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

[dstovall5]

A W/L record is applied to pitchers, baseball managers, QB's and HC's because their decisions and performances have a big influence on the outcome of games. Their fate with their teams and their place in history is determined by their won/loss record especially in postseason. Tom Landry, Don Shula, Chuck Noll and many other HC's are considered great HC's because of their W/L record and postseason success. I don't hear any Cowboy FANS complaining that Landry's W/L record is a misapplied stat. You don't hear any Cowboy FANS complaining that Staubach's or Aikman's W/L record during the regular season and postseason is a misapplied stat . Do you know why? lol Lombardi never took a snap on the field for the Packers but he has his name on the SB trophy because his teams won 5 championships. It's his W/L record especially in championship games that made him the legendary coach he is.

He was a product of his players like all HC's and received a lot of the credit for their wins. Any player who touches the ball every single snap or inning is going to have a big influence on the outcome of a game and will to be judged by championships and their W/L record. A W/L record is only a misapplied stat to the Romo apologists who go out of their way to put all the blame for the Cowboys 1-6 elimination game record under him on the team and none of it on Romo. They blame everyone of his 12 turnovers on the team and none on him. They give him all the credit when he plays great and wins and put all the blame for his poor performances on the team when he loses.

Good job bringing up pitchers and comparing them to quarterbacks, it just strengthens the point people have pointed out in defense of Romo. Which is that it's a team game and to win games you need other parts of the team to perform other then the QB or pitcher (even if they play good).

Ok now lets compare, last year the Dallas Cowboys had an atrocious run game (31st), horrible offensive line, banged up defense, lack of a 3rd WR, and also injuries to key offensive players. On the other hand, T.Romo their scrub of a QB threw for 4,900 yards, 28 TD, 19 Ints, and had a 90.5 rating which put Dallas in the top half of passing offenses (T.Romo had a down year as well!). And people want to put the blame of the 8-8 season on Romo, ok now onto the baseball ...

The Chicago White Sox are last place in their division with a record of 37 - 56, they're atrocious and just as horrible as Dallas's offensive line, if that's even possible. They also happen to have a pitcher with the name of Chris Sale. First glance at his W/L and you'll see a mediocre 6-8, hmm he must suck! But then you look a little deeper (must be hard) then that and see his 2.85 ERA (top 15). Well why are they losing still? Maybe because CWS offense is 29th out of 30th! They have only scored 350 runs which only trumps the horrendous Miami Marlins.

P.S. - In baseball pitchers aren't judged solely by the W/L columns, just only by narrow minded people. People with some sense look past the W/L columns and look at the reasons why they have the record they do. But I'm sure this doesn't matter, people will always blame the pitcher with a 2.85 ERA over the supporting cast who is the 29th worst offense in the league. Just look at the Dallas Cowboys! People want to put the blame on Romo who's the only reason we're 8-8, but they'll look past our 31st rushing, horrible offensive line, and our banged up defense. Funny stuff.

 

[KJJ]

Middle ground please. Balance please.

Agreed, its not totally absurd to look at a players W/L record as some indication of the quality of their play. The key is some indication, not THE indication. It's finding balance. The Romo critics don't want to talk about his overall W/L record. They want that "go home" record because they want a stick to beat him with. Like Phil Simms said, no one had even heard of win or go home games until Romo. It was a stat created just for him because they couldn't get traditional stats to say what they wanted to say. I went to ESPN to look at Romo's career stats - there is nothing there for W/L record and certainly nothing like "win or go home" record. Instead, you have Comp % TD's INT's yards etc. The traditional benchmarks. Romo stacks up VERY well there. So that is discarded in favor of something else. He's a choker! Lets look at 4th qtr performance, oops he just got stronger. Then lets look somewhere else.

I get your point and its an ok point though a bit apples and oranges with some of your examples IMO.

Win or go home games are only mentioned with Romo because he's played in only 4 playoff games in his 7 years as the starter. Because the Cowboys have missed the playoffs the last 3 years a lot of focus and scrutiny has been placed on Romo's 3 season finale elimination game losses that had playoff births on the line. Rarely do you see 2 divisional opponents facing each other in a season finale with a playoff birth on the line for both teams. When you have a QB putting up the numbers Romo does every year and see him falter as badly as he does in make or break games it causes fans and experts to closely analyze all their win or go home games.

It's puzzling to see a QB play as consistently well as Romo does throughout most of the regular season only to see him fold just as consistently once his team is facing elimination. His choker reputation is a result of the consistent ill-timed mistakes that keep popping up with him in win or go home games. If his career ended tomorrow he'll be best remembered for the fumbled snap on the FG attempt vs Seattle in the playoffs in 06. Had that happened in week 4 of that season no one would even remember it just like no one would have remembered Jackie Smith's drop in the SB had it occurred during the regular season that year. The bigger the game the more a mistake is magnified.

Playing great in less meaningful games only to meltdown when your entire season is on the line is going to tag any QB with a choker label. What happened in Washington in the season finale in 2012 continued to reinforce the perception that many fans and some in the media have of Romo. It's the win or go home games that help build a QB's legacy. Joe Montana is arguably the greatest QB in history because he played his best, most memorable games in win or go home situations. Those are the games that define a QB's career and add skins to their wall.

Throwing the winning TD in the final minutes of a week 6 game isn't going to build a clutch reputation for a QB especially a QB who hasn't been clutch at all when their team has been behind in 6 win or go home games. If a QB can get it done consistently throughout most of the regular season they better be able to get it done when it's all on the line or they will be labeled a choker. It's the consistent mistakes that Romo makes in win or go home games that's built his reputation for choking. That's just telling it like it is.

 

[KJJ]

The Chicago White Sox are last place in their division with a record of 37 - 56, they're atrocious and just as horrible as Dallas's offensive line, if that's even possible. They also happen to have a pitcher with the name of Chris Sale. First glance at his W/L and you'll see a mediocre 6-8, hmm he must suck! But then you look a little deeper (must be hard) then that and see his 2.85 ERA (top 15). Well why are they losing still? Maybe because CWS offense is 29th out of 30th! They have only scored 350 runs which only trumps the horrendous Miami Marlins.

Baseball pitchers don't start every game like NFL QB's do. Pitchers need to rested that's why there's a staff of them. Pitchers don't put runs on the board for their team but QB's put TD's on the board for theirs and lot's of them. More is required of a QB than any position in sports. No position in sports influences the outcome of games like QB's do especially with all the passing teams do today. If you get down by 14 + points it's all on your QB to bring you back.

P.S. - In baseball pitchers aren't judged solely by the W/L columns, just only by narrow minded people.

It's WINS that get them to Cooperstown. Pitchers are credited with wins and losses it's always been that way but you think it's only because everyone is narrow minded. If this discussion didn't have to do with Romo's 1-6 win or go home record none of this talk about the stat being misapplied or only the narrow minded look at that stat.

 

[KJJ]

Keep in mind that the 1-6 record isn't being defended, it's being explained.

Romo's 12 turnovers can explain some of it.

 

[percyhoward]

You don't hear any Cowboy FANS complaining that Staubach's or Aikman's W/L record during the regular season and postseason is a misapplied stat .

This is the "every team is the same except for the QB" fallacy.

Any player who touches the ball every single snap or inning is going to have a big influence on the outcome of a game and will to be judged by championships and their W/L record.

This is the "QB touches the ball on every single snap" fallacy.

No QB touches the ball on every single snap. It's half the snaps. Your QB's performance has no more influence on the outcome than your pass defense's performance.

 

[dstovall5]

Baseball pitchers don't start every game like NFL QB's do. Pitchers need to rested that's why there's a staff of them. Pitchers don't put runs on the board for their team but QB's put TD's on the board for theirs and lot's of them. More is required of a QB than any position in sports. No position in sports influences the outcome of games like QB's do especially with all the passing teams do today. If you get down by 14 + points it's all on your QB to bring you back.

It doesn't matter if pitchers start every game or not, there is still a W/L associated with them even if they've only started 10 games out of 40. I agree with you that more is required of the QB, but it still doesn't change the point I made. A W/L will only show the result and not the reason, and if you look deeper past the W/L column you will find what contributed most to the W/L. Like I stated earlier, some people want to blame the pitcher with a 2.85 ERA for the 8 loses, but they'll look past the fact that the offense is the 29th ranked in the league. Same stuff with Dallas.

It's WINS that get them to Cooperstown. Pitchers are credited with wins and losses it's always been that way but you think it's only because everyone is narrow minded. If this discussion didn't have to do with Romo's 1-6 win or go home record none of this talk about the stat being misapplied or only the narrow minded look at that stat.

Not true. If it was solely based on wins you wouldn't have pitchers who are BARELY above .500 get into the hall.

Last year after week 9 Dallas was 3-5, to even have a shot at the playoffs we couldn't afford anymore loses(3-6 or 3-7 you're definitely out). That's when our QB led the team to a 5-1 stretch, so no I don't buy into that "1-6 win or go home" non sense. If he doesn't do that, week 15, 16 , and 17 don't even matter because we're out of it. So if you want to make an actual "win or go home record" then add all the games were we had to win (like the 5-1 stretch) to even have a chance at playoffs during week 17. Though I shouldn't expect anything more, it fits your agenda, correct?

 

[5Stars]

This is the "every team is the same except for the QB" fallacy.


This is the "QB touches the ball on every single snap" fallacy.

No QB touches the ball on every single snap. It's half the snaps. Your QB's performance has no more influence on the outcome than your pass defense's performance.

Good luck with all this, Percy! Once you understand that the failures of the Cowboys are all Romo's fault, you might even make some new friends. Some people are never going to understand a team dynamic. It's a one man show in their way of thinking. Again, good luck trying to convince those that say it's all Romo.

 

[KJJ]

This is the "every team is the same except for the QB" fallacy.


This is the "QB touches the ball on every single snap" fallacy.

No QB touches the ball on every single snap. It's half the snaps. Your QB's performance has no more influence on the outcome than your pass defense's performance.

It's only a fallacy in the minds of Cowboy FANS who spend their time blaming everyone but Romo for the teams 1-6 win or go home record. A QB touches the ball every single snap on offense which is why they influence the outcome of so many games. If they're on they can put a lot of points on the board for their team and if they're off they can put points on the board for the opponent. A QB's mistakes can give the opposition momentum and instantly put them in scoring position. A QB can force their defense to have to defend a short field. Many games are dictated by the performance of a QB.

 

[5Stars]

Not true. If it was solely based on wins you wouldn't have pitchers who are BARELY above .500 get into the hall.

Last year after week 9 Dallas was 3-5, to even have a shot at the playoffs we couldn't afford anymore loses(3-6 or 3-7 you're definitely out). That's when our QB led the team to a 5-1 stretch, so no I don't buy into that "1-6 win or go home" non sense. If he doesn't do that, week 15, 16 , and 17 don't even matter because we're out of it. So if you want to make an actual "win or go home record" then add all the games were we had to win (like the 5-1 stretch) to even have a chance at playoffs during week 17. Though I shouldn't expect anything more, it fits your agenda, correct?

I've been preaching this same thing to the Romo haters and it just goes in one ear and out the other! Some just don't understand or don't want to understand that it takes every player on a football team to do their job to even have a chance in one of those "win or go home" games because there are many games during the season that the team has to win to even get a chance in one of those supposed "win or go home" games.

Good luck going forward with this discussion!

 

[percyhoward]

Romo's 12 turnovers can explain some of it.

You'll like this.

If Romo has even as bad as an average season in 2011 and 2012 (Let's say he ranks 16th in passer rating both years), the Week 17 games are meaningless, the turnovers go down from 12 to 7, and the record goes up from 1-6 to 1-4.

With 2 of the 4 losses being games in which no Romo turnover led to a TD, and that no other QB would have won anyway.

 

[percyhoward]

It's only a fallacy in the minds of Cowboy FANS who spend their time blaming everyone but Romo for the teams 1-6 win or go home record. A QB touches the ball every single snap on offense which is why they influence the outcome of so many games. If they're on they can put a lot of points on the board for their team and if they're off they can put points on the board for the opponent. A QB's mistakes can give the opposition momentum and instantly put them in scoring position. A QB can force their defense to have to defend a short field. Many games are dictated by the performance of a QB.

They're fallacies because they don't stand up to logic. Logic has to be a part of it.

Anything you say about the influence of your QB is also true about the influence of your pass defense.

 

[AsthmaField]

Fantastic thread. Nice job Percy. I wish more people understood this.

 

[percyhoward]

I wish more people understood this.

Man, you said a mouthful there.

 

[KJJ]

It doesn't matter if pitchers start every game or not, there is still a W/L associated with them even if they've only started 10 games out of 40. I agree with you that more is required of the QB, but it still doesn't change the point I made. A W/L will only show the result and not the reason, and if you look deeper past the W/L column you will find what contributed most to the W/L. Like I stated earlier, some people want to blame the pitcher with a 2.85 ERA for the 8 loses, but they'll look past the fact that the offense is the 29th ranked in the league. Same stuff with Dallas.

There's still a W/L record regardless of how many games a pitcher starts but their record only accounts for a handful of games over the course of a 162 game season. There's many pitchers on a staff who get credited with wins and losses over those 162 games. A starting NFL QB contributes to every win and loss over the course of an NFL season. They're so critical to a teams success they've played with broken ribs and a punctured lung. To be replaced they have to be so injured they just can't go. Every win and loss over an entire 16 season is credited to a starting NFL QB. If a pitcher only starts 10 games out of 40 games that pitcher isn't going to have near the influence on their teams season that a starting NFL QB is going to have on their teams season.

Baseball is a game of streaks and slumps over 162 games. A pitcher can have a losing record and a team can lose 10 straight games and still end up in the World Series. Any one loss in an NFL season can come back to bite a team because a season is made up of only 16 games. If a starting NFL QB has a losing record their team will be sitting home for the playoffs. You really can't compare baseball and football because of the disparity in games and the number of pitchers used to win baseball games. You can yank a pitcher when they're struggling and keep yanking them over a course of a game and still get a win. You can't do that with QB's because there's such a big drop off between a starting QB and a backup. The last thing an NFL team wants to see is their backup QB. NFL teams live and die with the same QB week after week because it's so damn hard to find a good one. Look at the Jets and Sanchez even though he sucks they've been forced to go with him. QB's can't be saved like pitchers when it's going bad they have to stick it out over the course of a game and hope they find their rhythm.

Not true. If it was solely based on wins you wouldn't have pitchers who are BARELY above .500 get into the hall.

If it wasn't about wins you would have sub 500 pitchers in the HOF. Everything is based on wins in sports if you're in a position that greatly influences the outcome of games like QB's and HC's.

Last year after week 9 Dallas was 3-5, to even have a shot at the playoffs we couldn't afford anymore loses(3-6 or 3-7 you're definitely out). That's when our QB led the team to a 5-1 stretch, so no I don't buy into that "1-6 win or go home" non sense.

So our QB led the team to a 5-1 stretch but he didn't lead the team to a 1-6 win or go home record? You just proved my point that these W/L records attributed to Romo are only nonsense to Cowboy FANS when the record is a losing one.

If he doesn't do that, week 15, 16 , and 17 don't even matter because we're out of it. So if you want to make an actual "win or go home record" then add all the games were we had to win (like the 5-1 stretch) to even have a chance at playoffs during week 17. Though I shouldn't expect anything more, it fits your agenda, correct?

The fact is week 17 did matter and it was the game that mattered most to the Cowboys season. None of the other games had a do or die label attached to them or a division title at stake that day. FANS can spin it anyway they want but week 15 and 16 or week 4 and 9 weren't "elimination" games. Romo is never able to finish that's the issue with him. His passer rating vs Washington in week 17 was his lowest of the season which again reinforced the perception most everyone has of him. There's no agenda here just pointing out the facts.

 

[5Stars]

Any one loss in an NFL season can come back to bite a team because a season is made up of only 16 games. If a starting NFL QB has a losing record their team will be sitting home for the playoffs.

None of the other games had a do or die label attached to them or a division title at stake that day.

 

[KJJ]

You'll like this.

If Romo has even as bad as an average season in 2011 and 2012 (Let's say he ranks 16th in passer rating both years), the Week 17 games are meaningless, the turnovers go down from 12 to 7, and the record goes up from 1-6 to 1-4.

With 2 of the 4 losses being games in which no Romo turnover led to a TD, and that no other QB would have won anyway.

Where would the Pats, Packers, Giants and several other teams have been in 2011 and 2012 if their QB's had average seasons? Do you think the Giants in 2011 and the Ravens in 2012 would have won the SB with average postseason performances by Eli and Flacco?

 

[dstovall5]

There's still a W/L record regardless of how many games a pitcher starts but their record only accounts for a handful of games over the course of a 162 game season. There's many pitchers on a staff who get credited with wins and losses over those 162 games. A starting NFL QB contributes to every win and loss over the course of an NFL season. They're so critical to a teams success they've played with broken ribs and a punctured lung. To be replaced they have to be so injured they just can't go. Every win and loss over an entire 16 season is credited to a starting NFL QB. If a pitcher only starts 10 games out of 40 games that pitcher isn't going to have near the influence on their teams season that a starting NFL QB is going to have on their teams season.

Baseball is a game of streaks and slumps over 162 games. A pitcher can have a losing record and a team can lose 10 straight games and still end up in the World Series. Any one loss in an NFL season can come back to bite a team because a season is made up of only 16 games. If a starting NFL QB has a losing record their team will be sitting home for the playoffs. You really can't compare baseball and football because of the disparity in games and the number of pitchers used to win baseball games. You can yank a pitcher when they're struggling and keep yanking them over a course of a game and still get a win. You can't do that with QB's because there's such a big drop off between a starting QB and a backup. The last thing an NFL team wants to see is their backup QB. NFL teams live and die with the same QB week after week because it's so damn hard to find a good one. Look at the Jets and Sanchez even though he sucks they've been forced to go with him. QB's can't be saved like pitchers when it's going bad they have to stick it out over the course of a game and hope they find their rhythm.

Actually if you read what I was comparing to it was a very fair and accurate comparison. Both teams are losing games in the W/L column, but both QB/Pitcher are performing well. I mean I know all you look at is the W/L column, but it's a little deeper then that.

If it wasn't about wins you would have sub 500 pitchers in the HOF. Everything is based on wins in sports if you're in a position that greatly influences the outcome of games like QB's and HC's.

So what you're saying is that it's not about the wins now, correct? Because Rollie Fingers was a HoF pitcher with a W/L column of 114/118, and I believe that's a 491 win %, right? Just want to make sure I'm getting this down, especially since you're confusing me with your flip flopping.

So our QB led the team to a 5-1 stretch but he didn't lead the team to a 1-6 win or go home record? You just proved my point that these W/L records attributed to Romo are only nonsense to Cowboy FANS when the record is a losing one.

I never said he didn't at all, I just said if you're going to bring out this "win or go home game record" non sense then at least calculate his other games that he won in those situations as well, but I know you wont because it's not in the agenda.

The fact is week 17 did matter and it was the game that mattered most to the Cowboys season. None of the other games had a do or die label attached to them or a division title at stake that day. FANS can spin it anyway they want but week 15 and 16 or week 4 and 9 weren't "elimination" games. Romo is never able to finish that's the issue with him. His passer rating vs Washington in week 17 was his lowest of the season which again reinforced the perception most everyone has of him. There's no agenda here just pointing out the facts.

You're correct about week 17, he did have a horrible game, though I don't think anyone is defending that. I just can't stand how people try to make it out like every game we lose is 100% his fault. I guess those 200-300 yards rushing that Washington hung on us that week is just me trying to "spin" facts, or it might be me just going crazy. You flipping on me is frying my brain, sorry.

 

[5Stars]

If only that Commander defender was not in Romo's face 2 seconds after the snap...

 

[KJJ]

Actually if you read what I was comparing to it was a very fair and accurate comparison. Both teams are losing games in the W/L column, but both QB/Pitcher are performing well. I mean I know all you look at is the W/L column, but it's a little deeper then that.

Sorry but it's not a fair comparison and I don't just look at the W/L column but a QB's legacy is defined by it in the postseason. I look at a QB's postseason record and how many championships they have.

So what you're saying is that it's not about the wins now, correct? Because Rollie Fingers was a HoF pitcher with a W/L column of 114/118, and I believe that's a 491 win %, right? Just want to make sure I'm getting this down, especially since you're confusing me with your flip flopping.

Dude Major League pitchers receive a lot of notoriety and get voted into the HOF for saving games even though they don't get the win. Rollie Fingers had 341 career saves that's what made his career. He won both the American League MVP and Cy Young Award with the Brewers in 1981. He won the 1974 World Series Most Valuable Player Award with one win and two saves. You're making this way too easy for me.

I never said he didn't at all, I just said if you're going to bring out this "win or go home game record" non sense then at least calculate his other games that he won in those situations as well, but I know you wont because it's not in the agenda.

Explain why Romo's 1-6 win or go home record is nonsense but his 5-1 stretch isn't? I've given Romo credit many times for the games he's won but when a QB consistently stinks it up in win or go home games it's going to lead to a stigma that only a championship will help them overcome. Anytime anyone points out the negatives with Romo it's always looked at as an agenda. Everything that's being pointed out about Romo are facts including his 1-6 win or go home record that you call nonsense.

You're correct about week 17, he did have a horrible game, though I don't think anyone is defending that. I just can't stand how people try to make it out like every game we lose is 100% his fault. I guess those 200-300 yards rushing that Washington hung on us that week is just me trying to "spin" facts, or it might be me just going crazy. You flipping on me is frying my brain, sorry.

Well I'm glad you think I finally got something right. Maybe not in this thread but some have defended his poor performance in week 17 last season. I'm not one of those who makes it sound like every game the Cowboys lose is 100% his fault it's just spun that way by those who do have an agenda. Washington wouldn't have had as many yards rushing had their offense not got extra opportunities to pound the ball due to Romo's 3 turnovers. I blame Romo and the defense for that loss both played awful.

 

[KJJ]

If only Too Tall Jones could have gotten into Joe Montana's face even more.