How Bad Have Tony Romo's Defenses Been?

[zack]

Which is still trying tom absolve specific individuals and elevate their play via numbers.

I don't agree with trying to justify one player over the team. I am reminded so often this is a team sport. Romo's defenses indicates this has an agenda.

I don't agree with that agenda. Because when someone mentioned the turnovers by Romo in 2007, the immediate excuse was, Dallas was throwing a lot more long balls.

Either they win and lose as a team, or not.

I'd suggest Romo has as big a hand ion both wins and loses as anyone else.

It's funny when people mention romo in 07. Wasn't this his first season as a full time starter? It's not like he was a 5 year starter at this point.

 

[OhSnap]

This.

I'm not anti-Ware by any means..

but the defense was designed from the get go as the 3-4 built to feature Ware.

That was the way Parcells built the D.

But I don't think it ever got better over the last 6 years.

Wished we'd never changed and wish Zimmer had never left.

That defense is the thing that brought Wade on board too. With wades knowledge of the 3-4 and Merriman looking so good in 2005 it just seemed to make sense to have him profile the guy picked right before Merriman.

 

[big dog cowboy]

wish Zimmer had never left.

I just threw up in my mouth.

 

[Blackspider214]

Hate to be a cliche *****, but ... beating a dead horse here.
Every sensible person on this forum that uses logic knows the defense has been the problem.

And so has the offense. No one side is totally to blame.

 

[Idgit]

Oh you mean this

That wasn't actually a 9 route to begin with. That was an adjustment both players made after Tony had to move around under some pressure. It wasn't that he stopped on the route, it was that he wasn't quite on the same page with Tony when the route broke down, and that hesitation killed him.

For the record, PC also had a drop on a 3rd down conversion and a bobble on STs in that game.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Man, I'd argue just the opposite. If there's one stat that hides the truth about this team, it's W-L. Even though it has finished 8-8 the last three years, we all should know that it's been a bad team with a lot of below-average players and just a few very good players, almost all of them on the passing offense.

The stats in this thread show how bad the defense has been, and the defense is half the team. You could throw in more stats (and I've done that) showing how bad the running game has been, and that's basically 3/4 of the team. If your opinion is that this has been a bad team, than you should realize that these stats (that you don't use) are telling you that your opinion is correct.

The whole point of research is to inform people's opinions. Teams themselves have access to more information, and go much, much more in depth in their own research to isolate how specific elements of the team performed in specific situations. You'd hate that, I'm sure. Lot's of math there. But this is what informs teams where their strengths and weaknesses are with regard to personnel, play calling, and any other aspect of the team you can think of, plus many you can't.

Some stats can indeed hide some of these aspects, but then someone would point out the specific flaw. Things like yards per game, when possessions per game aren't equal league-wide, so teams with more possessions naturally will have more yards, even though they don't necessarily have better offenses. These days, you can take pretty much everything into account. Play calling, execution, occasional malaise (great 70's word, btw) etc. The challenge is to go as in depth as possible, and look at as many elements as possible, while keeping it as easy as possible for everyone to understand.

Analyzing different elements of a team is not saying there is only one "cause" when the team loses. You don't believe that yourself, so there's no reason for you to think I do either. And you can't put an umbrella around all stats as if they were equal, so that finding one bad stat somehow discredits all others. Do some research, and you'll see that there are some very good stats that correlate highly to winning. I can only lead the horse to water here. Unless you've looked into a subject and have enough of a grasp that you can intelligently discuss it, you don't really have much of a case in criticizing it.


That's an accusation made from safely within the refuge of a generality. You've accused me of "trying to work numbers to move blame," without any specifics as to which numbers I've supposedly "worked." That's understandable, because the more you stay away from specifics, the less likely you'll have to deal with the mess of actually trying to defend your position.

And that is where you usually check out.

It is not my intent to suggest you specifically intend to use the stats to justify one player. I realize I left that impression and apologize.

However, you have a following that use your information to do the very thing I claim. Which is to absolve Romo when he makes a fatal mistake in a game.

Regardless of how poorly the defense plays, if the game comes down to a turnover in the last minutes, that was a game that had the potential of being won except for that turnover. We have seen in the past the best team not always win. or the worst team have a shot and pull it off, or fail when they had the game.

No matter what transpires on the field for this team, Romo is sacrosanct. Clearly the Jets opener a few years back he threw to pick that cost the team the game. But fans argued here about the defense and special teams.

I see his games and understand his contribution. But I will not sugarcoat his play.

I freely admit the defense has cause a great deal more problems. I don't need stats to come to this conclusion. Nor do I need to review numbers to decide for myself what is what. You put a great deal of stock in them. I do not. And my generality, as you claim, is still right.

because - and this is important.

The numbers used to decide the offense is better also obscure the one fact that cannot be obfuscated.

When a player on this offense turns the ball over and that is the lynchpin of the loss, all the other numbers go out the window.

Your specific give hope to the argument it isn't Romo's fault when he throws for 300+ yards, but then turns the ball over at the most critical time in the game. Somehow the defense is laid bare at this point when without that turnover, the game very well, and in most cases would have been a W.

I don't need a degree in aerodynamics to understand the plane is flying, or falling out of the sky. Or to support the crash was due to something it wasn't.

 

[Redball Express]

I just threw up in my mouth.

Hahahaha..

Hope somebody knows the Hymlick maneuver for you,bro.

 

[Redball Express]

That defense is the thing that brought Wade on board too. With wades knowledge of the 3-4 and Merriman looking so good in 2005 it just seemed to make sense to have him profile the guy picked right before Merriman.

That's a true statement.

Yep,

For the first couple of years after that draft Merriman was well above Ware.

Thank goodness we didn't pick him.

Could you imagine taking Merriman and then drafting Bobby Carpenter?

The fan base would have turned over in their graves.

 

[percyhoward]

It is not my intent to suggest you specifically intend to use the stats to justify one player. I realize I left that impression and apologize.

However, you have a following that use your information to do the very thing I claim. Which is to absolve Romo when he makes a fatal mistake in a game.

Ideally, you'd want the analysis to inform your opinion, and not the other way around, so I'd worry less about people's motives and look at the soundness of their arguments. If you're bothered by someone's argument, point out the flaw. They'll either make sense or not -- no matter what motivated them.

If you're bothered by someone's argument but you can't point out the flaw, then it's time to adjust your opinion. After all, it's not what or who you believe, it's what makes the most sense. I hope my following would agree.

 

[casmith07]

That wasn't actually a 9 route to begin with. That was an adjustment both players made after Tony had to move around under some pressure. It wasn't that he stopped on the route, it was that he wasn't quite on the same page with Tony when the route broke down, and that hesitation killed him.

For the record, PC also had a drop on a 3rd down conversion and a bobble on STs in that game.

You have the safety and the CB beat with nothing but end zone in front of you and you pull up - why?

Where do you think the QB is going to throw it? Underneath the coverage?

 

[Idgit]

You have the safety and the CB beat with nothing but end zone in front of you and you pull up - why?

Where do you think the QB is going to throw it? Underneath the coverage?

He was expecting the inside release, and the route was supposed to be into inside/outside coverage with the ball fit into that hole at the top of the route. When the safety gave him the outside, he paused at the top of the route, unsure if Tony had seen it. Then he took it upfield, but he was too late at that point.

At least, this is what he said on Irvin's radio show when it happened.

 

[Szczepanik]

Yeah, that 26 was almost Eli-like.
He joked the other day that he actually had a 5 turnover game in 2007 and they still won.

Buffalo game in Buffalo I believe.

 

[Szczepanik]

Big Ben is a prime example of a QB whos success has thrived on his defense.