Stopping the New Romo Myth

[TheDude]

I think the old impression that Romo has Favre's bad qualities is outdated.

He certainly for throw it away for example.
The ball hit the grown 4 times vs GB
2 throw aways
1 drop
Dez catch

I wasnt meaning to intimate that Romo had all of Favres tendencies (Rocket Balls, Blind throws) . I think I was trying to illustrate Romo will hold on to the ball, wait for something to develop and go for a big play. I dont think of Romo as a 3(5/7) step drop, plant, fire the ball guy that say a Brady, or Aikman was. He can but there seems to be an intuition that can see big plays and will go for it. Maybe a little less now, but he is not a Carson Palmer -type.

Maybe a bad analogy. Kind of brain dead from reading regulatory banking rules all day

 

[CT Dal Fan]

I wasnt meaning to intimate that Romo had all of Favres tendencies (Rocket Balls, Blind throws) . I think I was trying to illustrate Romo will hold on to the ball, wait for something to develop and go for a big play. I dont think of Romo as a 3(5/7) step drop, plant, fire the ball guy that say a Brady, or Aikman was. He can but there seems to be an intuition that can see big plays and will go for it. Maybe a little less now, but he is not a Carson Palmer -type.

Maybe a bad analogy. Kind of brain dead from reading regulatory banking rules all day

Good points, and this really made me think. Romo does hold onto the ball at times, but he gets away with it because of his mobility (and lately, stellar pass protection). Defenders just can't cover that long; so this tendency actually leads to big plays.

 

[Idgit]

Even if he happen to be for one season or a few games. It doesnt make him better than Brees under any scenario. There is no temporary better. There is only better.
Romo is NOT better than Brees.

If he happened to be better than him for a season, then that's at least one scenario were he's better than Brees.

I'm not really one to compare guys, anyway. Romo's good enough at his job for us to win a championship with him. That's all I really care about.

 

[percyhoward]

It was mentioned earlier in the thread that "We had games where we were ahead and still threw the ball for no good reason. And that's when Romo's turnovers tend to come." I guess this is referring to 2006-13, when we were still throwing the ball too much. In any case, there's no tendency of turnovers by Romo in that situation. Here are all of Romo's attempts in his career when his team was ahead by one score or less in the 4th quarter from 2006-13. Although the sample size is relatively small, he was actually pretty good in this situation.

SInce even a 3rd-quarter lead, if it's big enough, could be a time to stop throwing the ball, this next one is the entire second half with a lead of any size. This is all before 2014, and this isn't when Romo's turnovers tend to happen either.

The only thing I could find where Romo does have an inordinate amount of INT is when Dallas is tied or up by one score or less with 5:00 or less remaining. See below.

While those 5 interceptions in a career of 112 wouldn't exactly be considered a tendency, they might help explain the perception of one. But it should probably be a rule of thumb that any sample with Hasselbeck, Flacco, and Eli ranked ahead of Brees, Romo, and Brady is a sample that's too small.

Here's the same kind of phenomenon, this time occurring on all attempts in overtime. It features Dalton ahead of Brees, and guys like Cassel, Sanchez, and Bradford ahead of Tom Brady. It makes Romo look good, just like the one above makes him look bad, but how much does it really tell us about any of these players?

 

[AdamJT13]

I thought I laid it out. So not to be pedantic, but.....

The scenario: :04 seconds left at your own 36 before the end of half down 0-3.

How do you score in that time from that distance?:

• PI call to have an untimed down. Kick FG.
  • So maybe someone has time to look up, but I cant recall a PI on an end of half jump ball in any game in recent memory. the ball has to at least get 30-35 yards down field...safeties are already back. Any other play than a deep pass is really VOID of reward and only poses RISK.
• TD
  • Romo cant throw it 75 yards in the air, so what is the point?

In both of those cases, I dont recall any team converting in that exact sceanrio.

In 2006, the Bills scored (a field goal) after getting the ball at their own 40 with 1 second left before halftime after a long pass and a facemask penalty, which gave them an untimed down --

1-10-BUF 40 ( :01 ) (Shotgun) J.Losman pass deep left to J.Reed to TEN 8 for 52 yards (C.Finnegan). Caught at TEN 8. Penalty gives BUF untimed down. P14 PENALTY on TEN-T.Brown, Face Mask (15 Yards), 5 yards, enforced at TEN 8.

1-3-TEN 3 ( :00 ) Untimed down. R.Lindell 21 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-M.Schneck, Holder-B.Moorman.


The last TD in that situation came in 2003. With 6 seconds left in the game and the ball on their own 25, the Saints scored on a 75-yard TD pass. It would have tied the game, but their kicker missed the extra point!

There have been other times when a defensive penalty has resulted in a short gain and a free play, which at least gives you another chance at a Hail Mary.

 

[TheDude]

In 2006, the Bills scored (a field goal) after getting the ball at their own 40 with 1 second left before halftime after a long pass and a facemask penalty, which gave them an untimed down --

1-10-BUF 40 ( :01 ) (Shotgun) J.Losman pass deep left to J.Reed to TEN 8 for 52 yards (C.Finnegan). Caught at TEN 8. Penalty gives BUF untimed down. P14 PENALTY on TEN-T.Brown, Face Mask (15 Yards), 5 yards, enforced at TEN 8.

1-3-TEN 3 ( :00 ) Untimed down. R.Lindell 21 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-M.Schneck, Holder-B.Moorman.


The last TD in that situation came in 2003. With 6 seconds left in the game and the ball on their own 25, the Saints scored on a 75-yard TD pass. It would have tied the game, but their kicker missed the extra point!

There have been other times when a defensive penalty has resulted in a short gain and a free play, which at least gives you another chance at a Hail Mary.

Good Find on Buffalo. So since 1998, there have been 354 times a team has gotten the ball with :10 left before half with the ball <= their own 40 yard line . The results have been 0 TDs and 1 FG or .3%. Since this Dal v Was play was first down with :04 seconds left at the 36, the scenario is fits here. It doesnt show up here because they got the ball with :27 seconds and amassed 6 net yards. It was 1st down though, so you can say it was a start of a drive - I cant see a logical hole.


Outcome........... ...Total........... ...Pct
End of Half ........... ... 337 ................ 95.2%
End Half ........... ... 9 ........... ... 2.5%
Interception ........... ... 6 ........... ... 1.7%
Fumble ........... ... 1. ........... ... 3%
Field Goal ........... ... 1 ........... ... .3%

All Turnovers........... ... 7 ........... ... 2.0%
All Scores ........... ... 1 ........... ... .3%


PlayTotal........... ...PctPer vDrive
Pass ........... ... 25 ........... ... 6.9% .1
Rush ........... ... 337 ........... ... 93.4%1.0

So juxtaposing the Dallas play vs Buffalo. I stipulated in a post that once the ball was hiked the result should be one of 2 choices. 1) Heave it for that 0.3% chance you get a penalty etc. 2) give up - slide, heave it out of bounds, throw it at the feet, etc. Buffalo (with Losman who was a crap QB but had a rocket arm) threw it 52 yards down the field. Dallas threw it 1 yard and I am not sure it wasnt a lateral.

So lets say the odds were 1/350 for a score, but as the only resulting score shows, the ball has to go deep down field to get you in a position to execute the longshot.. This seemed logical before the example and was confirmed by the example. Therefore I would deduce that this should have been the strategy to make running a passing play remotely defensible. ,

And why these 6 Interceptions should not be looked at as a bad decision here....

• NE v Den. LOS 40 - Orton intercepted at NE 3 yard line
• Az v NY LOS 36 - PLummer intercepted at 19 yard line
• NYG Seattle. LOS 40. Manning intercepted at 8 yard lne
• Phi v Az. LOS LOS 29. McNabb intercepted at 7 yard line
• NYG v Hou. LOS 35. Manning intercepted at Hou 42 yard line
• Ten v indy. LOS 32. V Young Intercepted at Indy 35

A down field INT would have been the smarter throw (if you dont kneel), even though of the 25 pass plays, 6, or 24%, were intercepted.


As for NO, the situation was not the same. End of game is finite. A one yard pass wont get it done, especially when the pass could be a lateral

 

[ufcrules1]

I have no problem ceding the point that Romo isnt Brady, P. Manning, Rogers or Brees. Which is why I dont expect Romo consistently chuck it 50 times and call him Brady-south. I dont think he is a prototype, anticipatory thrower like an Aikman, but more of a Farve who will not throw it away and wait for a route to develop a little more separation before throwing. That can be ok, but can be dangerous against teams with good pass rushes. I think Favre was highly overrated and cost huge games and numerous losses. Romo is more contained, but he still has to be saved from himself sometimes. On the flip side, a guy like Carson Palmer is textbook, but not necessarily flashy enough to improvise.

A manning or Brady team will likely always be at or > 10 wins (though they have played in some sorry overall divisions). But I dont see Romo is significantly worse then Wilson, Flacco and Eli (2) or even Ben (I think he is better than many). Which means he has as good a chance to win 3-4 game sin a row if he gets to the playoffs. Flacco and Eli are prime examples.

I dont know if it is worth going back into the 8-8 seasons, but that roster near what it is now. Costa, Berny, Livings, Ratliff, Coleman, Ball, Sensabaugh, McCray, Heath. B James and Newman were done, Hamstring Austin was never the same after 2009, etc. In addition, Garrett muffed a few games (i.e. this Wash game - moreso the AZ game, Lions/GB, etc).

All I know is Stephen MaGee, Jay Cutler, Sanchez, Tanneyhill, Stafford, Bradford, Freeman, Ponder, Gabbert, Vick/smith, Schaub, Locker, Alex Smith, werent going to get the 2011-2013 teams over the hump and I think they would have been worse even with an Eli, Falcco, and maybe Ben.

This team hasnt exactly been stockpiling backup talent at the QB spot

Good post. My opinion is actually very close to yours with some slight differences. I don't think Favre was overrated, I think he was an extremely good QB that made some boneheaded decisions but played the game with a ton of passion and was a huge reason his team won a super bowl that year. I think back to just a few years ago and how good he made MN when he played for them, minus his last year when he was phsyically done.

You're right Romo doesn't belong in the elite bucket. Also, until he actually does what Eli and Flacco have done in the playoffs, he can only be rated better than them in the regular season... Which we both know doesn't account for much in a game that is played for the Lombardi.

Just my opinions anyway.

 

[ufcrules1]

Good Find on Buffalo. So since 1998, there have been 354 times a team has gotten the ball with :10 left before half with the ball <= their own 40 yard line . The results have been 0 TDs and 1 FG or .3%. Since this Dal v Was play was first down with :04 seconds left at the 36, the scenario is fits here. It doesnt show up here because they got the ball with :27 seconds and amassed 6 net yards. It was 1st down though, so you can say it was a start of a drive - I cant see a logical hole.


Outcome........... ...Total........... ...Pct
End of Half ........... ... 337 ................ 95.2%
End Half ........... ... 9 ........... ... 2.5%
Interception ........... ... 6 ........... ... 1.7%
Fumble ........... ... 1. ........... ... 3%
Field Goal ........... ... 1 ........... ... .3%

All Turnovers........... ... 7 ........... ... 2.0%
All Scores ........... ... 1 ........... ... .3%


PlayTotal........... ...PctPer vDrive
Pass ........... ... 25 ........... ... 6.9% .1
Rush ........... ... 337 ........... ... 93.4%1.0

So juxtaposing the Dallas play vs Buffalo. I stipulated in a post that once the ball was hiked the result should be one of 2 choices. 1) Heave it for that 0.3% chance you get a penalty etc. 2) give up - slide, heave it out of bounds, throw it at the feet, etc. Buffalo (with Losman who was a crap QB but had a rocket arm) threw it 52 yards down the field. Dallas threw it 1 yard and I am not sure it wasnt a lateral.

So lets say the odds were 1/350 for a score, but as the only resulting score shows, the ball has to go deep down field to get you in a position to execute the longshot.. This seemed logical before the example and was confirmed by the example. Therefore I would deduce that this should have been the strategy to make running a passing play remotely defensible. ,

And why these 6 Interceptions should not be looked at as a bad decision here....

• NE v Den. LOS 40 - Orton intercepted at NE 3 yard line
• Az v NY LOS 36 - PLummer intercepted at 19 yard line
• NYG Seattle. LOS 40. Manning intercepted at 8 yard lne
• Phi v Az. LOS LOS 29. McNabb intercepted at 7 yard line
• NYG v Hou. LOS 35. Manning intercepted at Hou 42 yard line
• Ten v indy. LOS 32. V Young Intercepted at Indy 35

A down field INT would have been the smarter throw (if you dont kneel), even though of the 25 pass plays, 6, or 24%, were intercepted.


As for NO, the situation was not the same. End of game is finite. A one yard pass wont get it done, especially when the pass could be a lateral

Excellent spot on post. That play was extremely low odds of getting us a score. The correct play would have been to kneel the ball. Tons of football left to be played in that game. I'm surprised anyone would think otherwise.

 

[Idgit]

Good Find on Buffalo. So since 1998, there have been 354 times a team has gotten the ball with :10 left before half with the ball <= their own 40 yard line . The results have been 0 TDs and 1 FG or .3%. Since this Dal v Was play was first down with :04 seconds left at the 36, the scenario is fits here. It doesnt show up here because they got the ball with :27 seconds and amassed 6 net yards. It was 1st down though, so you can say it was a start of a drive - I cant see a logical hole.


Outcome........... ...Total........... ...Pct
End of Half ........... ... 337 ................ 95.2%
End Half ........... ... 9 ........... ... 2.5%
Interception ........... ... 6 ........... ... 1.7%
Fumble ........... ... 1. ........... ... 3%
Field Goal ........... ... 1 ........... ... .3%

All Turnovers........... ... 7 ........... ... 2.0%
All Scores ........... ... 1 ........... ... .3%


PlayTotal........... ...PctPer vDrive
Pass ........... ... 25 ........... ... 6.9% .1
Rush ........... ... 337 ........... ... 93.4%1.0

So juxtaposing the Dallas play vs Buffalo. I stipulated in a post that once the ball was hiked the result should be one of 2 choices. 1) Heave it for that 0.3% chance you get a penalty etc. 2) give up - slide, heave it out of bounds, throw it at the feet, etc. Buffalo (with Losman who was a crap QB but had a rocket arm) threw it 52 yards down the field. Dallas threw it 1 yard and I am not sure it wasnt a lateral.

So lets say the odds were 1/350 for a score, but as the only resulting score shows, the ball has to go deep down field to get you in a position to execute the longshot.. This seemed logical before the example and was confirmed by the example. Therefore I would deduce that this should have been the strategy to make running a passing play remotely defensible. ,

And why these 6 Interceptions should not be looked at as a bad decision here....

• NE v Den. LOS 40 - Orton intercepted at NE 3 yard line
• Az v NY LOS 36 - PLummer intercepted at 19 yard line
• NYG Seattle. LOS 40. Manning intercepted at 8 yard lne
• Phi v Az. LOS LOS 29. McNabb intercepted at 7 yard line
• NYG v Hou. LOS 35. Manning intercepted at Hou 42 yard line
• Ten v indy. LOS 32. V Young Intercepted at Indy 35

A down field INT would have been the smarter throw (if you dont kneel), even though of the 25 pass plays, 6, or 24%, were intercepted.


As for NO, the situation was not the same. End of game is finite. A one yard pass wont get it done, especially when the pass could be a lateral

How many of those 354 plays were plays called for deep balls downfield, though? The probability that you'd score on such a play call shouldn't be worn down by the fact that many coaches will just take a knee or run the ball to get to half time in that circumstance.

For that matter, the time remaining is obviously a factor in terms of the probability of getting an untimed play, and it can also dictate the coverage or defense you expect to get (though I don't think that was a factor in WAS), but in terms of the probability of getting a big play on a pass to Dez, I'm not sure how much it matters. He makes a lot of big plays in the passing game, and they can happen at any time. If you can give the guy another chance to score, get him more involved in the game, and get some experience in your two-minute offense as a whole, I don't see a good reason not to take a shot.

I do agree that Romo taking the check down was not a good decision on his part. Throwing the ball away once the protection broke down is the smart play. But even with that, he got the ball off and it was caught. He's also responsible for putting the ball in a dangerous place on the field.

But it still comes down to the fact that Choice got stripped. That's more important than the play call, and more important than Tony's decision to not throw the ball away.

 

[TheDude]

How many of those 354 plays were plays called for deep balls downfield, though? The probability that you'd score on such a play call shouldn't be worn down by the fact that many coaches will just take a knee or run the ball to get to half time in that circumstance.

For that matter, the time remaining is obviously a factor in terms of the probability of getting an untimed play, and it can also dictate the coverage or defense you expect to get (though I don't think that was a factor in WAS), but in terms of the probability of getting a big play on a pass to Dez, I'm not sure how much it matters. He makes a lot of big plays in the passing game, and they can happen at any time. If you can give the guy another chance to score, get him more involved in the game, and get some experience in your two-minute offense as a whole, I don't see a good reason not to take a shot.

I do agree that Romo taking the check down was not a good decision on his part. Throwing the ball away once the protection broke down is the smart play. But even with that, he got the ball off and it was caught. He's also responsible for putting the ball in a dangerous place on the field.

But it still comes down to the fact that Choice got stripped. That's more important than the play call, and more important than Tony's decision to not throw the ball away.

I'll look in a bit. Only 25 passes the rest were runs. 5 of the 6 Ints were in "potential untimed FG range'.

So,you are saying that the real probability to score is 1/25 or 4%? I dont think that assumption holds. You cant disregard the thought processes NFL coaches on 94% of the time because you think it dilutes the real probability. removing that is some bias in only looking at a (1-time, penalty aided) scenario that led to 3 points. The sample of 25 is too small. The % of scoring a TD is not 0% - it just hasnt happened. Also, I doubt that defensive TD is precisely 0.3%. But I would assume on face value that the odds of a combined defensive score% + injury% far outweigh % of an offensive score. In the Buffalo and Dallas examples the score is defense 7 offense 3. The offensive score didnt come on a 1 yard pass.

Since there are more turnovers than scores, that is a risk that should be taken into account. Also, I have no idea how many times a player was injured, but if a team tried to throw it every time, then you are going to increase the risk of sack, injuries, etc.

Choice isnt blameless, but he had to catch that ball since it was near a lateral. He was put in the equation by a Garrett, then Romo decision.

The main point was I would have gladly taken an INT at the Wash 15 yard line. That makes Romo's stats worse, but it fits the intent people are trying to craft as justification. Romo's stats arent impacted here, but it was not a good situational football move. Just like the AZ drive (known unfortunately as the "ice the kicker game") and just like the time Romo called a TO holding for a FG vs Wash with none remaining and got bailed out by Wash calling a TO too. Bad decisions for the situation dont always show up in stats which is why football cant be explained with stats. Stats explain the result of plays not the cascading decisions that led to the plays.

I hate being in the seat of bagging on Romo, he's won more games than lost by a wide margin. Im just try to be objective and not excuse the good or bad away

 

[CowboyRoy]

The Saints have a couple of 7-9 finishes in the last few years....When the team isnt that good, Brees hasnt exactly driven them to the playoffs every year. In fact the NFC South last year rivals an all-time worst division...and he was the best QB in their - By Far

Nah, he just had the better team around him. And even with that, there was no "by far". The numbers back that up.

The notion that Romo is better than Brees is one of the most ridiculous statements that has ever been presented on here.

 

[CowboyRoy]

If he happened to be better than him for a season, then that's at least one scenario were he's better than Brees.

I'm not really one to compare guys, anyway. Romo's good enough at his job for us to win a championship with him. That's all I really care about.

Good enough. Yep, he has been good enough for many years.

 

[TheDude]

Nah, he just had the better team around him. And even with that, there was no "by far". The numbers back that up.

The notion that Romo is better than Brees is one of the most ridiculous statements that has ever been presented on here.

meant to say in their division. Better than Ryan, Newton and whatever Tampa through out there

 

[jobberone]

Good post. My opinion is actually very close to yours with some slight differences. I don't think Favre was overrated, I think he was an extremely good QB that made some boneheaded decisions but played the game with a ton of passion and was a huge reason his team won a super bowl that year. I think back to just a few years ago and how good he made MN when he played for them, minus his last year when he was phsyically done.

You're right Romo doesn't belong in the elite bucket. Also, until he actually does what Eli and Flacco have done in the playoffs, he can only be rated better than them in the regular season... Which we both know doesn't account for much in a game that is played for the Lombardi.

Just my opinions anyway.

That doesn't make any sense unless you didn't read PH's post.

 

[ufcrules1]

The main point was I would have gladly taken an INT at the Wash 15 yard line. That makes Romo's stats worse, but it fits the intent people are trying to craft as justification. Romo's stats arent impacted here, but it was not a good situational football move. Just like the AZ drive (known unfortunately as the "ice the kicker game") and just like the time Romo called a TO holding for a FG vs Wash with none remaining and got bailed out by Wash calling a TO too. Bad decisions for the situation dont always show up in stats which is why football cant be explained with stats. Stats explain the result of plays not the cascading decisions that led to the plays.

I hate being in the seat of bagging on Romo, he's won more games than lost by a wide margin. Im just try to be objective and not excuse the good or bad away

I have brought up this point many times. Some fans want the stats to be the end all be all to every discussion regarding how good or bad a player is. We all know Romo is a very good QB. However, truth be told he makes plenty of bonehead decisions that don't always show up in the stat book but can truly impact a game/season.

 

[ufcrules1]

That doesn't make any sense unless you didn't read PH's post.

Care to link that post?

 

[jobberone]

#284 in this thread

 

[DallasEast]

That doesn't make any sense unless you didn't read PH's post.

Incredible. Did you know swapping the word "unless" with a period slightly changes the context of your comment?

 

[Idgit]

I'll look in a bit. Only 25 passes the rest were runs. 5 of the 6 Ints were in "potential untimed FG range'.

So,you are saying that the real probability to score is 1/25 or 4%? I dont think that assumption holds. You cant disregard the thought processes NFL coaches on 94% of the time because you think it dilutes the real probability. removing that is some bias in only looking at a (1-time, penalty aided) scenario that led to 3 points. The sample of 25 is too small. The % of scoring a TD is not 0% - it just hasnt happened. Also, I doubt that defensive TD is precisely 0.3%. But I would assume on face value that the odds of a combined defensive score% + injury% far outweigh % of an offensive score. In the Buffalo and Dallas examples the score is defense 7 offense 3. The offensive score didnt come on a 1 yard pass.

Since there are more turnovers than scores, that is a risk that should be taken into account. Also, I have no idea how many times a player was injured, but if a team tried to throw it every time, then you are going to increase the risk of sack, injuries, etc.

Choice isnt blameless, but he had to catch that ball since it was near a lateral. He was put in the equation by a Garrett, then Romo decision.

The main point was I would have gladly taken an INT at the Wash 15 yard line. That makes Romo's stats worse, but it fits the intent people are trying to craft as justification. Romo's stats arent impacted here, but it was not a good situational football move. Just like the AZ drive (known unfortunately as the "ice the kicker game") and just like the time Romo called a TO holding for a FG vs Wash with none remaining and got bailed out by Wash calling a TO too. Bad decisions for the situation dont always show up in stats which is why football cant be explained with stats. Stats explain the result of plays not the cascading decisions that led to the plays.

I hate being in the seat of bagging on Romo, he's won more games than lost by a wide margin. Im just try to be objective and not excuse the good or bad away

Sorry, missed this one somehow. I don't think there's really a way to get at the actual probability but there are definitely a ton of plays in that count where a coach was playing out the half as opposed to really pushing the ball down field. Then there are going to be other times where he might have gone downfield but the defense had them check out of it and whatnot. Generally, though, I'd imagine that number of plays where they were legitimately trying to score with a deep downfield pass as a primary option of the called play to be a lot less than '354.'

Either way, an interesting debate. I definitely see where you're coming from. It's one of those for me where, even though you almost always play the probabilities, I just kind of like trying to push it to Dez if he's got a shot no matter what. If for no other reason than you feed the big dog every now and then and you let the defense know you will. Tony erred in checking down when he should have thrown it out. And Choice erred in not going down fast enough. It definitely was not a shining offensive moment, so I'm not trying to defend it. I personally had less of an issue wiht the play call, but I do understand the other perspective there, for sure.

 

[jobberone]

Incredible. Did you know swapping the word "unless" with a period slightly changes the context of your comment?

You're right. I like your idea better.