BR: Tony Romo Has Not Only Been the Best Version of Himself, He Might Be the NFL MVP

[Toruk_Makto]

Why do the statistical splits say differently?

And it's actually on the 36th attempt, by the way.

I perfectly know causation and correlation (I deal with it every day at work). His performance on his passes dips on pass attempts 35+. In pass attempts 20-35 hie's very good.




Like we were behind in the KC game last year when we threw the ball 51 times and ran it 9 times? Oh wait...we weren't down at all (significantly). But, we decided to throw the ball 85% of the time for whatever reason. And the offense stalled, Romo didn't perform that well.

Less is more with Romo.



Really?

How successful did we run the ball against the Eagles on Sunday night?

And we ran the ball 31 times.

Don't know of those favorable situations when the Eagles are stacking 8 and 9 in the box and we are still running.

Instead, as Garrett said in a PC earlier this year, you have to run the ball in unfavorable situations and get through those 'ugly' runs where you only gain 1 or 2 yards to set up for other runs and for bigger pass plays.

Again, less is more with Romo.

This wasn't learned a while ago when we played the Packers and threw the ball time and time again back in *2010* against the Packers and Dom Capers replied that he kept on blitzing because he knew that Dallas had given up on the run and would not run the ball (Capers said that when a team runs against a blitz there's a fear that the offense only has to get past the 1st wave and they are off to a huge play).

Less is more with Romo.




YR

I don't even know where to start with this....but our rushing efficiency numbers from 2009-2012 speak volumes.

Facts are important.

Are vastly improved rushing efficiency on a much larger volume this year also speaks volumes.

Facts are important.

And we run into 8 and 9 men in the box this year...not to make Romo throw less and make him"better" but because we can do so effectively and protect our defense.

Facts are important.

And again please explain to me what happens on the 35 pass vs the 36th pass that makes Romo suck?

Facts are important.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Be a man, YR. Show some sportsmanship when you lose.


Anyone can dodge and whine when confronted, but it takes a real man to stand up and eat his words.

Nope.

Less is more with Romo.

And no matter what you say, you're seeing that hold true right in front of your eyes. Why you are offended by this, I have no idea.

And why anybody would feel the need to blatantly take words of out of context speaks volumes...that person can't handle the fact that they have a vendetta and that they were dead wrong when it came to the 'more Romo is more' (along with claiming that Romo is at his physical peak!). So they twist words to hopefully save face.
I never said Romo was a 'bad QB' and I never said that we should get rid of him because he's a bad QB (I said we should trade him because it would be best for him which would negate the argument that I 'hate' Romo). And there were a lot of people on this forum saying we should trade Romo because it would be best for him. Guess they are irrational Romo haters as well.

Less is more with Romo.





YR

 

[Toruk_Makto]

So if that's the case, then by your logic we should be throwing *more* this year to take advantage of the O-Line's pass protection and Romo's ability.

YR

We run more and not throw less...not to minimize Romo's impact on the game....but to protect the defense.

Do you follow this team?

Also Denver is running the ball more and throwing less. For a lot of the same reasons. And they have Peyton Freaking Manning. Do you think their brass and fans are sitting around and saying Less is more with Peyton? Or perhaps they know that controlling the clock and staying ahead of the snap count and protecting their defense are important?

Do you follow the NFL?

 

[Staubacher]

Do you know how many examples of situational awareness one could give you for the few "greatest hits" you obsessively trot out? Geesh this year alone there have been countless. Give it up, Romo is a top tier excellent QB period having a fantastic year with no lame ifs ands or buts by someone who painted themselves into corner can drool out.

If you had your way he wouldn't be here. And we'd be the worse for it. Bottom line you underestimated him like so many others. Get out of denial and deal with it. Romo is far better than you ever dreamed he'd be.

Or the debacle before the 2 minute warning against Houston. The goal was to, at the very least, get the Texans to use all of their timeouts.

We start off with a 1-yard run with Murray, making it 2nd and 9.

Then the Texans call a timeout.

Off the timeout...Romo audibles and audibles and audibles....and we have a delay of game (coming off a timeout).

Now it's 2nd and 14.

We then get a 8-yard gain on a short screen pass to Harris. This makes it 3rd and 6, but it would have been 3rd and 1 if we didn't have the delay of game (again, coming off a timeout).

Then on 3rd and 6, the idea is to hopefully get a 1st down, but at the very least, complete the pass or take a sack to keep the clock running and force another timeout. Instead, Romo doesn't see Dez open and chucks it over his head and it stops the clock.

Like I mentioned, I'm not the only person that feels this way as both Tony Dungy and Jimmy Johnson have said that Romo has a poor understanding of situational football. I guess they must be irrational Romo haters.





YR

It still doesn't explain the stat splits on hits 20-35 attempts and more than 35+ attempts. Not for the *game*, but on those stats alone.

The Packers game was a perfect example. We ran the ball *tremendously* well. But, we stopped running the ball and kept throwing the ball and that led to...2 interceptions.

If 'less is not more' with Romo, I think we would agree that he's getting excellent pass protection. And we *know* that the team that passes more effectively wins in the NFL 80% of the time. So if that's the case, then by your logic we should be throwing *more* this year to take advantage of the O-Line's pass protection and Romo's ability.





YR

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I don't even know where to start with this....but our rushing efficiency numbers from 2009-2012 speak volumes.

Facts are important.

Are vastly improved rushing efficiency on a much larger volume this year also speaks volumes.

Facts are important.

And we run into 8 and 9 men in the box this year...not to make Romo throw less and make him"better" but because we can do so effectively and protect our defense.

Facts are important.

And again please explain to me what happens on the 35 pass vs the 36th pass that makes Romo suck?

Facts are important.

We ran the ball efficiently last year. We just refused to run the ball. IE. the KC game and the Green Bay game.

We ran the ball inefficiently under Parcells in '06...and Romo was wildly effective with Terry Glenn and Patrick Crayton at WR. Parcells kept Romo under 36 passes a game.

The splits show that his effectiveness starts to drop off when he throws it 35-50 times.

Yup. Facts are important.

And the fact is....

Less is more with Romo.





YR

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Most people understand that.

NFL Rank in Conversion Percentage
Dallas Rushing
2010-2013
short yardage: 21st
in red zone: 26th
inside opp 5: 30th
goal line: 25th

2014
short yardage: 11th
in red zone: 13th
inside opp 5: 7th
goal line: 1st

These are percentages. They don't go up because an offense is throwing less. They go up because it's running better.

I love how @Yakuza Rich has completely ignored this post.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

We run more and not throw less...not to minimize Romo's impact on the game....but to protect the defense.

Do you follow this team?

Also Denver is running the ball more and throwing less. For a lot of the same reasons. And they have Peyton Freaking Manning. Do you think their brass and fans are sitting around and saying Less is more with Peyton? Or perhaps they know that controlling the clock and staying ahead of the snap count and protecting their defense are important?

Do you follow the NFL?

I follow the NFL more than you do.

Do you understand that his QB rating goes down when he throws his 36th pass? And he is far more effective on passes 20-35?

Less is more with Romo.




YR

 

[Toruk_Makto]

We ran the ball efficiently last year. We just refused to run the ball. IE. the KC game and the Green Bay game.

We ran the ball inefficiently under Parcells in '06...and Romo was wildly effective with Terry Glenn and Patrick Crayton at WR. Parcells kept Romo under 36 passes a game.

The splits show that his effectiveness starts to drop off when he throws it 35-50 times.

Yup. Facts are important.

And the fact is....

Less is more with Romo.





YR

Please see the post right above this. When you talk about running efficiently you need to also talk about volume. In year's past we only ran the ball in favorable conditions (i.e. Romo audibling). This year we have fantastic efficiency numbers with volume and with running in unfavorable situations. Like you keep ignoring this. We notice.

 

[Staubacher]

We run more and not throw less...not to minimize Romo's impact on the game....but to protect the defense.

Do you follow this team?

Also Denver is running the ball more and throwing less. For a lot of the same reasons. And they have Peyton Freaking Manning. Do you think their brass and fans are sitting around and saying Less is more with Peyton? Or perhaps they know that controlling the clock and staying ahead of the snap count and protecting their defense are important?

Do you follow the NFL?

Those who painted themselves into a corner with Romo never bring the defense into the discussion. The historically bad defense that pass happy audibling Romo went 8-7 with last year and a missed game away from the playoffs. To them we are only running more because Romo isn't good not because of our weak defense or Romo playing with a broken back

 

[dfan32]

Is Brees in decline? ->Yes

Has Brees has a substandard season compared to his career averages in New Orleans? -> Yes

Has Drew Brees been "terrible" this season? -> No, unless you consider 31 TDs vs 12 INTs and a 101.4 QB rating terrible...

Well maybe I should have said some terrible games. I've seen a couple of them. The parallel I was trying to point out is the Saints as a team has had a down year, Drew Brees has had some terrible games as a result. Drew Brees, rightfully, did not catch a lot of flack over the terrible games he's had.
Romo on the other hand, given the same conditions and result, always gets way more criticism and blame. Some may not admit it but we have all witnessed it.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I follow the NFL more than you do.

Do you understand that his QB rating goes down when he throws his 36th pass? And he is far more effective on passes 20-35?

Less is more with Romo.




YR

No you don't.

And that's the point. Using an arbitrary cuttof from pass 35 to 36. Unless you can explain what's the difference in one more throw you're completely ignoring context. You're data mining. And that's how you go broke in investing. You know the market is consistently up more on sunny days than rainy ones? Do you know what this means? Nothing. Just like looking at 35 passes vs. 36 in a vacuum.

Also I like how you ignored my point on Peyton.

You do that a lot.

Selectively respond to things.

We notice.

 

[theogt]

Yakuza Rich has always been very careful to disguise his anti-Romo rants over the years. He doesn't like the guy for whatever reason, but fully recognizes it's not based in any sort of reality so he has to hedge his bets. Now, fantastically, he's claiming some sort of credit for being right, while all the while being dead wrong. It's pathetic, egomaniacal nonsense that should just be laughed at with disdain.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I love how @Yakuza Rich has completely ignored this post.

1. I didn't ignore the post. I have a ton of people that either like my posts or blind lemmings like yourself that don't understand that less is more with Romo.

2. In 2006, our running game was lousy and our WR's were Crayton, an injured TO and Terry Glenn. Romo was off the charts and we kept him throwing less than 36 times a game because Parcells would stick to the run.

3. The Eagles game is a perfect example. We ran the ball like crap. But we stuck to the run. That means the Eagles would keep 8 in the box and then we could throw over the top to Dez for big plays. When we abandoned the run because it wasn't working...we became a dink and dunk offense and Romo wasn't very effective.

4. Why do you ignore the statistical splits on passes 20-35 versus 35+?

Less is more with Romo.



YR

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Yakuza Rich has always been very careful to disguise his anti-Romo rants over the years. He doesn't like the guy for whatever reason, but fully recognizes it's not based in any sort of reality so he has to hedge his bets. Now, fantastically, he's claiming some sort of credit for being right, while all the while being dead wrong. It's pathetic, egomaniacal nonsense that should just be laughed at with disdain.

Pretty much this.

Yakuza right now is wearing clown shoes.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

1. I didn't ignore the post. I have a ton of people that either like my posts or blind lemmings like yourself that don't understand that less is more with Romo.

2. In 2006, our running game was lousy and our WR's were Crayton, an injured TO and Terry Glenn. Romo was off the charts and we kept him throwing less than 36 times a game because Parcells would stick to the run.

3. The Eagles game is a perfect example. We ran the ball like crap. But we stuck to the run. That means the Eagles would keep 8 in the box and then we could throw over the top to Dez for big plays. When we abandoned the run because it wasn't working...we became a dink and dunk offense and Romo wasn't very effective.

4. Why do you ignore the statistical splits on passes 20-35 versus 35+?

Less is more with Romo.



YR

I didn't ignore it.

I addressed it in my very first post.

Teams that have high pass attempts are usually losing. The game has gotten away from them. Bad things are happening. Probably in all 3 phases of the game. When you pass it only 20 times with a guy like Romo. Things are probably going very well. You're winning. You're playing with a lead.

It's like you don't understand context at all.

You know teams that take a knee in the 2nd half of games win 100% of the time? The Cowboys should invent a new offense where we just take a knee every 2nd half. We'd always win!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Yakuza Rich]

No you don't.

And that's the point. Using an arbitrary cuttof from pass 35 to 36. Unless you can explain what's the difference in one more throw you're completely ignoring context. You're data mining. And that's how you go broke in investing. You know the market is consistently up more on sunny days than rainy ones? Do you know what this means? Nothing. Just like looking at 35 passes vs. 36 in a vacuum.

Also I like how you ignored my point on Peyton.

You do that a lot.

Selectively respond to things.

We notice.

Sorry, you're wrong and your reasoning is continually poor. And you ignore my points and examples (i.e. the KC and Green Bay game from last year).

As one poster noted, it's much like a pitch count in baseball. If a pitcher is recorded and you see that he has thrown as many as 125 pitches in a game. And you notice that when you tally everything up that his average fastball lowers by 5 mph on pitches recorded from 101-125.

Obviously, there's no guarantee that on pitch 101 he will see a 5 mph drop in club head speed. Nor is there a guarantee that he will seen any drop in his fastball on pitch 101. But, we know from past history that his fastball drops on pitches 101 to 125. That's what we try to avoid with that pitcher.

Why does Romo start becoming less effective at 36+ passes? Could be a myriad of issues. He could be getting tired. Maybe the defense gets a better read for what the offense is doing. Maybe there is a communication problem with the offense (more passes, opposing defense starts to throw different blitzes and now we have to audilble more).

But, you just want to ignore that and call me 'selective.'

Good grief.

Less is more with Romo.





YR

 

[percyhoward]

If 'less is not more' with Romo, I think we would agree that he's getting excellent pass protection. And we *know* that the team that passes more effectively wins in the NFL 80% of the time. So if that's the case, then by your logic we should be throwing *more* this year to take advantage of the O-Line's pass protection and Romo's ability.

Passing more doesn't mean passing more effectively, any more than passing less improves an offense.

The Packers are 3-2 when Rodgers exceeds 36 attempts, 7-2 when he doesn't. The Broncos are 2-3 when Manning goes over 36 attempts, 8-0 when he doesn't. Saints 1-8 when Brees is over 36, 5-0 when he isn't.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Pretty much this.

Yakuza right now is wearing clown shoes.

Yup, pretty much right that less is more with Romo.

And theogt is wrong in claiming that Romo is at his physical peak, coming off 2 back surgeries and at 34 years old.

Sometimes you just can't make this stuff up!




YR

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Passing more doesn't mean passing more effectively, any more than passing less improves an offense.

The Packers are 3-2 when Rodgers exceeds 36 attempts, 7-2 when he doesn't. The Broncos are 2-3 when Manning goes over 36 attempts, 8-0 when he doesn't. Saints 1-8 when Brees is over 36, 5-0 when he isn't.

I'm not looking at their win totals. I'm looking at their efficiency. Can't help it if your QB plays great and the team still loses. That's not on the QB, it's on the team.

I am also looking at the splits of their efficiency passing the ball on pass attempts 20-35 versus 35-50.

Anyway, I'm out. It's late. Gotta go to work tomorrow. Obviously, this stuff is flying over some people's heads. And I've been told that Romo is at his physical peak at 34 years old and coming off 2 back surgeries. If that's the type of reasoning people are going to use...knock yourself out.

But remember,

Less is more with Romo



YR

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I'm not looking at their win totals. I'm looking at their efficiency. Can't help it if your QB plays great and the team still loses. That's not on the QB, it's on the team.

I am also looking at the splits of their efficiency passing the ball on pass attempts 20-35 versus 35-50.

Anyway, I'm out. It's late. Gotta go to work tomorrow. Obviously, this stuff is flying over some people's heads. And I've been told that Romo is at his physical peak at 34 years old and coming off 2 back surgeries. If that's the type of reasoning people are going to use...knock yourself out.

But remember,

Less is more with Romo



YR

Why 35 vs 36 passes?

And again do you understand game context?