Romo or Brees

MarcusRock said:
It's not "simple math." It's statistical probability which is why you either can't or are deliberately failing to grasp it because it doesn't favor Romo versus Brees, even in some of the categories it should favor Romo. That alone would obliterate any case you could attempt to make for Romo as even on par with Brees. It's also why Romo defenders would need to go into side chatter about scheme, coaching, etc. to make their case because the numbers sure can't, even when you account for Brees' extra throwing.

You never did circle back to the conclusion you brought up. Is it easier to go 8 for 10 than it is to go 80 for 100? Let's think about basketball this time, lol.
Click to expand...
It's exactly the same. Why wouldn't it be? Again, you're confusing volatility with something else. Do you understand volatility? you dont seem to be giving any indication that you do. The idea that throwing less gives a greater chance for having better stats is so laughably stupid, I'm actually at a loss to try to come up with an example you can understand.
 
armadillooutlaw said:
That's hardly true.
Romo averaged between 30-40 pass attempts per game eight of ten seasons as a starter.
Manning averaged 30-40 attempts a game 14 seasons, Brees 7 seasons between 30-40 attempts per game, 8 seasons between 40-42 attempts per game.
Click to expand...
Wrong, they simply threw the ball more. If you take Romo's best seasons and compare Brees best seasons for TD%, they are both competitive.
 
I'm as big a Romo fan as you'll find, but I gotta give the edge to Brees on this one.
 
I love Tony, but Drew Brees is the better QB.

Look at the man's stats...that's really all you need to see.
 
MarcusRock said:
You don't get it. Throwing less favors a QB having a greater chance at better TD%, lower INT%, Yards per attempt, and completion percentage. Romo's statistical probabilities favor him in all 4 of those categories yet Brees exceeds Romo in 2 of those 4 categories anyway. I'm not talking strictly volume, I'm talking about how Brees excellence over Romo is seen in his volume. Here's another one, Brees missed less games to injury in his entire career (6) than Romo did on 3 separate occasions within a season despite playing more than 35% more games than Romo did. A person is not expected to be more durable when playing more but Brees has been. You get it now?
Click to expand...
In other other words Romo playing only 7 full seasons which is the least of any completed career near the top and why Wilson is so high actually favors a greater opportunity for a higher rating?

The probability that rating stays high throughout their career unless they maintain that level they had during their peaks years is unlikely?

Please clarify if I’ve misinterpreted.
 
Super_Kazuya said:
It's exactly the same. Why wouldn't it be? Again, you're confusing volatility with something else. Do you understand volatility? you dont seem to be giving any indication that you do. The idea that throwing less gives a greater chance for having better stats is so laughably stupid, I'm actually at a loss to try to come up with an example you can understand.
Click to expand...

There's a certain amount of context when looking at stats and how they're interpreted. Stats are printed in black and white and simply state the results, but they don't explain the reasons for those results. Going 8-10 is a lot different than going 80-100, while in black and white math they're the same, the reason why you had to make 100 versus 10 attempts is different. When a QB is having to make more attempts, it's usually because his team is behind or struggling and is forced to make more plays and take more risks, make throws they might not otherwise. Romo's best season was when he was throwing less not more, he didn't have to take risks or make decisions he wouldn't otherwise make. There is a difference in attempting in 450 passes vs 650 passes, there is a higher chance for mistakes because it often means they're throwing in more adverse conditions or less support from the team.
 
This rating list really begins to deflate after #13 with Chad Pennington, Matt Schaub, Carlson Palmer, Kaepernick, Dalton and Culpepper 14- 20.

Once you basically get by the top 13 the list just doesn’t make any sense with Marino at #28, Favre #29, Staubach in the 40’s and Troy in the 50’s.

I’d summarize since the only QB’s until # 13 before this pass happy era are Montana and Young that this passer rating is mostly flawed as any kind of reflection of NFL all time greatest passers or QB’s.

Instead it reveals more of who has the best ratings amongst who’ve thrown the ball the most. Lol

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_career.htm
 
Brees hands down. He was more accurate than romo and he more than likely gets dallas a SB whereas romo was never good enough to make it that far.

Romo choked more than not.

Where do you think names like Tony Choko came from.

Brees.
 
Roadtrip635 said:
There's a certain amount of context when looking at stats and how they're interpreted. Stats are printed in black and white and simply state the results, but they don't explain the reasons for those results. Going 8-10 is a lot different than going 80-100, while in black and white math they're the same, the reason why you had to make 100 versus 10 attempts is different. When a QB is having to make more attempts, it's usually because his team is behind or struggling and is forced to make more plays and take more risks, make throws they might not otherwise. Romo's best season was when he was throwing less not more, he didn't have to take risks or make decisions he wouldn't otherwise make. There is a difference in attempting in 450 passes vs 650 passes, there is a higher chance for mistakes because it often means they're throwing in more adverse conditions or less support from the team.
Click to expand...
What? He didn’t say anything about that. He literally said that over the thousands of attempts in both players careers, that it was easier for Romo to have better numbers because of MATH. Did you even read all of the discussion?
 
Brees and it's really not a question IMO. Romo couldn't stay healthy. Brees started in twice as many games.
Brees is going into his 18th season? Think about the longevity. It's incredible.
Twice the yards.
Nearly four times the TDs.
Twice the attempts.
Romo led the NFL in yards per attempt and rating in 2014. That's really it.
Brees led the NFL in completions 6 times, attempts 4 times, yards 7 times, percentage 4 times, TDs 4 times yards per game 6 times.
Brees won and was a SB MVP.
Tons of records.

Pretty one sided.
 
superonyx said:
Romo.
Brees would have stunk it up playing in a JG predictable offense.

Romo in Sean Peyton’s offense would have multiple Super Bowls.

Scheme matters.
Click to expand...
This. Our teams that could have done some good winning have been flushed down the toilet by terrible coaching. When your coaching costs you 2-3 games a season and you miss the playoffs by one game 4 years in a row and you still keep your job there is only one spot to put the blame. The front office. When will Will McClay be able to run the entire front office? That is when this team will return to greatness and not just good enough to miss out.
 
MarcusRock said:
YThrowing less favors a QB having a greater chance at better TD%, lower INT%, Yards per attempt, and completion percentage.
Click to expand...
Super_Kazuya said:
What? He didn’t say anything about that. He literally said that over the thousands of attempts in both players careers, that it was easier for Romo to have better numbers because of MATH. Did you even read all of the discussion?
Click to expand...
MarcusRock said:
Throwing less favors a QB having a greater chance at better TD%, lower INT%, Yards per attempt, and completion percentage.
Click to expand...

You bolded and took issue to that statement, but is generally true. In a football context, throwing less is generally favorable for the QB. When a QB throws less it's usually because they have more favorable conditions, leading a game, more support from the running game, more favorable down and distance situations, defense forcing turnovers etc. It doesn't require the QB to take as many unnecessary risks, he's not forced as often to make longer, or questionable throws or decisions.


They have different styles and run different type offenses. Brees is in a pass orientated offense and while not generally considered a dink and dunk QB, the Saints offense is more successful when involving their RBs which are usually shorter safer passes. Romo played in a more run focused and downfield passing offense which inherently carries more risk. Romo throwing less passes benefits Romo because of the type passes he was asked to make. Brees stats look better in part because, while a great deep ball passer, because his offense didn't rely on him to have to constantly complete deep passes. His success has come from being able to make the shorter safer passes.

Coaches and fans get enamored by the big arm and/or athletic ability, ala Marino, Elway, or Romo and want to play to those strengths and get tunnel vision by that talent, but that only carries you so far. Romo's offense was designed to take advantage of his strength's, his arm and scrambling ability, but the passing game relied too heavily on that and didn't afford him more shorter and safer throws. Brees was also put in an offense that played to his strengths, but his coaches knew enough to not just rely on that which afforded him greater longevity and success.
 
I think both QBs were elite talents. I'm not going to give either one the thumbs up. In Romo's defense, he played many years on garbage Cowboy teams. In several seasons he was the difference between the Cowboys being relevant or not. This started the second he replaced Bledsoe against the Giants. And anyone that watched that Broncos/Cowboys game in 2013 where Romo kept us in the game all night with a vastly inferior team than the eventual super bowl rep. for the AFC cannot deny his abilities. The dude knew what he was doing and was as good as any of these elite QBs.
 
Hard to say what each would have done in the others offense. Romo may still be heathy and breez may have a broke back.
 
Roadtrip635 said:
You bolded and took issue to that statement, but is generally true. In a football context, throwing less is generally favorable for the QB. When a QB throws less it's usually because they have more favorable conditions, leading a game, more support from the running game, more favorable down and distance situations, defense forcing turnovers etc. It doesn't require the QB to take as many unnecessary risks, he's not forced as often to make longer, or questionable throws or decisions.


They have different styles and run different type offenses. Brees is in a pass orientated offense and while not generally considered a dink and dunk QB, the Saints offense is more successful when involving their RBs which are usually shorter safer passes. Romo played in a more run focused and downfield passing offense which inherently carries more risk. Romo throwing less passes benefits Romo because of the type passes he was asked to make. Brees stats look better in part because, while a great deep ball passer, because his offense didn't rely on him to have to constantly complete deep passes. His success has come from being able to make the shorter safer passes.

Coaches and fans get enamored by the big arm and/or athletic ability, ala Marino, Elway, or Romo and want to play to those strengths and get tunnel vision by that talent, but that only carries you so far. Romo's offense was designed to take advantage of his strength's, his arm and scrambling ability, but the passing game relied too heavily on that and didn't afford him more shorter and safer throws. Brees was also put in an offense that played to his strengths, but his coaches knew enough to not just rely on that which afforded him greater longevity and success.
Click to expand...
All of what you are saying is speculation. By your logic, the QBs who threw the ball less in 2017 should have higher passer ratings than those who throw the ball more, but the opposite is true. However you are right, there is nuance and what you are saying can at least be debated.
Again he is saying from a pure MATH perspective it is easier to complete 8 out of 10 passes than 80 out of 100. Eliminate opponent, eliminate fatigue, eliminate everything. He’s saying mathematically, he even used the words “statistical probability” and said it was easier to go 8 for 10 in baseball than 80 out of 100.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 28,894 (members: 38, guests: 28,856)
Robots: 875

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,079
Messages
14,511,122
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top