"Win-or-go-home" from a team point of view

[percyhoward]

How about if I give a post number, and you tell me yes or no?

 

[superpunk]

A HC never throws a pass, takes a hand off or makes a tackle. They're a product of their players primarily their QB. Jimmy Johnson was 1-15 with the inexperience and talent he was stuck with in 89. A QB does more to win games than anyone on the field or on the sidelines. If Percy was working me you wouldn't be defending him. He puts more into Romo's passer rating stats than he does on his W/L record or win or go home performances. It's all about passer ratings with Percy.

So when people criticized Peyton for not getting it done in win or go home games did they have a point or not? I believe he was 3-6 in playoff games until they won the SB. Actually his playoff record is awful...he's 9-11 with 8 one and dones in the playoffs. let's keep this in mind, shall we?

Peyton Manning was never in danger of losing his job because he's one of the greatest QB's in the history of the NFL...duh! He's the reason the Colts were winning games

percy's points don't need defended trust me everyone can see whats up here.

 

[KJJ]

Kindly indicate where you explained how the QB's performance is more important than the performance of whoever is trying to stop it.

Your original question was what's more important the performance of your QB or the performance of your pass defense? Your question has changed several times over the past few pages. It went from the performance of your "QB" to the performance of your "pass offense" and now it's the performance of your "defense." I've already explained that you can't win in todays game if your QB performs poorly especially in win or go home games. Point out all the wins from the last 2 seasons from teams whose QB performed "poorly?"

It's like when a DB has the best coverage possible but a ball is so perfectly thrown they can't defend it. It wasn't that the 85 Bears defense didn't perform well against Miami in Chicago's only loss that season it was Marino being on and having one real lucky play that resulted in a TD. Sometimes no defense can defend a real hot QB especially in todays game with all the multiple receiver sets. It's hard for any defense to defend the duel threat QB's who can run and throw. You can keep asking the question as many different ways as you want to get the answer you're looking for but you'll be wasting your time.

 

[KJJ]

What's embarrassing is FANS who defend other FANS and claim they're working you. LOL If they're working me why do they need to be defended and have questions they can't answer answered for them?

 

[percyhoward]

I've already explained that you can't win in today's game if your QB performs poorly especially in win or go home games.

That much is a given. The question is How is the QB's poor performance in such a game any more or less important than the pass defense's performance?

 

[justbob]

Enough sniping back and forth --Stay on thread without the personal jabs....

 

[jobberone]

So what does Romo have to do this year? I don't put all INTs on the QB but I think INT % is a good stat. Romo's average is 2.8 and 2.9 last year. Generally the better QBs drift downwards as they mature although they can have 'off' years. Brady was 1.3 last year and has an average of 2.1. His last four are 2.3, 0.8, 2.0 then 1.3. Romo is 1.6, 3.3, 1.9, and 2.9. Now you can't just say well Romo is worse. There are other factors which play a role but you can generalize some from it.

Yards per attempt is a good barometer as well as AY/A, Y/C, rating and TD%. No matter what the individual stats are they are influenced a great deal by team and opponents. But again you can generalize some for those stats. W-L% is not as good a barometer.

So back on topic in a very good thread.

 

[Section446]

So what does Romo have to do this year? I don't put all INTs on the QB but I think INT % is a good stat. Romo's average is 2.8 and 2.9 last year. Generally the better QBs drift downwards as they mature although they can have 'off' years. Brady was 1.3 last year and has an average of 2.1. His last four are 2.3, 0.8, 2.0 then 1.3. Romo is 1.6, 3.3, 1.9, and 2.9. Now you can't just say well Romo is worse. There are other factors which play a role but you can generalize some from it.

Yards per attempt is a good barometer as well as AY/A, Y/C, rating and TD%. No matter what the individual stats are they are influenced a great deal by team and opponents. But again you can generalize some for those stats. W-L% is not as good a barometer.

So back on topic in a very good thread.

I just don't buy comparing Romo to someone like Brady (no matter the stat). Brady could turn into one of the worst QB's in the league, and it wouldn't matter. At the end of the day, he has 3 Super Bowl rings, he's been a truly elite QB, and is an automatic HOFer. I just don't think that you can fairly compare someone like him to someone like Romo. Let's compare Romo to guys in his realm: Stafford, Ryan, guys like that.

 

[OhSnap]

I feel like Romo has made some mistakes in these "win or go home" games (which is a fake stat) but it seems like he gets treated like his mistakes have been the Neil odonnell SB 30 type and not the result of a team that was struggling in pretty much every aspect since 2009 and most people knew that line was in trouble headed to Minni then too. Theres been a rush to pass judgement on Romo no matter where you stand on him.

 

[dstovall5]

I just don't buy comparing Romo to someone like Brady (no matter the stat). Brady could turn into one of the worst QB's in the league, and it wouldn't matter. At the end of the day, he has 3 Super Bowl rings, he's been a truly elite QB, and is an automatic HOFer. I just don't think that you can fairly compare someone like him to someone like Romo. Let's compare Romo to guys in his realm: Stafford, Ryan, guys like that.

Well then that's not "fair" to Romo, or Ryan. As of now, Romo and Ryan are considerably better then stafford, though that could change in the future. Also jury still isn't written on Romo, he still has time to get it done and get that Super Bowl ring.

 

[Section446]

Well then that's not "fair" to Romo, or Ryan. As of now, Romo and Ryan are considerably better then stafford, though that could change in the future. Also jury still isn't written on Romo, he still has time to get it done and get that Super Bowl ring.

I don't personally think that the jury is still out on Romo. At 33, he "is what he is", he's too old and too far into the game to change. As much as I want to be wrong, I just don't think he's a Super Bowl caliber QB.

 

[jobberone]

I just don't buy comparing Romo to someone like Brady (no matter the stat). Brady could turn into one of the worst QB's in the league, and it wouldn't matter. At the end of the day, he has 3 Super Bowl rings, he's been a truly elite QB, and is an automatic HOFer. I just don't think that you can fairly compare someone like him to someone like Romo. Let's compare Romo to guys in his realm: Stafford, Ryan, guys like that.

The point is to look at the stats, what's important and why Romo is playing at Brady's level and what objectively he needs to do to do that. Brady was used as an example because he normally has a great INT%. No one is comparing the careers of Romo with anyone else.

 

[Section446]

The point is to look at the stats, what's important and why Romo is playing at Brady's level and what objectively he needs to do to do that. Brady was used as an example because he normally has a great INT%. No one is comparing the careers of Romo with anyone else.

Would you agree that statistics don't always tell the whole story?

 

[jobberone]

I don't personally think that the jury is still out on Romo. At 33, he "is what he is", he's too old and too far into the game to change. As much as I want to be wrong, I just don't think he's a Super Bowl caliber QB.

I don't think that is true either. He has high Y/C and rating and those are two good ways to generally look at QBs. Historically as QBs get beyond their first few years their INT% goes down; the good ones. Romo has done a little better he just needs to get into the 1+ range and mostly stay there. Bradies INT% was much like Romo's his first six years then had another 2.6 in the midst of some very good INT%s. If you look at the teams around Brady and Romo you could easily make a case that they aren't that far apart. I'd have to look at some defensive stats as well as other offensive ones but you can see the success NE has had during that run and its not all because Brady is carrying the team although he's had a couple of wow years.

 

[dstovall5]

I don't personally think that the jury is still out on Romo. At 33, he "is what he is", he's too old and too far into the game to change. As much as I want to be wrong, I just don't think he's a Super Bowl caliber QB.

Well then I guess we'll just be in mediocrity again for the next 4-5 years, right? I'm curious as to what your opinion is of a "Super Bowl caliber QB". I mean you don't think a QB with a career 95.6 rating can get the job done? Perhaps it's the pieces around him? I mean if you're expecting Romo to carry the 31st rushing offense, one of the worst o-lines, and a bottom half defense that can't create turnovers to the playoffs, then I got news for you, no QB can do that. No not even the bad man A.Rodgers, when they won the SB their defense
was one of the tops in creating turn overs, that helps you think?

 

[jobberone]

Would you agree that statistics don't always tell the whole story?

Oh, yeah. But you can't just say I think this and that without looking at both the player with your own eyes and then objectively look at the team around him. Some stats are historically just good barometers like Y/A, Y/C, and rating. If you start correlating a number of predictive stats together then you start getting into reasonable certainties. I'm not going to try to change your mind. It doesn't matter what I objectively throw out there IMO. Just some things to consider.

 

[WhizKid]

8 posts about how he doesn't want to take the time to put up a post number. Embarrassing. This is what happens when you're too proud to admit you were wrong and too stubborn to just bow out.

Did it get to 8 posts now? My God! lol Talk about digging your own grave.

I don't think that is true either. He has high Y/C and rating and those are two good ways to generally look at QBs. Historically as QBs get beyond their first few years their INT% goes down; the good ones. Romo has done a little better he just needs to get into the 1+ range and mostly stay there. Bradies INT% was much like Romo's his first six years then had another 2.6 in the midst of some very good INT%s. If you look at the teams around Brady and Romo you could easily make a case that they aren't that far apart. I'd have to look at some defensive stats as well as other offensive ones but you can see the success NE has had during that run and its not all because Brady is carrying the team although he's had a couple of wow years.

I think there are some good points here. There is something that I have been preaching here for a while, and that is if a QB is going to carry a team, specifically into the playoffs and onto the Super Bowl, you have to consider the efficiency of how on offense is ran. Specifically given the scheme that is being used and the personnel which it possesses. I would agree that talent-wise, the two teams might not be far off, but it's where that talent is located and how it effects the performance of the offense that counts. While the Cowboys may have Dez, Miles, Witten, ?Murray?, and in the past TO and Glenn; the Patriots throughout Brady's tenure has always, throughout most of his career, consistently possessed one of the top offensive lines in the league and a coach with the ability to make the adjustments necessary to win a game. Given the type of offense the Cowboys ran, they have pretty much in recent history been running on E when it came to their line and the people they trotted out there to protect their QB. So while the skill positions are there to perform, it almost makes them moot considering the production of the offensive line and the scheme in which they play. Now, this isn't saying that Romo did not have at one time a formidable offensive line to play behind, but I think it does give credence to how long of a window the Cowboys actually had at producing a quality Super Bowl run and how common mediocrity has been achieved really in spite of the team and how a QB who has been left to carry the load of that team without the proper tools to complete the job properly. Top this off with the poor management from last years coach and you have pretty much something setup for disaster. It's like I need to hammer this nail into a board to get it to stick to the wall, but instead of a hammer, a nail, and a person to guide the nail, I was handed a stapler, a tac, and the person to guide it. There is only so much one can do.

I do get the comparison between the two QBs and I do think you can compare situations without comparing actual careers.

 

[percyhoward]

Would you agree that statistics don't always tell the whole story?

You have to be careful about which statistics you use, because they don't all equally relate to winning. Passer rating and yards per attempt (in one of its forms) are the best ones.

And then, once you pick one of those (Let's say it's passer rating), you have to remember that there are two of these ratings in every game. One for your QB against the opposing defense, and one for your defense against the opposing QB. It's very easy to forget this step, and think, "My QB had a great rating and we lost. Passer rating must not be such a good stat." Don't forget your defense's rating! The Cowboys' has been horrible the last two seasons.

 

[Ring Leader]

That's what's so frustrating about him. Part of what makes him a damn good QB is that he's willing to take stupid chances, on the other hand, what makes me want to throw my remote at my TV on Sunday's is the fact that he's willing to take stupid chances. When it works, he's a genius, a play-maker, etc... When it doesn't work, people are calling for Orton to start. I just think that at his age, he's matured as much as he's going to mature as a QB. When the "top NFL QB's" list comes out, people usually go crazy when guys like Stafford and Ryan are ahead of Romo. They aren't ahead of him because they are a better QB right now, they are ahead of him because they are so young, that they have not yet fully matured as a QB. I really really want to fully support Romo, but I just can't bring myself to it. He just doesn't come off to me as a guy who is destined to be a champion.

Nobody with a brain larger than a walnut is calling for Orton to start if Romo is healthy.

 

[KJJ]

The one stat by a QB that determines more wins and losses than any other is their TD to turnover ratio especially in win or go home games. Romo's TD to turnover ratio in his 1-6 elimination game record is 8-12. In his one win his TD to turnover ratio is 2-0. In his 6 losses his TD to turnover ratio is 6-12. Peyton Manning has a 9-11 playoff record. His TD to turnover ratio is 30-21. In his 9 wins his TD to turnover ratio is 20-11. In his 11 losses his TD to turnover ratio is 10-10. Eli Manning's playoff/elimination game record is 9-3. In his 9 wins his TD to turnover ratio is a very impressive 18-2. In his 3 losses his TD to turnover ratio is 2-7. Joe Flacco has a 9-4 playoff record. His TD to turnover ratio is 19-10. In his 4 losses his TD to turnover ratio is 3-8. In his 9 wins his TD to turnover ratio is 16-2.