Romo and "Roughing the Passer" 2006-15

[percyhoward]

I mentioned that to a hater and his response was typical, other teams don't have to rush Romo in the 2nd half, just have to wait for a pick six

Out of the 79 QB with at least 300 2nd-half attempts since 2006, Romo ranks 1st in yards per attempt (8.4) and 2nd in passer rating (103.1). That high YPA is an indicator of the big plays he's made in the 2nd half, many of which were the result of holding the ball longer than usual and taking a hit.

Passing -- Scoring Plays of 20+ yards in 2nd Half
Romo 67
Brees 59
Rivers 53
EManning 53
Rodgers 47

Scoring Plays of 20+ yards in 4th qtr or OT
Romo 35
EManning 32
Brees 28
Rivers 26
Rodgers 25

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Others are saying well there are many explanations for the difference etc. I said that might explain if the difference were at the level of P Manning compared to Rodgers but they cannot explain 10x the attempts required.

 

[Idgit]

That has nothing to do with crunching numbers.

It's asking him describe/explain/demonstrate why 2nd half RTPs are somehow worth more than 1st half RTPs.

You're confusing the value of something with the expected frequency of it.

 

[lurkercowboy]

Thank you for these numbers. That confirms what I thought we all saw over the years, that RTP calls against Romo have been very rare. Can anyone come up with a reasonable explanation? I sure can't.

 

[DFWJC]

just a couple of years ago, that Demontre Moore late hit was so blantant that utube had mutuple clips of it, even from non Cowboy fans.

I at least partially blame the apathy from Wade Phillips and Garrett over the years. The have t defended him like they should after the fact

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

You're confusing the value of something with the expected frequency of it.

"expected frequency" = baseless speculation

 

[Idgit]

"expected frequency" = baseless speculation

No. He gave you the data re how often the penalty is called in the 4th compared to the other quarters.

 

[CCBoy]

"expected frequency" = baseless speculation

Just to be analytical...and that all depends on the parameters of definition. Statistical probability explains a lot of things in a social environment. Empirical doesn't take the field in all cases...

Baseless must meet the confining element of definition. Now define your exclusion, beyond discussable parameters.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

No. He gave you the data re how often the penalty is called in the 4th compared to the other quarters.

No, no.

You said "expected frequency," not him.

Beyond that, this apparent lack of "expected frequency" in the 4th QTR insinuates there is supposed greater value in getting an RTP call in the 4th QTR than, say, the 2nd QTR, which is a bunk assumption unless there is comprehensive supplemental information (i.e. down-and-distance, score, clock, situation, etc. of every QB on the benefiting end of an RTP from '08-present) to provide adequate context to draw a reliable inference from.

How many of those 4th quarter RTPs that Aaron Rogers received actually happen with the Packers up 35-10 (or so) and some frustrated DE just wanting to tee off on him? Or, should we just assume they all happened at a critical point late in the game, tied score and ultimately help the Pack win the game?

 

[Idgit]

No, no.

You said "expected frequency," not him.

Beyond that, this apparent lack of "expected frequency" in the 4th QTR insinuates there is supposed greater value in getting an RTP call in the 4th QTR than, say, the 2nd QTR, which is a bunk assumption unless there is comprehensive supplemental information (i.e. down-and-distance, score, clock, situation, etc. of every QB on the benefiting end of an RTP from '08-present) to provide adequate context to draw a reliable inference from.

I was paraphrasing what he'd already explained in his posts before you got confused with all the irrelevant value questions.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

I was paraphrasing what he'd already explained in his posts before you got confused with all the irrelevant value questions.

Lol, smh.

Yes, value would be irrelevant to someone that gets impressed by the sight of numbers without meaning.

Carry on.

 

[CCBoy]

No, no.

You said "expected frequency," not him.

Beyond that, this apparent lack of "expected frequency" in the 4th QTR insinuates there is supposed greater value in getting an RTP call in the 4th QTR than, say, the 2nd QTR, which is a bunk assumption unless there is comprehensive supplemental information (i.e. down-and-distance, score, clock, situation, etc. of every QB on the benefiting end of an RTP from '08-present) to provide adequate context to draw a reliable inference from.

How many of those 4th quarter RTPs that Aaron Rogers received actually happen with the Packers up 35-10 (or so) and some frustrated DE just wanting to tee off on him? Or, should we just assume they all happened at a critical point late in the game, tied score and ultimately help the Pack win the game?

To the chase here...a special case of when, doesn't cross compare to a body of works that indicates, no matter the specific or special case, it doesn't matter...only who it is.

 

[Idgit]

Lol, smh.

Yes, value would be irrelevant to someone that gets impressed by the sight of numbers without meaning.

Carry on.

You think there's even one other poster on the board who read the OP and the OPs followup a and failed to find any meaning in them? Because I don't.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

You think there's even one other poster on the board who read the OP and the OPs followup a and failed to find any meaning in them? Because I don't.

People find meaning in pet rocks. Congrats for finding similar success.

I guess I should just be happy that people find happiness in looking at numbers on a screen and applying whatever meaning they want to them. Relevance and basic statistical principals be damned.

 

[Idgit]

People find meaning in pet rocks. Congrats for finding similar success.

I guess I should just be happy that people find happiness in looking at numbers on a screen and applying whatever meaning they want to them. Relevance and basic statistical principals be damned.

Who do you know that finds meaning in pet tricks?

And you can't make the mistakes you've made in understanding what's going on in this thread and then try to take the intellectual high road. It comes off as forced.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Who do you know that finds meaning in pet tricks?

And you can't make the mistakes you've made in understanding what's going on in this thread and then try to take the intellectual high road. It comes off as forced.

Lol, you see me taking the "intellectual high road" because I'm on it. You being upset and lamely objecting to it doesn't put you on it.

Have fun with numbers!

 

[gmoney112]

If I was Jerry, I'd pay to have videos leaked to every sports media site and viral social media account with clickbait like "you WONT BELIEVE what refs missed this game!!!!"

30-40 million views and you'd probably start getting a response. Gotta hit em where it hurts because the NFL dun care bro's. Kraft, Gooddell, Mara, and Rooney all probably use the same Asian massage parlor.

Edit: I've started getting heavily involved in web dev, this might actually be a fun project for me.

 

[Idgit]

Lol, you see me taking the "intellectual high road" because I'm on it. You being upset and lamely objecting to it doesn't put you on it.

Have fun with numbers!

Have fun misunderstanding them some more.

 

[Primetime42]

 

[Domer_und]

Great stuff. I've talked about this discrepancy at length on other forums. There's no denying that when it comes to RTP, Romo gets the short stick.

It isn't called and the more critical the situation the less it's called. Pretty much the opposite of RTP trends for every other QB.

Domer