Revisiting Romo's Late Game Stats

[percyhoward]

So this is a team sport. They win and lose together. Thus, to me, all the stats in the world are meaningless if this is the case.

The Cowboys, Jets, and Steelers all finished 8-8. Talk about each team's areas of needed improvement without addressing individual performance in 2013. You can't. You'd have to assume that their needs must be identical because of their records.

That's why people talk about individual stats--it's a more complete, more accurate way of discussing a team than W-L.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

This mentality is so frustrating to try to debate. You're literally saying you don't care about explanations, you only care about wins and losses, and then you're perfectly happy ignoring the tons of things that contribute to teams losing football games that have little or nothing to do with QB play. It is, obviously, a completely irrational argument to try to make.

And then, to write off people pointing out the exceedingly obvious as avoiding the point....gah! Your point is not your point. Your point is you're trying to hold somebody accountable for something they cannot be held solely accountable for. That's not an argument, that's a misunderstanding about how football games are won and lost.

Preach.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Give me the W's and L's that's the only stat that matters.

How dare you inject some sanity into this???

Absolutely, for us non-statisticianites, we labor under the delusion that wins be good and losses be bad. And romo seems to be good until the crucial games. And that is too bad for Cowboy fans.

Despite the good news re stats for Romo, my shallow mind keep thinking about bobbles and pix into doubte coverages in the last minutes. Call me slow but also, call me sharp-eyed as far as Romo's constant meltdowns when it really counts.

 

[percyhoward]

We get it, Percy. Aaron Rodgers is better than Romo.

And better in the 4th qtr only because of the last 5 minutes of games, interestingly enough.

 

[jnday]

And so will your heroes Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, etc. You're boring.

I don't have heroes and you are predictable.

 

[iceberg]

wiseguys

Hey man, when you say something stupid...

 

[KJJ]

Maybe it's just the passer rating you were talking about and I am reading to much into it.

Would you say any list with Romo in the top of anything amongst hall of fame QBs is one that should be ignored? Would that then make any argument for the "greatness" of Romo invalid, in affect ridding any and all evidence supporting his success?

Any stat that has Romo amongst or ahead of a number of HOF QB's can't be a stat that has a strong correlation to making the playoffs, winning big games and championships. With todays rules everything has been bent to open up the passing game and perfect the performance of QB's. It all reflects in their passer ratings compared to the passer ratings of QB's from decades ago. The NFL wants scoring and the rules have allowed even average NFL QB's to put up some impressive numbers and passer ratings. Chad Pennington and Matt Schaub who are 12th and 13th on the all-time passer rating list have higher career passer ratings than Dan Marino and many other HOF QB's.

Of the top 10 all-time career passing rating leaders 7 are current QB's. Mark Sanchez has a higher passer rating than Joe Namath. Romo's career passer rating blows away Aikman and Staubach's which further proves how little correlation passer rating stats have to winning championships. Romo is not a "great" QB he's a very good QB that's all he's proven himself to be based on his regular season performances compared to his elimination game performances. It's not about passer ratings it's about a QB's W/L record in the games that matter most.

I see what you are saying, but isn't that the point of this thread? Are we not discussing the final five minutes?
Anytime there is a discussion about the entirety of his game, it generally evolves into a discussion about his mishaps towards the end of the game. But when any evidence supporting the success of the individual is shown, that last 5 minutes should be ignored?

The thread is designed as usual to find a stat that will put Romo ahead of QB's who've won championships. His passer rating stats are the one thing he maintains year after year despite having a losing record as a starting QB the last 4 years. The OP mentions his passer rating stats all the time but he never wants to discuss his elimination game passer ratings that don't have Romo ahead of all these HOF QB's.

Maybe it's just the passer rating you were talking about and I am reading to much into it.

If you're reading that I don't like Romo or think Romo isn't a good QB or that his sucks then you are reading too much into it.

 

[iceberg]

The one good thing about this debate is that Romo will pull a couple of his boneheaded mistakes this season, like he always does, and the Romo defenders will fade away for a couple of weeks after those mistakes cost the team a win. For a short time, Romo's flaws are accepted reality and the rest of the posters don't have read about how it wasn't Romo's fault. Those days without the unreasonable Romo defending are priceless. I look forward to them every year.

Yes, cause NO OTHER TOP NFL QB has EVER made boneheaded plays. You get what you look for whether its real or not

 

[jnday]

I don't care to look the stats up, but they have been posted many times on this board. The stat that makes it hard to defend Romo is his play against teams with winning records. To make matters worse, his meltdowns in the final minutes of games have happened against teams with records at .500 or above. This includes the "win or go home games" when a playoff appearance is possible. I have always said that Romo is a good QB, but he has a couple major flaws. The so-called "chokes" happen against good teams, but Romo has a good record of comebacks against below average teams in the 4th quarter.

 

[KJJ]

So find some other individual stat with a higher correlation to winning. I'll gladly use it instead.

If passer rating stats have as high a correlation to winning as you claim then how come Romo who has the 5th highest career passer rating all-time has only one elimination game victory in 7 tries and has a losing record the last 4 years despite maintaining a high passer rating?

 

[iceberg]

This mentality is so frustrating to try to debate. You're literally saying you don't care about explanations, you only care about wins and losses, and then you're perfectly happy ignoring the tons of things that contribute to teams losing football games that have little or nothing to do with QB play. It is, obviously, a completely irrational argument to try to make.

And then, to write off people pointing out the exceedingly obvious as avoiding the point....gah! Your point is not your point. Your point is you're trying to hold somebody accountable for something they cannot be held solely accountable for. That's not an argument, that's a misunderstanding about how football games are won and lost.

 

[percyhoward]

Does he touch it on defense? You are ignoring half of the game with this thinking.

The only difference is point of view, yes. For every fan who insists his team's QB is the most important player in the game, there's an opposing team's fan thinking the same thing about his own QB.

 

[iceberg]

Did Wilson win the Superbowl, or did the D?

 

[Idgit]

If passer rating stats have as high a correlation to winning as you claim then how come Romo who has the 5th highest career passer rating all-time has only one elimination game victory in 7 tries and has a losing record the last 4 years despite maintaining a high passer rating?

Oooh!! Ooh! Can I guess at this one? I'm going to go with: "because our opponents all have a higher passer rating against us than we have against them in those games." And then I'll go further to say that this happens against good teams more than bad ones, because the good teams tend to both pass effectively and defend the pass effectively. Or they do one of the two really, really well. So the fact that we only do one of those two things well, and lose to better teams as a result, ought to surprise nobody.

 

[percyhoward]

If passer rating stats have as high a correlation to winning as you claim then how come Romo who has the 5th highest career passer rating all-time has only one elimination game victory in 7 tries and has a losing record the last 4 years despite maintaining a high passer rating?

I'm going to refer you to post #92 for your answer.

 

[TwoDeep3]

This is pretty simple.

Romo does nothing alone. Passing stats require an offensive line, running backs, and receivers to accomplish the stats you site.

Yet you act like he does these things alone.

Only when Romo throws an interception does he act alone. But then that even requires a team around him to accomplish.

So yes, there is a huge amount of irony about this thread and the position some take about this player when he makes mistakes.

 

[iceberg]

If passer rating stats have as high a correlation to winning as you claim then how come Romo who has the 5th highest career passer rating all-time has only one elimination game victory in 7 tries and has a losing record the last 4 years despite maintaining a high passer rating?

Cause our D sucks the poo out of the city sewer

 

[EST_1986]

This mentality is so frustrating to try to debate. You're literally saying you don't care about explanations, you only care about wins and losses, and then you're perfectly happy ignoring the tons of things that contribute to teams losing football games that have little or nothing to do with QB play. It is, obviously, a completely irrational argument to try to make.

And then, to write off people pointing out the exceedingly obvious as avoiding the point....gah! Your point is not your point. Your point is you're trying to hold somebody accountable for something they cannot be held solely accountable for. That's not an argument, that's a misunderstanding about how football games are won and lost.

I only care about wins and losses. WAHHH. Statistical victories are the only ones that matter around here anymore.

 

[Idgit]

This is pretty simple.

Romo does nothing alone. Passing stats require an offensive line, running backs, and receivers to accomplish the stats you site.

Yet you act like he does these things alone.

Only when Romo throws an interception does he act alone. But then that even requires a team around him to accomplish.

So yes, there is a huge amount of irony about this thread and the position some take about this player when he makes mistakes.

I'm still not following you. You're making the (good) point that other players on offense contribute to the high individual QB statistics. I get that part. I don't see where the irony comes in. I think we all understand that there are difficulties sussing out and measuring an individual's play when he's on the field with 21 other people and that the play of the individuals combine to be the play of the team.

I'm just not seeing where there's anything ironic involved. But I'll let it drop.

 

[Idgit]

I only care about wins and losses. WAHHH. Statistical victories are the only ones that matter around here anymore.

Now you're confusing the system for measuring performance with 'what matters.' Wins matter. They are also the most important measure of a team's performance over the course of a season.

Other more refined statistics attempt to measure *why* teams win. Or how individual players play. This is important information for anybody who wants to know how to win so the team can get better.

Ignoring that data because it's confusing or because you may be unsure of how to interpret it doesn't change the fact that the information is helpful in diagnosing what matters. And by what matters I mean 'how to win a football game.'