManning 87.8 Brees 86.8 Roethlisberger 83.1 Ryan 79.4 Brady 78.3

Maybe you meant, "leading or trailing" by a small amount. Here's an 8-point margin or less either way...
PManning 30 td 10 int 8.2 ypa 103.5
Romo 38 td 17 int 8.4 ypa 99.9
Brees 27 td 18 int 7.7 ypa 93.1
Palmer 23 td 13 int 7.3 ypa 88.4
Cutler 26 td 18 int 7.2 ypa 85.4
Roethlisberger 84.0 Brady 83.2 Schaub 81.6 Rayn 79.6 Rivers 76.7

3-points either way...
Romo 16 td 10 int 9.2 ypa 100.8
Roethlisberger 10 td 2 int 8.0 100.0
PManning 10 td 4 int 7.4 ypa 93.9
Palmer 9 td 6 int 7.2 ypa 87.7
Rivers 11 td 8 int 7.4 ypa 85.0
Brees 83.9 Brady 83.8 Ryan 81.7 Stafford 80.1 Flacco 78.6

Maybe you only want to look at the final 5 minutes of these games. First, with an 8-point margin...
Cutler 9 td 7 int 7.5 ypa 85.3
Roethlisberger 14 td 8 int 6.9 ypa 82.9
Romo 11 td 11 int 7.3 ypa 81.2
Schaub 6 td 8 int 8.3 ypa 81.0
Stafford 7 td 9 int 6.0 ypa 77.2
Palmer 76.8 Brees 74.8 Rivers 72.0 Brady 71.0 Ryan 66.7

And again at 5 minutes or less, but with a 3-point margin...
Roethlisberger 5 td 2 int 7.6 ypa 95.4
PManning 4 td 3 int 6.5 ypa 79.6
Rivers 3 td 3 int 7.5 ypa 79.2
Schaub 1 td 3 int 7.7 ypa 76.8
Romo 4 td 7 int 7.8 ypa 72.5
Ryan 70.3 Stafford 70.3 Brady 68.9 Brees 56.9

There are two conflicting factors: what actually happened vs. what most people remember.

And only that second factor drives mass perception.

Man, that's a lot of interceptions, isn't it?

Just a completely overwhelming and dominant post.

There is NO denying this stuff. People can dream up all the hate they want and narrow the parameters down as much as they want to pin Romo in a corner, but in the end the facts are there; in ALL situations, he is right there with many of the very best in the league and actually compares favorably more often than not.

 

[percyhoward]

There is a thread on page 31 that lists the info. What drives the mass perception is that Romo pulls about two of these choke jobs a year. There is no getting around it. It comes in high profile situations that the whole world sees. There is no stat that can hide these blow ups. Most of the chokes come against teams with winning records which makes it look worse. Actually, Romo doesn't have that good of a record against the better teams in the league. I have never considered myself a hater, but I am not blinded to the point that I can't see that Romo has a history of chokes and there is no denying it.

I went to that thread and found the stat you were referring to. Here it is:

Most Int When Tied Or Up By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006
Romo 7
Fitzpatrick 4
Schaub 4
Henne 4
Roethlisberger 4

The idea is to show everyone how Romo has more late blunders in close games than any other QB. The problem is, this isn't even close to being true. The challenge, then, is how to make it appear to be the truth. Several tricks were used in this endeavor, as it is more art than science.

Trick #1:
Whoever put this stat together made the conscious choice to eliminate all situations when that QB's team was behind in the game. (Notice how it reads, "Tied Or Up By 1 Possession?") They had to leave out the times when the QB was trailing in a close game. They had to do it that way, or else everyone would see that Eli, Brees, and Big Ben (all Super Bowl winners) all have more INT than Romo in these situations, and that would not fit the perception that our clever artist is playing to.

Most Int When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006
Rivers 20
Fitzpatrick 20
EManning 15
Roethlisberger 14
Brees 14

There is no logical reason to eliminate situations when you're behind by 1 score. Screw logic. Romo's not even on the top 5 of this list, so they can't use it.

Trick #2:
Remember, the stat is "Most Int When Tied Or Up By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006." Why only "in losses." Why not include every game? They had to leave out the games that were won by that QB's team, because there are 8 players with more INT than Romo in these situations...

Most Int When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In All Games Since 2006
Rivers 23
Fitzpatrick 21
PManning 19
Brees 18
Brady 18

If the idea is to objectively measure the quarterback's performance in late-and-close situations, there is no logical reason to eliminate the games that were won. If the idea is to paint a picture of ineptitude late in close games, you absolutely cannot include league MVP's like Manning and Brady in your picture. Besides, where's Romo in this picture? Nope, can't use it. Forget all games when the QB's team was behind, and forget all the games when his team won, too.

Trick #3:
This one is the simplest of all. Show only the interceptions. Leave out everything else. Don't include yards or touchdowns, and everybody will just fill in those blanks with their own assumptions. Surely no one will assume Romo has the most yards, the most touchdowns, and the highest yards per attempt in these situations. (Even though it's the truth). In fact, they'll assume just the opposite, and what they don't know won't hurt them.

All Passes When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In All Games Since 2006
Rodgers 246 of 382 3284 yd 23 td 8 int 102.9
PManning 309 of 473 3803 yd 30 td 11 int 101.5
Romo 403 of 630 5396 yd 39 td 17 int 100.5
Brees 391 of 576 4435 yd 27 td 18 int 93.3
EManning 266 of 441 3624 yd 31 td 19 int 92.1

If the idea is to objectively measure the quarterback's performance in late-and-close situations, there is no logical reason to eliminate the games that were won, or games that the team was behind in, or to eliminate yards, or touchdowns. So clearly, that's not the idea. The idea is to paint a picture that supports the perception that the artists are trying to mold.

They're doing a great job.

 

[ufcrules1]

I'm so ready to move on from this guy.

Damn man, we locked ourselves up with this guy, stupid move.

Another Romo homer turned realist. Congrats man.

 

[ufcrules1]

I went to that thread and found the stat you were referring to. Here it is:

Most Int When Tied Or Up By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006
Romo 7
Fitzpatrick 4
Schaub 4
Henne 4
Roethlisberger 4

The idea is to show everyone how Romo has more late blunders in close games than any other QB. The problem is, this isn't even close to being true. The challenge, then, is how to make it appear to be the truth. Several tricks were used in this endeavor, as it is more art than science.

Trick #1:
Whoever put this stat together made the conscious choice to eliminate all situations when that QB's team was behind in the game. (Notice how it reads, "Tied Or Up By 1 Possession?") They had to leave out the times when the QB was trailing in a close game. They had to do it that way, or else everyone would see that Eli, Brees, and Big Ben (all Super Bowl winners) all have more INT than Romo in these situations, and that would not fit the perception that our clever artist is playing to.
Most Int When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006
Rivers 20
Fitzpatrick 20
EManning 15
Roethlisberger 14
Brees 14

There is no logical reason to eliminate situations when you're behind by 1 score. Screw logic. Romo's not even on the top 5 of this list, so they can't use it.

Trick #2:
Remember, the stat is "Most Int When Tied Or Up By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006." Why only "in losses." Why not include every game? They had to leave out the games that were won by that QB's team, because there are 8 players with more INT than Romo in these situations...

Most Int When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In All Games Since 2006
Rivers 23
Fitzpatrick 21
PManning 19
Brees 18
Brady 18

If the idea is to objectively measure the quarterback's performance in late-and-close situations, there is no logical reason to eliminate the games that were won. If the idea is to paint a picture of ineptitude late in close games, you absolutely cannot include league MVP's like Manning and Brady in your picture. Besides, where's Romo in this picture? Nope, can't use it. Forget all games when the QB's team was behind, and forget all the games when his team won, too.

Trick #3:
This one is the simplest of all. Show only the interceptions. Leave out everything else. Don't include yards or touchdowns, and everybody will just fill in those blanks with their own assumptions. Surely no one will assume Romo has the most yards, the most touchdowns, and the highest yards per attempt in these situations. (Even though it's the truth). In fact, they'll assume just the opposite, and what they don't know won't hurt them.

All Passes When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In All Games Since 2006
Rodgers 246 of 382 3284 yd 23 td 8 int 102.9
PManning 309 of 473 3803 yd 30 td 11 int 101.5
Romo 403 of 630 5396 yd 39 td 17 int 100.5
Brees 391 of 576 4435 yd 27 td 18 int 93.3
EManning 266 of 441 3624 yd 31 td 19 int 92.1

If the idea is to objectively measure the quarterback's performance in late-and-close situations, there is no logical reason to eliminate the games that were won, or games that the team was behind in, or to eliminate yards, or touchdowns. So clearly, that's not the idea. The idea is to paint a picture that supports the perception that the artists are trying to mold.

They're doing a great job.

A manipulator of stats knows when he sees another manipulator of stats. Stats don't even come close to painting the whole picture of a player. If they did, Tony would be a lot better player than he is.

 

[jnday]

I went to that thread and found the stat you were referring to. Here it is:

Most Int When Tied Or Up By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006
Romo 7
Fitzpatrick 4
Schaub 4
Henne 4
Roethlisberger 4

The idea is to show everyone how Romo has more late blunders in close games than any other QB. The problem is, this isn't even close to being true. The challenge, then, is how to make it appear to be the truth. Several tricks were used in this endeavor, as it is more art than science.

Trick #1:
Whoever put this stat together made the conscious choice to eliminate all situations when that QB's team was behind in the game. (Notice how it reads, "Tied Or Up By 1 Possession?") They had to leave out the times when the QB was trailing in a close game. They had to do it that way, or else everyone would see that Eli, Brees, and Big Ben (all Super Bowl winners) all have more INT than Romo in these situations, and that would not fit the perception that our clever artist is playing to.
Most Int When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006
Rivers 20
Fitzpatrick 20
EManning 15
Roethlisberger 14
Brees 14

There is no logical reason to eliminate situations when you're behind by 1 score. Screw logic. Romo's not even on the top 5 of this list, so they can't use it.

Trick #2:
Remember, the stat is "Most Int When Tied Or Up By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In Losses Since 2006." Why only "in losses." Why not include every game? They had to leave out the games that were won by that QB's team, because there are 8 players with more INT than Romo in these situations...

Most Int When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In All Games Since 2006
Rivers 23
Fitzpatrick 21
PManning 19
Brees 18
Brady 18

If the idea is to objectively measure the quarterback's performance in late-and-close situations, there is no logical reason to eliminate the games that were won. If the idea is to paint a picture of ineptitude late in close games, you absolutely cannot include league MVP's like Manning and Brady in your picture. Besides, where's Romo in this picture? Nope, can't use it. Forget all games when the QB's team was behind, and forget all the games when his team won, too.

Trick #3:
This one is the simplest of all. Show only the interceptions. Leave out everything else. Don't include yards or touchdowns, and everybody will just fill in those blanks with their own assumptions. Surely no one will assume Romo has the most yards, the most touchdowns, and the highest yards per attempt in these situations. (Even though it's the truth). In fact, they'll assume just the opposite, and what they don't know won't hurt them.

All Passes When Tied Or Up Or Down By 1 Possession - 4th Quarter/Overtime In All Games Since 2006
Rodgers 246 of 382 3284 yd 23 td 8 int 102.9
PManning 309 of 473 3803 yd 30 td 11 int 101.5
Romo 403 of 630 5396 yd 39 td 17 int 100.5
Brees 391 of 576 4435 yd 27 td 18 int 93.3
EManning 266 of 441 3624 yd 31 td 19 int 92.1

If the idea is to objectively measure the quarterback's performance in late-and-close situations, there is no logical reason to eliminate the games that were won, or games that the team was behind in, or to eliminate yards, or touchdowns. So clearly, that's not the idea. The idea is to paint a picture that supports the perception that the artists are trying to mold.

They're doing a great job.

Forget stats. There is a reason that Romo has a choke label. I don't think he is as bad as some makes him out to be, but his blunders have cost the team wins in some big games. His record is not so good in games against teams with winning records and usually Romo's meltdowns happen in high profile games. It happens often enough that I have come to expect it. I can't figure out how anybody can deny it.

 

[percyhoward]

A manipulator of stats knows when he sees another manipulator of stats. Stats don't even come close to painting the whole picture of a player. If they did, Tony would be a lot better player than he is.

All you've said there is that I must know how to manipulate stats -- not that I manipulated these.

And no, a record of a player's performance doesn't paint the whole picture of the player. But it comes much, much closer than anyone's opinion.

 

[Don Corleone]

I think the only wasted year was 2007. This team didn't stand a chance any other year. Romo need only look in the mirror at the man who booked an escapade during the bye week to Cabo.

THAT is the defining moment of his career!

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Forget stats. There is a reason that Romo has a choke label. I don't think he is as bad as some makes him out to be, but his blunders have cost the team wins in some big games. His record is not so good in games against teams with winning records and usually Romo's meltdowns happen in high profile games. It happens often enough that I have come to expect it. I can't figure out how anybody can deny it.

If you "forgot stats" then this wouldn't have been even brought up since you started it by mentioning your precious stat. No one is particularly impressed with your take on football... you don't know up from down. If you actually thought Romo was a great quarterback, then I'd truly be concerned about the Cowboys future.

 

[Clove]

No question, but his failures are mainly due to his incompetence of the supporting piecies around him. Unlike other good/great QBs, most of them have a good supporting cast to pick up the slack when their play is down. Give the man an average defense, at least, because that's not right to expect him to carry us with an atrocious defense, especially like the one this year. Even HoF QBs aren't asked to carry a team to the playoffs with no help, yet here we are asking Romo to do just that.

He's not carrying this team, this team was carrying itself. He's average, the players are average, that equates to 8-8 year after year. He's made a career and a living out of beating below .500 teams. Just go check it out for yourself.

And for beating a bunch of .500 and below .500 teams, he earns a 108 million dollar contract. That's how dumb Jerry is. But guess what? There are very few .500 and below teams in the playoffs, so you must learn to beat good teams. Yours and all Romo lover excuses are over.

 

[percyhoward]

Forget stats. There is a reason that Romo has a choke label. I don't think he is as bad as some makes him out to be, but his blunders have cost the team wins in some big games. His record is not so good in games against teams with winning records and usually Romo's meltdowns happen in high profile games. It happens often enough that I have come to expect it. I can't figure out how anybody can deny it.

Now you're really talking about the team, though. You're right that this team loses a lot of games against winning teams, but look at individual performances in the losses. In the losses, Romo has a 91.5 rating, the highest in the NFL since 2010. Our opponent's QB has a 107.9 rating, which ranks 30th. Maybe, just maybe, the defense isn't holding up their end of the deal.

 

[5Stars]

Forget stats. There is a reason that Romo has a choke label. I don't think he is as bad as some makes him out to be, but his blunders have cost the team wins in some big games. His record is not so good in games against teams with winning records and usually Romo's meltdowns happen in high profile games. It happens often enough that I have come to expect it. I can't figure out how anybody can deny it.

Well, if you would open your eyes and look at the WHOLE team instead of one man, maybe Romo would not have to try and do so much to win a game that the defense did not help win.

You are just like every other Romo hater, you focus on him and only him. Hey, I got an idea! How about the defense make the other team punt for once during a game?

 

[Frozen700]

Another Romo homer turned realist. Congrats man.

I was never a Romo Homer.....a Romo Homer is a guy who goes out of his way to give Romo props. Belittles other QB's to make Romo look good. Will fight every, and anyone who dares to question him.

I just thought he was better than he really was. At one point he was though....he actually ran around, was not scared to pull the trigger ect...I'm talking 2006-20011ish. That Romo would let Dez make a play. He was also a big play maker. This new Romo, with thin skin, can't get it done. We can't have a bus Drover at QB eating up almost more than half of the cap space.

But yes, unlike you, who has probably caught on to his little act early. I was still holding onto to hope, with a little shade of blinders on. I'm done. Do I hope he can bring us to the SB? Hell Yeah....but I just don't see it man.

If he stays he needs to at least take a pay cut, his play and record...does not equal that amount of pay. If he pulls a Flacco, I wouldn't mind his pay, as My belly would be full for about a Year or 2.

 

[jnday]

He's not carrying this team, this team was carrying itself. He's average, the players are average, that equates to 8-8 year after year. He's made a career and a living out of beating below .500 teams. Just go check it out for yourself.

And for beating a bunch of .500 and below .500 teams, he earns a 108 million dollar contract. That's how dumb Jerry is. But guess what? There are very few .500 and below teams in the playoffs, so you must learn to beat good teams. Yours and all Romo lover excuses are over.

Great post. I have never seen a player that requires so many excuses. Everything is another player's fault or Romo's chokes are justified because other QBs have have turned the ball over. Stats are only used for Romo when they support their argument and they turn a blind eye when he turns the ball over. The Romo lovers are s breed of their own. A blind breed. his record against the better teams is not good but you can't tell from his contract. If he was a young QB, there would be hope that he could change. At his age , the only change that is happening is his decline.

 

[jnday]

Well, if you would open your eyes and look at the WHOLE team instead of one man, maybe Romo would not have to try and do so much to win a game that the defense did not help win.

You are just like every other Romo hater, you focus on him and only him. Hey, I got an idea! How about the defense make the other team punt for once during a game?

Does the defense throw the bad passes that result in interceptions?

 

[5Stars]

Does the defense throw the bad passes that result in interceptions?

No, the defense is supposed to go get the interceptions thrown at them. Help Romo out a little...