Recommended Loss Forensics: Romo vs. the League's Top QB

[Frosty]

Not that simplicity is completely without merit, but we're talking players -- not teams/coaches.

Not to be argumentative, but I do see your point.....But I am talking players too. Danny White vs Tony Romo....playoffs wins vs playoff losses......IMO.....the Top NFL QB's are measured by Superbowl's wins and playoffs wins.....others QB's are forced to use states to prove their worthiness (Marinos, Fouts, Archie Mannings, Warren Moons Jim Kelly type QB's). Tom Brady, is known as a Super Bowl champion not for his stats. I appreciate the work you put into the post and like always you are one of the most respected posters on the zone and I don't want to disparage your comments but stats, metrics, analytical analysis all can be misleading based on what the author wants to prove.. IMO, in the end its about public opinion and simplicity. QBs are the face of the franchise and are credited (again right or wrong) for the Wins vs Losses

 

[Ring Leader]

Not to be argumentative, but I do see your point.....But I am talking players too. Danny White vs Tony Romo....playoffs wins vs playoff losses......IMO.....the Top NFL QB's are measured by Superbowl's wins and playoffs wins.....others QB's are forced to use states to prove their worthiness (Marinos, Fouts, Archie Mannings, Warren Moons Jim Kelly type QB's). Tom Brady, is known as a Super Bowl champion not for his stats. I appreciate the work you put into the post and like always you are one of the most respected posters on the zone and I don't want to disparage your comments but stats, metrics, analytical analysis all can be misleading based on what the author wants to prove.. IMO, in the end its about public opinion and simplicity. QBs are the face of the franchise and are credited (again right or wrong) for the Wins vs Losses

Throw the facts out the window and go with what the public rams down your throat. Brilliant.

 

[iceberg]

Not to be argumentative, but I do see your point.....But I am talking players too. Danny White vs Tony Romo....playoffs wins vs playoff losses......IMO.....the Top NFL QB's are measured by Superbowl's wins and playoffs wins.....others QB's are forced to use states to prove their worthiness (Marinos, Fouts, Archie Mannings, Warren Moons Jim Kelly type QB's). Tom Brady, is known as a Super Bowl champion not for his stats. I appreciate the work you put into the post and like always you are one of the most respected posters on the zone and I don't want to disparage your comments but stats, metrics, analytical analysis all can be misleading based on what the author wants to prove.. IMO, in the end its about public opinion and simplicity. QBs are the face of the franchise and are credited (again right or wrong) for the Wins vs Losses

it's hard to deny that qbs tend to be the face of the franchise.

but anyone who puts it ALL on the qb isn't football smart.

just looking for the face to lay blame on.

 

[percyhoward]

IMO its about public opinion and simplicity.

Leave room for some football in there too, maybe.

 

[iceberg]

Leave room for some football in there too, maybe.

public opinion is very uneducated. if stupid people wanna think romo sucks cause they just made a new stat to prove it, they will.

but it doesn't make them any less stupid.

 

[Animosity]

public opinion is very uneducated. if stupid people wanna think romo sucks cause they just made a new stat to prove it, they will.

but it doesn't make them any less stupid.

I just have to look back at the past 8 years to prove Romo sucks. You fanboys have to dig deep for super advanced stats to defend Romo.

We are in a division where you need 9, 10 games to win and get into the playoffs. There's really no excuse for Romo(whos paid like Aaron Rodgers)

 

[Animosity]

Or maybe we are 4-12 without him.

We won 1 game with him in 2010. Whats funny is that we won more games with some backup QB who was on his last legs.

 

[rcaldw]

Simplicity is not always uneducated. What the stats tell us is that Romo plays pretty well a lot. What the stats, by themselves, would not tell you is when he throws the backbreaking pick (at Washington 2 seasons ago for just one example) or makes the boneheaded decision (sometimes going to a pass audible at the worst possible moment). I like Romo overall. I don't believe is the elite guy that some try to make him out to be. You can throw a million numbers at me and it won't change my opinion. I watch the games, have for a very long time, and I know what I see. The best players, play their best, in the biggest moments. I do not believe that that has been Tony's legacy.

Having said this, I was really disappointed that he couldn't finish what he started last season. The play to win the game at Washington was as clutch as it gets. I wish he could have been healthy for Philly.

 

[percyhoward]

IMO its about public opinion and simplicity.

Can we fit football in there somewhere?

 

[iceberg]

I just have to look back at the past 8 years to prove Romo sucks. You fanboys have to dig deep for super advanced stats to defend Romo.

We are in a division where you need 9, 10 games to win and get into the playoffs. There's really no excuse for Romo(whos paid like Aaron Rodgers)

And you... You create new stats to apply to 1 player.

Nuff said. Educate yourself

 

[jnday]

it's hard to deny that qbs tend to be the face of the franchise.

but anyone who puts it ALL on the qb isn't football smart.

just looking for the face to lay blame on.

The QB has the most influence on the success of the offense and should share in more blame than players at other positions. QB is the only position that has the ball in his hands every play . He shouldn't get all the blame, but the nature of the position puts the QB getting a large share of the blame. There is no way to blame WRs, RBs, TEs, etc. on the same level with the QB. Up until these last few years, I don't remember Cowboy fans having any problem with placing blame on the QB, fairly or unfairly.

 

[jnday]

Simplicity is not always uneducated. What the stats tell us is that Romo plays pretty well a lot. What the stats, by themselves, would not tell you is when he throws the backbreaking pick (at Washington 2 seasons ago for just one example) or makes the boneheaded decision (sometimes going to a pass audible at the worst possible moment). I like Romo overall. I don't believe is the elite guy that some try to make him out to be. You can throw a million numbers at me and it won't change my opinion. I watch the games, have for a very long time, and I know what I see. The best players, play their best, in the biggest moments. I do not believe that that has been Tony's legacy.

Having said this, I was really disappointed that he couldn't finish what he started last season. The play to win the game at Washington was as clutch as it gets. I wish he could have been healthy for Philly.

You made a very good post and I agree with everything you said. You will be labeled a hater for it though.

 

[iceberg]

The QB has the most influence on the success of the offense and should share in more blame than players at other positions. QB is the only position that has the ball in his hands every play . He shouldn't get all the blame, but the nature of the position puts the QB getting a large share of the blame. There is no way to blame WRs, RBs, TEs, etc. on the same level with the QB. Up until these last few years, I don't remember Cowboy fans having any problem with placing blame on the QB, fairly or unfairly.

Actually I'd go coaching. For a team to win it all it all has to come together. For every team that has ever won it all.

I can't think of any Superbowl winner where 1 player "elevated" the team.

But to a fool one player can take the blame.

Its just stupid.

 

[jnday]

Actually I'd go coaching. For a team to win it all it all has to come together. For every team that has ever won it all.

I can't think of any Superbowl winner where 1 player "elevated" the team.

But to a fool one player can take the blame.

Its just stupid.

There is no way to blame just one player, but I have watched several QBs play at their best when it was needed the most, and the result was winning a Super Bowl.

 

[percyhoward]

The best players, play their best, in the biggest moments. I do not believe that that has been Tony's legacy.

Any big moment Romo's been in has been mostly of his doing.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

If you're a Romo hater.... You're on the wrong side of history.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

The QB has the most influence on the success of the offense and should share in more blame than players at other positions. QB is the only position that has the ball in his hands every play . He shouldn't get all the blame, but the nature of the position puts the QB getting a large share of the blame. There is no way to blame WRs, RBs, TEs, etc. on the same level with the QB. Up until these last few years, I don't remember Cowboy fans having any problem with placing blame on the QB, fairly or unfairly.

"the qb touches the ball on every play" is a stupid sports cliche that doesn't make any sense or hold up under any kind of examination. On some teams the quarterback is the most important player, but not on all teams. ESPN wants you to believe that QBs are magical gods that face each other in combat so they can bill the games as "Brady vs. Manning". In reality, QBs don't play at all in over half of the game (defense, special teams) and on half of the plays they do participate in they hand off the ball and then get out of the way and let the other guys go 10 on 11 (wow, so important). Even when they are passing the ball, not everything they do is some kind of critical play that couldn't be executed by hundreds of guys across America. Don't get me wrong, someone like Manning is super important, but he really is the team's offensive coordinator on the field. But he's the exception, not the rule. The obsession with quarterbacks is for lazy, dumb, ESPN brain-addled sports fans.

 

[iceberg]

There is no way to blame just one player, but I have watched several QBs play at their best when it was needed the most, and the result was winning a Super Bowl.

So how did they do during the season?

 

[KJJ]

The thread isn't about "elimination games," which are anything but a complete picture of every game. If you want to make it about that, at least try to focus on Romo's performance as opposed to W-L. Then maybe try to remember that all 32 teams do not suddenly wake up and find themselves involved in an elimimation game.

I know this thread isn't about elimination games none of your threads ever are because you can't find any stats/passer ratings in those games that have Romo ranked with Montana, Rodgers, Brees and many other QB's who've won championships. Your last thread had Romo "according to the stats" as the second best QB behind Rodgers in the last 5 minutes when everyone knows it's been turnovers in the last 5 minutes by Romo that has created the stigma he has. I'm sure you can find stats in certain situations the past 4 seasons that have Romo ranked amongst HOF QB's even though his W/L record is 4 games below 500 and the Cowboys haven't made the playoffs a single time during that period.

 

[jnday]

"the qb touches the ball on every play" is a stupid sports cliche that doesn't make any sense or hold up under any kind of examination. On some teams the quarterback is the most important player, but not on all teams. ESPN wants you to believe that QBs are magical gods that face each other in combat so they can bill the games as "Brady vs. Manning". In reality, QBs don't play at all in over half of the game (defense, special teams) and on half of the plays they do participate in they hand off the ball and then get out of the way and let the other guys go 10 on 11 (wow, so important). Even when they are passing the ball, not everything they do is some kind of critical play that couldn't be executed by hundreds of guys across America. Don't get me wrong, someone like Manning is super important, but he really is the team's offensive coordinator on the field. But he's the exception, not the rule. The obsession with quarterbacks is for lazy, dumb, ESPN brain-addled sports fans.

I am glad that I don't watch ESPN. I will just say that I disagree with everything you said. A QB does touch the ball every play and the good ones are an extension of the OC on the field. It is common knowledge that this is a QB driven game. Without good QB play, winning is rare. You use a simple handoff as an example that requires no special skill. Maybe you missed the tons of turnovers and negative plays that failing to execute a handoff has caused. It seems that you don't have much respect or appreciation for the QB position. If it was so easy, you could do it. I didn't know the most important position on the team was so overrated.