Romo (and Others) Vs. Playoff Teams

[TwoDeep3]

What the stats do, or should do, is make it clear that the lack of big game success isn't a function of the overall QB play. And they highlight that Eli Manning--two rings and all--wouldn't have those rings if he didn't have the support from his pass defense, either.
Whether those obvious facts change the minds of average fans who are unhappy with Tony Romo, or not, isn't relevant. You're right that there are always going to be people who believe things based off of insufficient data, or off of drawing the wrong conclusions from the available data. All you can really do is point it out to them. If they don't change their opinions as a result, they were never going to, anyway.

What you think it should or should not do ignores what it actually does.

The stat indicating the interceptions when throwing to one receiver versus the others seems to indicate the receiver is at fault.

But that doesn't prove that issue at all. It's still conjecture.

And it is this reason why I believe stats prove what the stat gathers wants to prove, but isn't empirical and doesn't settle anything.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Most here are not interested or trying to 'change' anyone's mind. They want to have nice conversation with fellow football fans esp Cowboys' ones. I'm often reminded or introduced to data I enjoy reading and knowing. All threads have there place and I read a lot of them as a fan of the site and not just as a mod 'having' to do so. Even the endless Jerry, Romo and Garrett sucks or doesn't suck ones.

I'm very happy to run across a relatively 'pure' football thread. I wish there was a way to keep them 'centered'.

Your opinion is nice but that doesn't begin to address my premise, which is the ROMO will not gain respect until he wins it all. And all this arguing and stats and machinations will not change that at all.

 

[percyhoward]

The stat indicating the interceptions when throwing to one receiver versus the others seems to indicate the receiver is at fault.

How so?

 

[Idgit]

What you think it should or should not do ignores what it actually does.

The stat indicating the interceptions when throwing to one receiver versus the others seems to indicate the receiver is at fault.

But that doesn't prove that issue at all. It's still conjecture.

And it is this reason why I believe stats prove what the stat gathers wants to prove, but isn't empirical and doesn't settle anything.

People definitely draw the wrong conclusions from stats all the time. They're data, not necessarily information. But a lot of good can come from having the right data if you know what you're doing with it.
In the case of the WR3-5 data, it indicates there's an issue between Romo and those guys. That's helpful to know. It doesn't necessarily indicate the problem is the receiver. It could be a disconnect with the QB. It could be a function of the practice reps. It could be a problem with one WR and the other two not having enough reps. It could be too small a data sample. The point is, it's still useful to know where the issues come about, because then the problem can be discussed and addressed.

 

[Idgit]

Your opinion is nice but that doesn't begin to address my premise, which is the ROMO will not gain respect until he wins it all. And all this arguing and stats and machinations will not change that at all.

It's not really necessary to address much with that premise. Very few QBs get respect from a general audience until they win it all. That will be the case without any regard for what's actually going on on the football field. If we start instead with the premise that what's actually going on on the field is what's important, then the fact that many will draw the wrong conclusion because they either are misguided by shallow game coverage or because they mistakenly blame the figurehead for the play of an entire team is academic.
It's like giving 100 people a multiple choice math problem that only ten people solve correctly. If most of the other 90 who arrived at the wrong answer arrived at the same wrong answer, so what? That just tells you there are common mistakes people make when doing that particular math problem. There's still a right answer. The fact that it's not the one that's popularly accepted isn't really relevant.

 

[jobberone]

Your opinion is nice but that doesn't begin to address my premise, which is the ROMO will not gain respect until he wins it all. And all this arguing and stats and machinations will not change that at all.

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree although I strongly suspect the majority of fans hold your opinion rather than mine. Mine just happens to be right!

 

[percyhoward]

In the case of the WR3-5 data, it indicates there's an issue between Romo and those guys. That's helpful to know..

Exactly. The significance of that little stat (again, one that I had not seen anywhere else) is that it exists at all; that such a negative is concentrated in that one particular area. It obviously needs fixing, and it's much more specific than saying "Romo needs to do better."

"Passer" rating is a lousy term anyway. It should be "pass" rating.

 

[jobberone]

Exactly. The significance of that little stat (again, one that I had not seen anywhere else) is that it exists at all; that such a negative is concentrated in that one particular area. It obviously needs fixing, and it's much more specific than saying "Romo needs to do better."

"Passer" rating is a lousy term anyway. It should be "pass" rating.

I've seen that data before or close to it but I'll never remember where just as I'd forgotten it until you posted it. Hopefully I won't forget it again as its pretty close to a silver bullet. Great thread. Thanks again.

 

[CaptainMorgan]

right

 

[TwoDeep3]

How so?

Clearly it may indicate what you suggest.

But you also cannot eliminate that Romo misread the route. he is not foolproof, and mere numbers don't answer what all the players were thinking.

While stats are black and white, what you infer from them is not black and white at all.

 

[CarlAllDay]

Our qb is so unappreciated... Folks really have forgotten what it was like to not have one. Smh

 

[jobberone]

Clearly it may indicate what you suggest.

But you also cannot eliminate that Romo misread the route. he is not foolproof, and mere numbers don't answer what all the players were thinking.

While stats are black and white, what you infer from them is not black and white at all.

When there is a statistical anomaly centered around the younger receivers then it's not unreasonable to think there's a direct relationship esp when the rest of the stats fit an historical pattern.

 

[DFWJC]

Anyway...

All the guys in the list have at least 1,000 attempts and 28 games, so it's a huge sample size (almost two full seasons of games at minimum). It shows lots of things. Aaron Rodgers has had an unbelievable, almost Beamonesque, five seasons. On the surface, it would seem that the rest of the NFL is lucky that the Packers have only won one SB, with a great pass defense (4th, 4th, 1st, 9th, 4th in DPR) and a QB who is that good against the league's best teams. How are they only 21-17 in those games? Because historically, their defense has feasted on non-playoff teams, and 14 of the 17 losses were by a TD or less, most of them high-scoring.

What's most interesting to me is to compare the two lists (vs. NFL with vs. playoff teams) to see who moves up in the order (Brees, and to a lesser extent Flacco and Eli), and who falls (Peyton and Ryan drop a couple of spots) when the competition gets tougher. The fact that Rodgers, Brady, and Romo are in the Top 5 of both lists speaks to their consistency. And that's really what motivated the post in the first place. That number in parentheses is the more important of the two ratings. It's great that Brees steps up against tough opponents, but there's something to be said for taking care of business against weaker teams.

Basically, this is the kind of stuff I can't find anywhere, so I look it up myself when I find that I have some time. It's good to know, IOW.

Really outstanding stuff, Percy.
If the Oline and defense advance, the odds are very good that these numbers will translate much better with wins than they currently do.

 

[percyhoward]

You cannot eliminate that Romo misread the route. he is not foolproof, and mere numbers don't answer what all the players were thinking.

While stats are black and white, what you infer from them is not black and white at all.

That's true of course, but you're wrong if you think the idea is to come up with an explanation that works for every single pass play to those 3 receivers.

The idea is to come up with the most likely explanation that the numbers for those 3 receivers are so different from the norm.

 

[visionary]

What's most interesting to me is to compare the two lists (vs. NFL with vs. playoff teams) to see who moves up in the order (Brees, and to a lesser extent Flacco and Eli), and who falls (Peyton and Ryan drop a couple of spots) when the competition gets tougher. The fact that Rodgers, Brady, and Romo are in the Top 5 of both lists speaks to their consistency. And that's really what motivated the post in the first place. .

This is a great great point PH and one that is easy to miss so thanx for pointing it out

I am a fan of Romo and his overall play and overall stats bear out that he is a very very good QB

The reality though is that these are means/medians and those go only so far... for instance, i think most objective people would agree that when you throw 3-4 interceptions in a win-or-go-home game, you are in large proportion responsible for the team losing that game

season averages may mask that

so, while i agree with and value the statistical analysis you posted, i also agree with 2Deep that the perception and the reality for romo will continue to be that he is a very very good QB whose team falls short in crunch time

a good example of this is LaBron, possibly the greatest basketball player of all time
had the reputation of a choker until he won the big one

if romo wants his reputation to be that of a winner, he will need to lead his team to a championship

fair or unfair, that is what is going to happen

 

[Muhast]

Maybe I'm not understanding the stats but, Romo's playoff QB rating is in the 80's, you have it at 95?

 

[Califan007]

Actually, these stats might help 'splain the whole "Romo was left off the top 100 players list" topic...check out Romo's 2011 stats against playoff teams, then compare them to his 2012 stats against playoff teams. Huge difference.

 

[percyhoward]

Maybe I'm not understanding the stats but, Romo's playoff QB rating is in the 80's, you have it at 95?

Romo
856 of 1383 for 10387 69 td 46 int 87.7 (95.0) 15-24

95.0 is Romo's career rating in all regular and post-season games.
87.7 is Romo's career rating in regular and post-season games against teams that made the playoffs.

 

[Muhast]

Romo
856 of 1383 for 10387 69 td 46 int 87.7 (95.0) 15-24

95.0 is Romo's career rating in all regular and post-season games.
87.7 is Romo's career rating in regular and post-season games against teams that made the playoffs.

Great, thats what I was missing then. I knew your numbers were most likely right, and I was just misunderstanding. Thanks for posting!

 

[percyhoward]

...check out Romo's 2011 stats against playoff teams, then compare them to his 2012 stats against playoff teams. Huge difference.

Check this out and you'll see what I mean about the impact of the 3rd WR in both those years. These numbers are only for the games against playoff teams.

2011
Passes to Robinson: 3 TD/1 INT
Passes to All Other Targets: 9 TD/4 INT

2012
Passes to Ogletree/Harris/Beasley: 2 TD/5 INT
Passes to All Other Targets: 8 TD/3 INT

Dallas played 6 games against playoff teams in 2012, and the impact of 3rd WR on passer rating can especially be seen in those games. On passes to all other targets, Romo went from 9 TD/4 INT in 2011 to 8 TD/3 INT in 2012. What happened to the huge difference? When you look at who the targets were for those passes, you see that there was hardly any difference at all, except on passes to the 3rd WR.