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

[KJJ]

Yes, sometimes I make the mistake of hitting show ignored content.

If you make up a stat to apply to a player that's agenda driven and useless cause you ignore every other universally accepted and applies stat so your made up one "works".

Its bull****.

You make the mistake of using the same line to everyone (It's back to ignore for you) which has caused other posters to joke about it. It makes you look silly repeating that to everyone whose opinions you don't agree with. if you're going to claim you're putting someone on ignore then do it. If Romo was leading the Cowboys to the playoffs every year the elimination game stat would have never been used. By the Cowboys not reaching the playoffs the past 4 years has put more of a focus on Romo's season finale elimination game losses because they're the most recent.

 

[Denim Chicken]

Roethlisberger and Eli are clearly above Romo. Both have a number of playoff appearances and wins and both have a couple of championships with Roethlisberger having led the Steelers to 3 SB's. Eli has a head to head edge over Romo and has beaten him in the playoffs and a season finale elimination game. Both Eli and Roethlisberger have an outside shot at the HOF if they can add a few more playoff wins or another championship. I would rank Stabler ahead of Romo . He won a playoff game in 5 consecutive years from 73 to 77 and led the Raiders to a championship in 1977 during a time when the Steelers were a dynasty and the Cowboys had great teams.

Although Doug Williams won a SB he wasn't close to the QB Romo is. Williams had one lucky year in 87 in which he led Washington to a championship. He didn't even start the season for Washington that year. He had a great performance in the SB and deserves credit but take away that one season and he had a very average career. I choose QB's according to playoff wins and SB's but they have to be consistent. One lucky season isn't going to cut it they have to have a solid "career."

I believe most GMs would not put Roethlisberger and Eli above Romo, but this summation perfectly illustrates your thinking (which I believe is flawed).

The fact is that your analysis (Roethlisberger and Eli being ahead of Romo bc of SB / playoff wins / head to head) totally neglects the impact of defense, special teams, Running game, wide Receivers, strength of schedule, etc.. and simply puts entire W/L solely on the QB.

Additionally, you pick and choose which games to assess while lending more weight to some based on arbitrary--and quite frankly, intentionally misleading--metrics.

This is why we could never see eye-to-eye in this argument. You analysis is subjective, anecdotal, and submissive of hard numbers (i.e. facts), relying solely on metrics which fail to assess an individual player's performance as equal to his peers and spiraling almost into the media’s corollary of a curse.

 

[iceberg]

I believe most GMs would not put Roethlisberger and Eli above Romo, but this summation perfectly illustrates your thinking (which I believe is flawed).

The fact is that your analysis (Roethlisberger and Eli being ahead of Romo bc of SB / playoff wins / head to head) totally neglects the impact of defense, special teams, Running game, wide Receivers, strength of schedule, etc.. and simply puts entire W/L solely on the QB.

Additionally, you pick and choose which games to assess while lending more weight to some based on arbitrary--and quite frankly, intentionally misleading--metrics.

This is why we could never see eye-to-eye in this argument. You analysis is subjective, anecdotal, and submissive of hard numbers (i.e. facts), relying solely on metrics which fail to assess an individual player's performance as equal to his peers and spiraling almost into the media’s corollary of a curse.

Yea. This.

 

[peplaw06]

Percy's stats are designed so that Romo can be compared favorably with a number of championship winning QB's. If Romo never wins another playoff game or even makes the playoffs again percy will be able to continue comparing Romo statistically with all these great QB's as long as he maintains his production during the regular season.

Stats aren't "designed." They are presented. You can present facts that favor your argument and you can present facts that dispute the other side's argument.

Percy's stats and research far outweigh yours. You have is 1-6 in elimination games. The rest has been generalities without substance. TO to turnover ratio correlation sounds like it might be promising, but you've never actually done the correlation. That's not proof.

 

[peplaw06]

Haven't you challenged me on this before? I've posted plenty of playoff/SB stats that proves that the QB who has the better TD to turnover ratio their team usually wins during the postseason. Naturally there's going to be a few exceptions to the rule but the last 5 SB winning QB's all had better TD to turnover ratio's than the losing QB. In Romo's 6 elimination game losses the opposing QB had the better TD to turnover ratio in 5 of the Cowboys losses.

No you haven't. At least not that I've seen... If you've done the research before then post it, or link it. Surely you didn't do all that work and not save it somewhere. And 10-15 games of research isn't enough to prove anything when you've got thousands of games to refer to.

And if you're going to claim it is a better correlation than any other stat, then then you have to compare it to other stats.

 

[DallasEast]

42 pages. The OP was filled with accurate, brilliant statistical analyses. Then a jihad popped out of nowhere. Even 9-11 was thrown into the mix. How does this sort of thing keep happening over and over on this site? Romo..?

Don't ask me. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the backwards cap hate thingy.
But if any of your members want me for a pallbearer, let me know.​

 

[KJJ]

I believe most GMs would not put Roethlisberger and Eli above Romo, but this summation perfectly illustrates your thinking (which I believe is flawed).

The fact is that your analysis (Roethlisberger and Eli being ahead of Romo bc of SB / playoff wins / head to head) totally neglects the impact of defense, special teams, Running game, wide Receivers, strength of schedule, etc.. and simply puts entire W/L solely on the QB.

Additionally, you pick and choose which games to assess while lending more weight to some based on arbitrary--and quite frankly, intentionally misleading--metrics.

This is why we could never see eye-to-eye in this argument. You analysis is subjective, anecdotal, and submissive of hard numbers (i.e. facts), relying solely on metrics which fail to assess an individual player's performance as equal to his peers and spiraling almost into the media’s corollary of a curse.

Most GM's would put Roethlisberger and Eli ahead of Romo based off their playoff success and SB wins. Practically every QB ranking out there has Eli and Roethlisberger ranked ahead of Romo who's starting to fall out of the top 10 in most rankings. Eli has beaten Romo in the most pivotal games a playoff game and a season finale elimination game. Even Roethlisberger outplayed Romo in a big head to head matchup in Dec of 08. While Roethlisberger was bringing the Steelers from behind vs the Cowboys Romo was imploding turning the ball over 3 times including a pick-six in the final minutes. Roethlisberger went on to lead the Steelers to a SB win that year while Romo continued to meltdown helping to keep the Cowboys home for the playoffs. On NFLN a few weeks ago they discussed which current QB's other than Peyton Manning, Brady, Brees and Rodgers had a shot at the HOF. The QB's they listed were Eli, Roethlisberger and Rivers. No mention of Romo. They all thought Eli and Roethlisberger had a shot but not so much with Rivers.

I pick and choose the games that are labeled do or die to judge QB's. Those are the games most knowledgeable fans judge QB's by and if some of you can't accept that due to Romo's failures in those games that's your problem. This is a FAN board and any objective fan is going to be outnumbered by a large group of biased FANS that flood these forums. I can assure you if you check the posting histories of all the FANS who disagree with me and a few others you'll find they're dead wrong about the Cowboys and Romo every year. If some of you could stop being a FAN for a minute you might start seeing things the way they really are. Most of you put more weight into regular season stats/passer ratings than you do playoff wins and championships because that's all you have with Romo.

 

[DanteEXT]

Roethlisberger and Eli are clearly above Romo. Both have a number of playoff appearances and wins and both have a couple of championships with Roethlisberger having led the Steelers to 3 SB's. Eli has a head to head edge over Romo and has beaten him in the playoffs and a season finale elimination game. Both Eli and Roethlisberger have an outside shot at the HOF if they can add a few more playoff wins or another championship. I would rank Stabler ahead of Romo . He won a playoff game in 5 consecutive years from 73 to 77 and led the Raiders to a championship in 1977 during a time when the Steelers were a dynasty and the Cowboys had great teams.

Although Doug Williams won a SB he wasn't close to the QB Romo is. Williams had one lucky year in 87 in which he led Washington to a championship. He didn't even start the season for Washington that year. He had a great performance in the SB and deserves credit but take away that one season and he had a very average career. I choose QB's according to playoff wins and SB's but they have to be consistent. One lucky season isn't going to cut it they have to have a solid "career."

Eli's Giants teams have gone 8-3 in the playoffs, 2 for 2 in SB appearances and he was named SB MVP twice and he only has "an outside shot at the HOF" at this point in your opinion? Hate to hear what you think about big brother Peyton's chances then. Probably be lucky to get in the Ring of Honor in Indy, huh?

 

[percyhoward]

I think there are too many unknowns to draw a conclusion using just stats to be honest but there are things you could add to help. The stats are great and all but the point of the game is to win so that also includes things like using the clock and not putting your defense in bad situations. Situational stats would help, when are turnovers occurring? Are the numbers the same against all defenses or is there a large variance? I would start by looking at how the games are being lost. Is it truly the defense that is causing the loss or are they usually being put in bad positions and wearing down? Are they given rest during the game or are there a lot of consecutive 3 and outs when the game is winnable? Is the game winnable and the offense is just not scoring when given a chance at the end? Are they given a lead or are they constantly playing from behind or close? Is the offense taking advantage of opportunities or do they stall for long periods? The offense is the strength of the team so they should give the defense more help considering how the team is built and the health of the defense late in the year. It's easy to say look at the total stats blame the defense but looking at it game by game would be a better approach.

Time of Possession

The point of the game is to win so that also includes things like using the clock and not putting your defense in bad situations...Is it truly the defense that is causing the loss or are they usually being put in bad positions and wearing down? Are they given rest during the game or are there a lot of consecutive 3 and outs when the game is winnable?...Is the offense taking advantage of opportunities or do they stall for long periods?

Great point. Cowboys ranked 26th in TOP late in close losses since 2011 (I used 2011 to avoid the very time-consuming exercise of having to filter out the non-Romo games in 2010). Interestingly (and pathetically), they ranked 26th in the average length of offensive possessions and 26th in defensive as well. It's easy to see why the offense ranked 26th:

First Down Percentage Rank
pass: 4th
run: 28th

Only 3 teams were better at getting first downs via the pass, and only four were worse via the run. That's why in the OP I included first downs by run and stated that the most important run stat late in close games is how well you move the chains. If this offense is to improve its TOP in these situations, it's going to have to run the ball a lot better.

That said, before anybody gets too carried away with pass/run's effect on the defense, I also compared TD% allowed after punts with TD% allowed after kickoffs since 2010. When the opponent's possession began after a punt, the Dallas defense ranked 27th. When it began after a kickoff (either to start the 1st or 2nd half, or following a Dallas scoring drive) the Cowboys defense ranked 32nd. So, while any defense should play better given more rest, the "rested" Dallas defense has actually played worse, relative to the rest of the league's defenses in the same situation. In short, the overall issue with the defense hasn't so much been a lack of rest as it has been a lack of defense.

Strength of Opposing Defense

Situational stats would help, when are turnovers occurring? Are the numbers the same against all defenses or is there a large variance? I would start by looking at how the games are being lost...

I don't know how closely you read the OP, but it's quite situation-specific (4th qtr or OT of losses, score + or - 8 points). All the turnovers, TD, and anything else listed occurred in that precise situation, and the entire point was to look at "how games are being lost." But the middle part of your quote is a useful suggestion.

These are all the defenses Dallas has faced with Romo late in close losses since 2010 (the defenses against which the stats in the OP were compiled). Each defense is listed with its passer rating allowed and where that rating ranked among the league's defenses that year. Below that, you'll find Romo's line in the loss(es) against them that year (att, comp, yds, td, int, sk). As in the OP, sacks count as attempts, and all QB turnovers count as INT in the rating.

2010 Commanders 89.6 (24th)
9 of 17 104 0 0 0
2010 Bears 74.4 (3rd)
Romo 5 of 8 66 0 0 0
2010 Titans 86.4 (21st)
9 of 18 111 1 2 0
2010 Vikings 86.4 (22nd)
7 of 11 83 1 1 0
2011 Jets 69.6 (3rd)
5 of 13 128 0 2 1
2011 Patriots 86.1 (20th)
9 of 15 106 0 0 0
2011 Lions 82.1 (12th)
7 of 11 45 0 1 1
2011 Cardinals 82.5 (13th)
10 of 14 107 0 0 1
2011 Giants 86.1 (21st)
7 of 11 186 2 0 0
2012 Ravens 80.6 (11th)
11 of 17 101 1 0 1
2012 Falcons 77.1 (5th)
5 of 6 69 0 0 0
2012 Giants 88.7 (20th)
12 of 22 117 0 1 1
2012 Commanders 87.0 (18th)
1 of 4 14 0 1 0
2012 Saints 93.8 (28th)
6 of 9 80 1 0 0
2013 Chiefs 78.5 (7th)
8 of 16 69 0 1 1
2013 Chargers 96.4 (28th)
4 of 5 28 0 0 0
2013 Broncos 84.5 (17th)
6 of 10 144 2 1 1
2013 Lions 85.0 (19th)
3 of 4 118 2 0 0
2013 Packers 95.9 (25th)
8 14 72 1 2 1

Romo vs...
top 11 (5 games) 34 of 60 433 1 3 3 64.1
middle 10 (9 games) 64 of 109 948 7 6 4 85.7
bottom 11 (5 games) 34 of 56 367 3 3 1 75.5
TOTAL 132 of 225 1748 11 12 8 76.7

Very low rating, as with all these QB in these games which, after all, were all lost. No "huge variance" issue to be noted, considering there's about a 10-point rating difference between the best and worst defenses he faced. Remember that Romo's rating (as seen in the OP) is the best of the top QB in these situations, meaning that whatever those guys may have gained against the top defenses, they lost right back (and then some) against the other defenses they faced. But there's the breakdown you were looking for.

Leading vs. Trailing

Is the game winnable and the offense is just not scoring when given a chance at the end? Are they given a lead or are they constantly playing from behind or close?

I'll take "winnable" to mean one-score games (+ or - 8 point margin). We already know the defense ranked last among the 10 QB's teams covered in the OP in TD% allowed late in close losses. We also know that the offense was among the league's best in these situations. I'll break down these losses further, based on score. Again, these are rankings since 2011 (for reasons stated above) out of all 32 teams.

4th Qtr or OT, trailing or tied
Offense TD%
1. Patriots
2. Cowboys
3. Broncos
4. Raiders
5. Giants

Defense TD% Allowed
28. Rams
29. Packers
30. Bears
31. Cowboys
32. Panthers

4th Qtr or OT, leading or tied
Offense TD%
1. Titans
2. Cowboys
3. Bears
4. Falcons
5. Broncos

Defense TD% Allowed
28. Cowboys
29. Rams
30. Patriots
31. Panthers
32. Bears

This is the rank in the percentage of drives that resulted in a touchdown. Late in close losses, offensively Dallas was 2nd best, whether leading or trailing. Defensively, the Cowboys were 28th when leading and 31st when trailing.

I hope that gives you a clearer picture.

 

[KJJ]

Eli's Giants teams have gone 8-3 in the playoffs, 2 for 2 in SB appearances and he was named SB MVP twice and he only has "an outside shot at the HOF" at this point in your opinion? Hate to hear what you think about big brother Peyton's chances then. Probably be lucky to get in the Ring of Honor in Indy, huh?

It was my opinion and the opinion of NFLN that Eli had an outside shot at the HOF. Two SB's wins doesn't guarantee a HOF induction. Jim Plunkett had two SB wins and an 8-2 playoff record which is very similar to Eli's postseason record. The problem with Eli he's had pretty average regular seasons and has had more regular season turnovers than Romo. His 8 playoff wins came in only 2 postseasons so it's not like he's had a real consistent career. He has a shot at the HOF but with the caliber of QB's playing during his era like Brees, Rodgers, Brady and his brother Peyton Eli might need another SB win or at least a few more playoff wins.

 

[KJJ]

No you haven't. At least not that I've seen... If you've done the research before then post it, or link it. Surely you didn't do all that work and not save it somewhere. And 10-15 games of research isn't enough to prove anything when you've got thousands of games to refer to.

And if you're going to claim it is a better correlation than any other stat, then then you have to compare it to other stats.

We had this same exact discussion a few weeks ago with you wanting me to post a bunch of games to prove my point which I did. Once I posted a number of games you scoffed and wanted to continue to argue. I'm not about to go through this again with you.

 

[KJJ]

Stats aren't "designed." They are presented. You can present facts that favor your argument and you can present facts that dispute the other side's argument.

Percy's stats and research far outweigh yours. You have is 1-6 in elimination games. The rest has been generalities without substance. TO to turnover ratio correlation sounds like it might be promising, but you've never actually done the correlation. That's not proof.

If Percy's stats carried any weight Romo wouldn't carry the stigma he does. He posts stats that rank Romo amongst HOF QB's. One of the passer rating stats Percy posted a couple of weeks ago had Romo ranked #2 behind Aaron Rodgers as the best QB in the last 5 minutes of games. This was according to the "stat." The stat is a joke because Romo is known for turning ball over in the last 5 minutes of games which shows how misleading that stat is. I've done the correlation on the TD to turnover ratio but you just want to waste my time.

 

[Aurican]

Time of Possession

Great point. Cowboys ranked 26th in TOP late in close losses since 2011 (I used 2011 to avoid the very time-consuming exercise of having to filter out the non-Romo games in 2010). Interestingly (and pathetically), they ranked 26th in the average length of offensive possessions and 26th in defensive as well. It's easy to see why the offense ranked 26th:

First Down Percentage Rank
pass: 4th
run: 28th

Only 3 teams were better at getting first downs via the pass, and only four were worse via the run. That's why in the OP I included first downs by run and stated that the most important run stat late in close games is how well you move the chains. If this offense is to improve its TOP in these situations, it's going to have to run the ball a lot better.

That said, before anybody gets too carried away with pass/run's effect on the defense, I also compared TD% allowed after punts with TD% allowed after kickoffs since 2010. When the opponent's possession began after a punt, the Dallas defense ranked 27th. When it began after a kickoff (either to start the 1st or 2nd half, or following a Dallas scoring drive) the Cowboys defense ranked 32nd. So, while any defense should play better given more rest, the "rested" Dallas defense has actually played worse, relative to the rest of the league's defenses in the same situation. In short, the overall issue with the defense hasn't so much been a lack of rest as it has been a lack of defense.

Strength of Opposing Defense

I don't know how closely you read the OP, but it's quite situation-specific (4th qtr or OT of losses, score + or - 8 points). All the turnovers, TD, and anything else listed occurred in that precise situation, and the entire point was to look at "how games are being lost." But the middle part of your quote is a useful suggestion.

These are all the defenses Dallas has faced with Romo late in close losses since 2010 (the defenses against which the stats in the OP were compiled). Each defense is listed with its passer rating allowed and where that rating ranked among the league's defenses that year. Below that, you'll find Romo's line in the loss(es) against them that year (att, comp, yds, td, int, sk). As in the OP, sacks count as attempts, and all QB turnovers count as INT in the rating.

2010 Commanders 89.6 (24th)
9 of 17 104 0 0 0
2010 Bears 74.4 (3rd)
Romo 5 of 8 66 0 0 0
2010 Titans 86.4 (21st)
9 of 18 111 1 2 0
2010 Vikings 86.4 (22nd)
7 of 11 83 1 1 0
2011 Jets 69.6 (3rd)
5 of 13 128 0 2 1
2011 Patriots 86.1 (20th)
9 of 15 106 0 0 0
2011 Lions 82.1 (12th)
7 of 11 45 0 1 1
2011 Cardinals 82.5 (13th)
10 of 14 107 0 0 1
2011 Giants 86.1 (21st)
7 of 11 186 2 0 0
2012 Ravens 80.6 (11th)
11 of 17 101 1 0 1
2012 Falcons 77.1 (5th)
5 of 6 69 0 0 0
2012 Giants 88.7 (20th)
12 of 22 117 0 1 1
2012 Commanders 87.0 (18th)
1 of 4 14 0 1 0
2012 Saints 93.8 (28th)
6 of 9 80 1 0 0
2013 Chiefs 78.5 (7th)
8 of 16 69 0 1 1
2013 Chargers 96.4 (28th)
4 of 5 28 0 0 0
2013 Broncos 84.5 (17th)
6 of 10 144 2 1 1
2013 Lions 85.0 (19th)
3 of 4 118 2 0 0
2013 Packers 95.9 (25th)
8 14 72 1 2 1

Romo vs...
top 11 (5 games) 34 of 60 433 1 3 3 64.1
middle 10 (9 games) 64 of 109 948 7 6 4 85.7
bottom 11 (5 games) 34 of 56 367 3 3 1 75.5
TOTAL 132 of 225 1748 11 12 8 76.7

Very low rating, as with all these QB in these games which, after all, were all lost. No "huge variance" issue to be noted, considering there's about a 10-point rating difference between the best and worst defenses he faced. Remember that Romo's rating (as seen in the OP) is the best of the top QB in these situations, meaning that whatever those guys may have gained against the top defenses, they lost right back (and then some) against the other defenses they faced. But there's the breakdown you were looking for.

Leading vs. Trailing

I'll take "winnable" to mean one-score games (+ or - 8 point margin). We already know the defense ranked last among the 10 QB's teams covered in the OP in TD% allowed late in close losses. We also know that the offense was among the league's best in these situations. I'll break down these losses further, based on score. Again, these are rankings since 2011 (for reasons stated above) out of all 32 teams.

4th Qtr or OT, trailing or tied
Offense TD%
1. Patriots
2. Cowboys
3. Broncos
4. Raiders
5. Giants

Defense TD% Allowed
28. Rams
29. Packers
30. Bears
31. Cowboys
32. Panthers

4th Qtr or OT, leading or tied
Offense TD%
1. Titans
2. Cowboys
3. Bears
4. Falcons
5. Broncos

Defense TD% Allowed
28. Cowboys
29. Rams
30. Patriots
31. Panthers
32. Bears

This is the rank in the percentage of drives that resulted in a touchdown. Late in close losses, offensively Dallas was 2nd best, whether leading or trailing. Defensively, the Cowboys were 28th when leading and 31st when trailing.

I hope that gives you a clearer picture.

Great post I appreciate the work you put into it and it does help paint a clearer picture. I do still think that looking at it game by game would be a better approach because by pooling a bunch of stats can create noise. A good example would be the game against the loss against the Chiefs which was lost 16-17. Would you say it's fair to blame the defense for the loss even though they only gave up 17 points? Isn't more expected of the offense? Granted that was only one game and I haven't looked into all the specifics but the more context you have for the stats the better.

 

[DanteEXT]

If Percy's stats carried any weight Romo wouldn't carry the stigma he does. He posts stats that rank Romo amongst HOF QB's. One of the passer rating stats Percy posted a couple of weeks ago had Romo ranked #2 behind Aaron Rodgers as the best QB in the last 5 minutes of games. This was according to the "stat." The stat is a joke because Romo is known for turning ball over in the last 5 minutes of games which shows how misleading that stat is. I've done the correlation on the TD to turnover ratio but you just want to waste my time.

If that stat does not support the stigma then maybe the stigma is not all that accurate.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

If that stat does not support the stigma then maybe the stigma is not all that accurate.

How useful can a stat be if all it tells you is stuff you didn't know?

 

[BlindFaith]

Great post I appreciate the work you put into it and it does help paint a clearer picture. I do still think that looking at it game by game would be a better approach because by pooling a bunch of stats can create noise. A good example would be the game against the loss against the Chiefs which was lost 16-17. Would you say it's fair to blame the defense for the loss even though they only gave up 17 points? Isn't more expected of the offense? Granted that was only one game and I haven't looked into all the specifics but the more context you have for the stats the better.

Interesting take on Romo and the 2012 season. Points out what you are alluding to here. Stats don't tell the whole story. That's why there is debate on how good Romo is. Some just go by the numbers, which he's capable of putting up fine numbers. Some look at each game and see that something is amiss.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/10/09/romo-has-great-4th-qtr-stats-doesnt-make-him-clutch/

I think Romo is a good QB, not elite. Certainly not HOF bound.

 

[Picksix]

Time of Possession

Great point. Cowboys ranked 26th in TOP late in close losses since 2011 (I used 2011 to avoid the very time-consuming exercise of having to filter out the non-Romo games in 2010). Interestingly (and pathetically), they ranked 26th in the average length of offensive possessions and 26th in defensive as well. It's easy to see why the offense ranked 26th:

First Down Percentage Rank
pass: 4th
run: 28th

Only 3 teams were better at getting first downs via the pass, and only four were worse via the run. That's why in the OP I included first downs by run and stated that the most important run stat late in close games is how well you move the chains. If this offense is to improve its TOP in these situations, it's going to have to run the ball a lot better.

That said, before anybody gets too carried away with pass/run's effect on the defense, I also compared TD% allowed after punts with TD% allowed after kickoffs since 2010. When the opponent's possession began after a punt, the Dallas defense ranked 27th. When it began after a kickoff (either to start the 1st or 2nd half, or following a Dallas scoring drive) the Cowboys defense ranked 32nd. So, while any defense should play better given more rest, the "rested" Dallas defense has actually played worse, relative to the rest of the league's defenses in the same situation. In short, the overall issue with the defense hasn't so much been a lack of rest as it has been a lack of defense.

Strength of Opposing Defense

I don't know how closely you read the OP, but it's quite situation-specific (4th qtr or OT of losses, score + or - 8 points). All the turnovers, TD, and anything else listed occurred in that precise situation, and the entire point was to look at "how games are being lost." But the middle part of your quote is a useful suggestion.

These are all the defenses Dallas has faced with Romo late in close losses since 2010 (the defenses against which the stats in the OP were compiled). Each defense is listed with its passer rating allowed and where that rating ranked among the league's defenses that year. Below that, you'll find Romo's line in the loss(es) against them that year (att, comp, yds, td, int, sk). As in the OP, sacks count as attempts, and all QB turnovers count as INT in the rating.

2010 Commanders 89.6 (24th)
9 of 17 104 0 0 0
2010 Bears 74.4 (3rd)
Romo 5 of 8 66 0 0 0
2010 Titans 86.4 (21st)
9 of 18 111 1 2 0
2010 Vikings 86.4 (22nd)
7 of 11 83 1 1 0
2011 Jets 69.6 (3rd)
5 of 13 128 0 2 1
2011 Patriots 86.1 (20th)
9 of 15 106 0 0 0
2011 Lions 82.1 (12th)
7 of 11 45 0 1 1
2011 Cardinals 82.5 (13th)
10 of 14 107 0 0 1
2011 Giants 86.1 (21st)
7 of 11 186 2 0 0
2012 Ravens 80.6 (11th)
11 of 17 101 1 0 1
2012 Falcons 77.1 (5th)
5 of 6 69 0 0 0
2012 Giants 88.7 (20th)
12 of 22 117 0 1 1
2012 Commanders 87.0 (18th)
1 of 4 14 0 1 0
2012 Saints 93.8 (28th)
6 of 9 80 1 0 0
2013 Chiefs 78.5 (7th)
8 of 16 69 0 1 1
2013 Chargers 96.4 (28th)
4 of 5 28 0 0 0
2013 Broncos 84.5 (17th)
6 of 10 144 2 1 1
2013 Lions 85.0 (19th)
3 of 4 118 2 0 0
2013 Packers 95.9 (25th)
8 14 72 1 2 1

Romo vs...
top 11 (5 games) 34 of 60 433 1 3 3 64.1
middle 10 (9 games) 64 of 109 948 7 6 4 85.7
bottom 11 (5 games) 34 of 56 367 3 3 1 75.5
TOTAL 132 of 225 1748 11 12 8 76.7

Very low rating, as with all these QB in these games which, after all, were all lost. No "huge variance" issue to be noted, considering there's about a 10-point rating difference between the best and worst defenses he faced. Remember that Romo's rating (as seen in the OP) is the best of the top QB in these situations, meaning that whatever those guys may have gained against the top defenses, they lost right back (and then some) against the other defenses they faced. But there's the breakdown you were looking for.

Leading vs. Trailing

I'll take "winnable" to mean one-score games (+ or - 8 point margin). We already know the defense ranked last among the 10 QB's teams covered in the OP in TD% allowed late in close losses. We also know that the offense was among the league's best in these situations. I'll break down these losses further, based on score. Again, these are rankings since 2011 (for reasons stated above) out of all 32 teams.

4th Qtr or OT, trailing or tied
Offense TD%
1. Patriots
2. Cowboys
3. Broncos
4. Raiders
5. Giants

Defense TD% Allowed
28. Rams
29. Packers
30. Bears
31. Cowboys
32. Panthers

4th Qtr or OT, leading or tied
Offense TD%
1. Titans
2. Cowboys
3. Bears
4. Falcons
5. Broncos

Defense TD% Allowed
28. Cowboys
29. Rams
30. Patriots
31. Panthers
32. Bears

This is the rank in the percentage of drives that resulted in a touchdown. Late in close losses, offensively Dallas was 2nd best, whether leading or trailing. Defensively, the Cowboys were 28th when leading and 31st when trailing.

I hope that gives you a clearer picture.

That's great stuff, Percy. So, in a nutshell, we pass well at the end of games, and run poorly. Regardless, we don't hold onto the ball very long. Our offense is really good at the end of close games (compared to other teams), and the defense is terrible. Romo has worse numbers against better defenses, but so does every other QB (shocking). That about right?

 

[Picksix]

Great post I appreciate the work you put into it and it does help paint a clearer picture. I do still think that looking at it game by game would be a better approach because by pooling a bunch of stats can create noise. A good example would be the game against the loss against the Chiefs which was lost 16-17. Would you say it's fair to blame the defense for the loss even though they only gave up 17 points? Isn't more expected of the offense? Granted that was only one game and I haven't looked into all the specifics but the more context you have for the stats the better.

Even though the Chiefs were playing very strong defense in the early part of the season, I think it's fair to say more should have been expected from the offense. But to follow your point, you have to look at what happened in that game, to get a better sense of why we only got 16 points. I don't remember too much, other than turning the ball over twice in the 2nd half (one of those being a Dunbar fumble), a questionable play call where we threw a screen to Williams, instead of targeting Dez (who had single coverage), and going for a FG late, instead of trying for a TD. Just like seasons, or careers, we like to simplify things and boil them down to just a handful of plays or aspects, instead of truly analyzing what occurred throughout the game.

 

[Denim Chicken]

Most GM's would put Roethlisberger and Eli ahead of Romo based off their playoff success and SB wins. Practically every QB ranking out there has Eli and Roethlisberger ranked ahead of Romo who's starting to fall out of the top 10 in most rankings. Eli has beaten Romo in the most pivotal games a playoff game and a season finale elimination game. Even Roethlisberger outplayed Romo in a big head to head matchup in Dec of 08. While Roethlisberger was bringing the Steelers from behind vs the Cowboys Romo was imploding turning the ball over 3 times including a pick-six in the final minutes. Roethlisberger went on to lead the Steelers to a SB win that year while Romo continued to meltdown helping to keep the Cowboys home for the playoffs. On NFLN a few weeks ago they discussed which current QB's other than Peyton Manning, Brady, Brees and Rodgers had a shot at the HOF. The QB's they listed were Eli, Roethlisberger and Rivers. No mention of Romo. They all thought Eli and Roethlisberger had a shot but not so much with Rivers.

I pick and choose the games that are labeled do or die to judge QB's. Those are the games most knowledgeable fans judge QB's by and if some of you can't accept that due to Romo's failures in those games that's your problem. This is a FAN board and any objective fan is going to be outnumbered by a large group of biased FANS that flood these forums. I can assure you if you check the posting histories of all the FANS who disagree with me and a few others you'll find they're dead wrong about the Cowboys and Romo every year. If some of you could stop being a FAN for a minute you might start seeing things the way they really are. Most of you put more weight into regular season stats/passer ratings than you do playoff wins and championships because that's all you have with Romo.

Again your flawed logic is ignoring all other factors in w/l other then the QB. The reason I give more influence to total stats rather then w/l in a microcosm of game is that the stats are the most logical way to compare individual positions. I really don't know how you don't see this. It's not bias, it is really common sense.

 

[KJJ]

If that stat does not support the stigma then maybe the stigma is not all that accurate.

The stigma is accurate it took a few years to create it and a few more to reinforce it. Only on a Cowboys FAN board does the stigma not exist. One ill-timed turnover isn't going to create a stigma or affect a passer rating stat that much. If a QB completes 6 straight passes and throws a pick on his 7th attempt he still ends with a high passer rating. I doubt Romo's int vs Denver affected his passer rating all that much in the final 5 minutes. Romo's 95.8 career passer rating ranks 5th all-time despite all the regular season turnovers he's committed that's helped cost the Cowboys games. Passer rating stats can hide mistakes they don't tell the whole story.