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

[CCBoy]

Dang it, and I never thought that the drive to procreation was limited to women. Go figure -

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Staubach was great on the road in the playoffs. In fact, he was probably the best road playoff QB of all time. In six road playoff games, he compiled a 95.5 rating, which was 35 points higher than the average of his era.

To put that in perspective, it would be like putting up a 120 rating over six road playoff games today.

The Cowboys were 5-1 in those games, thanks in large part to Staubach's performances. Winning on the road in the playoffs is not easy, even if you've got a complete team. Compare Dallas' record with Staubach to these QB's teams:

Aikman 1-4
Brees 1-4
Favre 3-7
Kelly 1-3
PManning 2-5
Marino 1-6
Montana 2-5
Moon 1-4
Young 0-3

M. Sanchez 4-2

 

[ufcrules1]

I think the thing probably is that most of us suspect you saw interceptions coming no matter what the actual outcome of any particular game. That's the downside for you for being so publicly wrong about Tony Romo in so many threads.

It is your opinion that I am publicly wrong and nothing more. Many people would disagree with you on that. There are 2 sides to the coin.. as you can see there are 55 pages of debating the topic.

 

[KJJ]

Yeah, reading this thread I sure as heck don't sense any anger from their posts when debating you... maybe laughter, possibly sympathy. But not anger.

There's clearly frustration in their posts and they can be seen in some of your responses as well. You've come at me in the past with some pretty harsh language that you finally cleaned up. Name calling is a result of anger and frustration. Just look at some of the crap that's being spewed using my name it's like some have a vendetta against me. lol Some of you take these discussions far too seriously you would think the discussion involves a family member.

 

[percyhoward]

M. Sanchez 4-2

Eli 6-1, Delhomme 4-1, Eason 3-1, etc. Lesson being the sample size is waaaaaay too small.

In Staubach's case it's just an extension of what he did in the regular season anyway.

 

[Ring Leader]

He needs a Joe Montana/ Roger Staubach moment in an elimination game to help change how he's viewed.

I'm not sure that the lazy, force fed public could ever change their minds about Romo regardless of what he accomplishes in the future. They are beyond the point of no return as a result of their emotionally entrenched ill-formed anti Romo personification. They have repeated their garbage so often and with such vitriol that their psyche couldn't withstand the fatal blow of having to having to concede that they were so horribly wrong for so long.

The post game rationalization for a Romo lead "Montana/Staubach" moment would be epic. The spin machine would make James Carville look like an amateur. I really hope we get the chance to enjoy something like this.

 

[gimmesix]

You just proved what I said there's only a handful of games that gave Staubach the reputation for being clutch. He was given the name Captain Comeback after the Cowboys miraculous come from behind victory in the final 90 seconds vs SF in the 72 playoffs. Staubach had a number of games where he wasn't clutch and you listed several. You never hear anyone claim Staubach choked in a game because 2 of his most clutch performances came during that playoff game in 72 vs SF and vs Minn in the 75 playoffs. Staubach's TD to turnover ratio in those 6 losses you listed was 3-12 which goes back to why I put so much weight on a QB's TD to turnover ratio. Staubach's career was defined by 3 great comebacks vs SF, Minn and Washington in the 1979 season finale with the NFC East on the line. Against SF in the playoffs in 72 Staubach tossed 2 TD's in the final 90 seconds to pull that game out. Against Minn in the 75 playoffs with the Cowboys behind in the closing minutes he hit Drew Pearson on a 4th and 16 play to keep the Cowboys last ditch drive alive. Then with only seconds to play he hit Pearson again from 50 yards out for the game winner.

That turned out to be the most memorable play of Staubach's career and one of the greatest in NFL history. Against Washington in Staubach's final regular season game of his career in 79 he brought the Cowboys back twice from 2 score deficits hitting Tony Hill in the final seconds to pull that game out. When fans think of Roger Staubach they think of those games because they made a lasting impression. The Cowboys only missed the playoffs once under Staubach. He played in 17 playoff games winning 11 of them including 2 SB's. If you look at the playoff careers of every great QB they all had their share of failures/chokes but their careers were defined by a few great games that are ingrained in everyones memory. If you look at Joe Montana's playoff record he had 3 straight seasons where the 49ers went one and out.

He had some performances that could be looked at as choke jobs but his reputation was built off of 5 great championship games. He had 2 great clutch come from behind performances in the postseason vs the Cowboys in the 81 title game and vs Cinn in the 1988 SB. When fans think of Joe Montana they think of those games. If you look at the career of Peyton Manning he's had more choke jobs than Romo's ever had but he's won 5 league MVP's, played in 3 SB's winning one and he's won 11 playoff games. Plus his teams make the playoffs every year. Staubach, Montana and Peyton Manning all have a lot of skins on their wall and their successes far outweigh their failures.

Sorry, the games you've mentioned don't count. I've coined the phrase "final elimination" games and none of those games were final elimination games because Dallas won them. Therefore, Staubach is a choker.

 

[peplaw06]

I want no part of the back and forth, but being a stat guy, correlation does not imply causation. The honey bee population decline and the 10 yr US Treasury are highly correlated in math. For a stat to truly be linked to causation, there need to be pvalue, t stat, f tests, etc.

The winning % is not correlation. The correlation formula has to do with 2 data sets and deviation around a mean.

Don't mean to be a jerk, it is just sore spot when correlation is used as not intended

Yeah I have a very rudimentary understanding of statistics, especially when on the level like this. All I know is what was being argued had not been supported.

 

[KJJ]

I'm not sure that the lazy, force fed public could ever change their minds about Romo regardless of what he accomplishes in the future. They are beyond the point of no return as a result of their emotionally entrenched ill-formed anti Romo personification. They have repeated their garbage so often and with such vitriol that their psyche couldn't withstand the fatal blow of having to having to concede that they were so horribly wrong for so long.

The post game rationalization for a Romo lead "Montana/Staubach" moment would be epic. The spin machine would make James Carville look like an amateur. I really hope we get the chance to enjoy something like this.

Leading the Cowboys to a championship would change the perception many have of him. You can't argue a QB can't win the big game when they've done it. The great numbers Romo puts up during the regular season have worked against him because he doesn't put up the same great numbers in playoff/elimination games. That's another reason he carries the choker label. Once a QB leads a team to a championship they can't be called a choker because they got it done on the ultimate stage. All it takes is one huge win to erase a stigma. The problem with Romo is every year he keeps reinforcing the stigma he has with late game turnovers. It's something that's plagued him every year.

 

[KJJ]

Sorry, the games you've mentioned don't count. I've coined the phrase "final elimination" games and none of those games were final elimination games because Dallas won them. Therefore, Staubach is a choker.

You've coined a phrase and are arguing something that's making you look very silly. If you can't figure out why Roger Staubach had the reputation he had and Romo has the reputation he has then you're lost.

 

[DanteEXT]

There's clearly frustration in their posts and they can be seen in some of your responses as well. You've come at me in the past with some pretty harsh language that you finally cleaned up. Name calling is a result of anger and frustration. Just look at some of the crap that's being spewed using my name it's like some have a vendetta against me. lol Some of you take these discussions far too seriously you would think the discussion involves a family member.

Like I said, it's either laughter, sympathy or a little of both at you. If it helps you to sleep at night thinking its all frustration at you like you are getting to them or something, go for it. Whatever you need for your bank.

If I ever truly got angry towards you I would have been banned. Anything I have wrote has been for amusement 'cause it's funny.

If "Name calling is a result of anger and frustration" then I guess that makes you the queen of "anger and frustration". How often do you use your little put down "FAN"? It's clear you try to use it to denigrate others on this board. Sad part is is that you try and hide your name calling by just capitalizing a word that is generally not used as a derogatory put down instead of putting on your big girl pants and use a word that means what you are intending to say.

 

[DallasEast]

I'm not sure that the lazy, force fed public could ever change their minds about Romo regardless of what he accomplishes in the future. They are beyond the point of no return as a result of their emotionally entrenched ill-formed anti Romo personification. They have repeated their garbage so often and with such vitriol that their psyche couldn't withstand the fatal blow of having to having to concede that they were so horribly wrong for so long.

The post game rationalization for a Romo lead "Montana/Staubach" moment would be epic. The spin machine would make James Carville look like an amateur. I really hope we get the chance to enjoy something like this.

I agree completely. Some people wrap themselves so strongly within an opinion that they must be "proven wrong" to even begin being shaken from a closed minded assumption. This site alone would witness some very VERY atypical comments posted if Tony Romo led the team to significant success. That, or unnaturally long periods of non-commenting about the event(s). And I have long predicted that certain active members would suddenly stop posting and new members would appear almost instantaneously. There would be coincidential claims made, of course, but for the most part, I think there would be a LOT of head shaking would accompany any huge Romo victory.

 

[KJJ]

Like I said, it's either laughter, sympathy or a little of both at you. If it helps you to sleep at night thinking its all frustration at you like you are getting to them or something, go for it. Whatever you need for your bank.

If I ever truly got angry towards you I would have been banned. Anything I have wrote has been for amusement 'cause it's funny.

If "Name calling is a result of anger and frustration" then I guess that makes you the queen of "anger and frustration". How often do you use your little put down "FAN"? It's clear you try to use it to denigrate others on this board. Sad part is is that you try and hide your name calling by just capitalizing a word that is generally not used as a derogatory put down instead of putting on your big girl pants and use a word that means what you are intending to say.

That's just more of your anger and frustration. Using the word FAN isn't name calling or I would have received a PM in my box long ago notifying me to knock it off. The word isn't used to denigrate others it's to distinguish between the homers and the realists. Some of your language has had to be hidden by a censor. I get called hater/troll both words are disparaging. None of the abuse I take from FANS is going to stop me from giving honest, unbiased opinions on the team and Romo. If my opinions bother some of you that much and don't think I have a clue what I'm talking about then put me on ignore.

 

[gimmesix]

You've coined a phrase and are arguing something that's making you look very silly.

Pot meet kettle.

 

[KJJ]

Pot meet kettle.

The phrase I coined 2 1/2 years ago on this board is being used by everyone.

 

[DallasEast]

The phrase I coined 2 1/2 years ago on this board is being used by everyone.

lol!

Am I correct by saying that you are accrediting yourself for a long-standing colloquialism, used throughout the world and various cultures, which you may have used first on this site two and a half years ago?

 

[gimmesix]

The phrase I coined 2 1/2 years ago on this board is being used by everyone.

There's a lot of people who smoke crack, too. That doesn't make it a good thing.

A weak argument is a weak argument, whether it's made by one person or copied by 100.

 

[5Stars]

The phrase I coined 2 1/2 years ago on this board is being used by everyone.

Yeah, more that 8 million of them, huh? lol

 

[TheDude]

Yeah I have a very rudimentary understanding of statistics, especially when on the level like this. All I know is what was being argued had not been supported.

No worries, I wasn't trying to say your contention was wrong. We had a big debate at work over correlation. You have made a good argument and didn't want it to get derailed. Sometimes stats can "prove" a causation but it's hard to do in football with all the variables I've tried and the data isnt easy to manipulate with conformation bias etc..

That said I think there is something to be said for preponderance of the evidence of stats, which may be subjective, but I leave that to you There has been some really good work here

 

[KJJ]

lol!

Am I correct by saying that you are accrediting yourself for a long-standing colloquialism, used throughout the world and various cultures, which you may have used first on this site two and a half years ago?

I took enough abuse here for that term so I might as well give myself credit for coining it. lol Honestly I don't remember anyone in the media examining Romo's elimination game record until I did on this board immediately after the Cowboys lost to the Giants in the season finale on Jan 1 2012. Someone had mentioned in a thread right after the game that it was a shame Romo wouldn't be able to add to his playoff record. I replied and said if you add his season finale loss to Philly in 08 to his record which was like a playoff game and his season finale loss to the Giants which was like a playoff game then his elimination game record would be 1-5. That created a HUGE UPROAR on the board.

The discussion got so heated that the thread had to be closed. A few months later during the offseason the media picked up on it and started discussing a lot of what we did here concerning Romo's elimination game record. There was no reason prior the Cowboys loss to the Giants in the season finale 2 1/2 years ago for anyone to examine Romo's season finale elimination game record because he had only played in one vs Philly 3 years prior. Had ESPN/NFLN or anyone else in the media started adding Romo's season finale elimination game losses to his playoff record someone here would have immediately started a thread complaining about it and it would have created much discussion.