Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Better real QB: Romo or Cutler? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Wrigley
- Start date
False Start
Footballguy
All I know is if I want to win a game down 3 in the 4th quarter, I am not even hinting around Tony Romo. I'll take Cutler and his bad attitude over a nice Romo and his 4th quarter interceptions no matter how great Mr. Romo is.
Wrigley
Footballguy
Cutler vs Rome, this year
Seems to me that the biggest difference between the two was the offensive lines.
Romos was awful
Seems to me that the biggest difference between the two was the offensive lines.
Romos was awful
Adam Harstad
Moderator
I laughed at Smith and Dalton because they're more the kind of guys that hold an offense back than the kind of guys that push an offense forward. Dalton is a very inconsistent passer. Smith is a very limited quarterback. Neither will take an offense any further than their supporting cast allows. Jay Cutler, on the other hand, is the kind of guy who has spent most of his career surrounded by crappy offensive teammates and making something out of nothing. He's the kind of guy who can carry an offense if he has to. He'll make more mistakes than Smith, but that's because he presses harder because he's generally had to. I don't think either Dalton or Smith are in Cutler's class as a quarterback, and I suspect their respective contracts will demonstrate that the NFL agrees.I'm not sure how you defend Cutler by laughing at Alex Smith and Andy Dalton. They all dam near put together the same kind of season. And Cutler has never played on the level Smith did last season, granted he's never been as bad as Smith pre- good coaching either. Whatever, i just found that interesting since Cutler is more of a fan/media fave of the bunch.Adam Harstad said:Sure. These rankings are strictly meant as an "if I had to play a game tomorrow, and I had a perfectly average team in every way, who would I want quarterbacking it?"Just Win Baby said:at the bolded. If you're going to make this claim, let's see your top 10. I want to see which guys you are ranking Cutler over.
Top tier:
Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Tom Brady. I'll let someone else argue the order, since it's irrelevant to this discussion.
Second tier:
Russell Wilson, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, Tony Romo. Probably in that exact order.
Third tier:
Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, Jay Cutler. It's a lot harder to put an order to these guys. Looking at it and going over it, I'd probably put Cutler last in this group, which would make him QB12 instead of QB10. So I'm glad I said "probably" among the top 10 and not "definitely" among the top 10.
Notable omissions-
Robert Griffin III: will easily be there some day. Is not there today.
Matt Stafford: His amazing beginning to the season convinced me I was wrong about him, but the way he fell apart without Calvin convinced me I was wrong to think I was wrong. Too reliant on huge volume and the best receiver in the NFL to be a top-12 QB.
Nick Foles: Hard to imagine a better start to his career, but I think Chip Kelly makes him look better than he is, and I'd need to see a larger sample size.
Joe Flacco: Pretty sure I've covered that already this thread.
Colin Kaepernick: He was close for me. Like Griffin, he'll be there someday, but I wouldn't put him there today.
Andy Dalton: Lol, no.
Alex Smith: Double lol, no.
Eli Manning: He's Joe Flacco on the downside of his career.
Michael Vick: One of the most dangerous weapons in the league, but we're a couple years removed from any quality film on him.
Anyone I missed? Which do you disagree with?
Adam Harstad
Moderator
No, Tony Romo is not more prone to making bad plays in critical times, it's just that his few bad plays tend to be more memorable than everyone else's.
Tony Romo earned the starting job in 2006, so I ran a search. The search looks strictly at plays since 2006 in the fourth quarter when a team was within 1 score (+/- 8 points). Adding a minimum of 100 pass attempts, I got a list of 53 quarterbacks. Of those 53 quarterbacks, Tony Romo ranks #1 in total attempts (630), #5 in comp% (64%, behind Brees/Manning/Pennington/Rodgers), #1 in yards per attempt (8.6), #1 in touchdowns (with 39, a whopping EIGHT more than anyone else in the sample), and #3 in passer rating (behind Rodgers and Peyton).
Ah, but what about the turnovers? Tony Romo ranks 8th in interceptions, behind Philip Rivers, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Jay Cutler, Tom Brady, and Matt Ryan (and tied with Matt Schaub). There's a whole lot of players on that list who are not known for making team-killing mistakes in close games, and yet they all do so at a substantially higher rate than Tony Romo. If you go by INT% (because, again, Romo leads the league in attempts in that situation), Romo falls even further down the list, behind guys like Ben Roethlisberger, Joe Flacco, Alex Smith, Chad Pennington, Russell Wilson, and a lot of other guys *NOT* known for making team-killing mistakes in close games (yet who have historically been more likely to make a team-killing mistake in a close game than Tony Romo).
By the way, one interesting name that's not on the list of guys more likely to choke away a close game? Peyton Manning, who like Romo, has ironically gotten a reputation as a choker. Ditto that for Cam Newton, too, actually. Those three have been among the least turnover-prone quarterbacks in the 4th quarter of 1-score games since 2006. So... yeah... #Narrative.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
More Tony Romo: Of the 32 quarterbacks with 200+ attempts in the 4th quarter of a 1-score game, only three guys have a better than 2:1 TD:INT ratio. Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Tony Romo. That's it, that's the entire list of guys who are more than twice as likely to throw a touchdown as they are to throw an interception late in a close game. Romo's at 39:17, Manning's at 30:11, and Rodgers is at 23:8. Those are also the only three players with a passer rating over 100 in late-and-close games. And, of course, two of those three guys are widely considered chokers, so... yeah. 
Edit: those three are, along with Eli Manning and (oddly enough) Kevin Kolb, the only guys with better than 8.0 yards per attempt in that situation, too.
Edit: those three are, along with Eli Manning and (oddly enough) Kevin Kolb, the only guys with better than 8.0 yards per attempt in that situation, too.
Last edited by a moderator:
Adam Harstad
Moderator
Is "the 4th quarter" not late enough for you? I re-ran the numbers, just looking at passing numbers in the final 2 minutes of a 1-score game (+/- 8 points). Using a minimum threshold of 50 attempts gets us 33 passers. Romo ranks 3rd in passer rating behind Jay Cutler (yup, there he is) and Aaron Rodgers. Only 6 of those 33 quarterbacks have more touchdowns than interceptions in that scenario (Roethlisberger, Stafford, Favre, Garrard, and yes, both Tony Romo and Jay Cutler). Tony Romo is the only one of those six with TWO more touchdowns than interceptions in that sample, and his 7:5 ratio is the best in the NFL.
Bottom line, no matter how you slice it, Tony Romo is literally the opposite of a choker. Select any timeframe in the 4th quarter, select any scoring margin, run the numbers, and I guarantee you Tony Romo will sit either at the top of the heap, or very near to it. Again, his few failures have been of the memorable, nationally-televised variety, but they are the exception and not the rule.
Bottom line, no matter how you slice it, Tony Romo is literally the opposite of a choker. Select any timeframe in the 4th quarter, select any scoring margin, run the numbers, and I guarantee you Tony Romo will sit either at the top of the heap, or very near to it. Again, his few failures have been of the memorable, nationally-televised variety, but they are the exception and not the rule.
Last edited by a moderator:
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
Cutler is not a next-level, dominate performer. He's just solid. The Bears are doomed to 7-9, 8-8, 9-7 season now. You can win a superbowl by luck with a great defense + Cutler, but you don't have a sustainible great team with Cutler at he top. And he is not worth the contract. The Eagles game showed that, so did Josh McCown playing equal/better than him. The numbers don't lie. He is no better than Flacco, Dalton(who's younger), Eli or any other QB you named that hovers around a average starter.I laughed at Smith and Dalton because they're more the kind of guys that hold an offense back than the kind of guys that push an offense forward. Dalton is a very inconsistent passer. Smith is a very limited quarterback. Neither will take an offense any further than their supporting cast allows. Jay Cutler, on the other hand, is the kind of guy who has spent most of his career surrounded by crappy offensive teammates and making something out of nothing. He's the kind of guy who can carry an offense if he has to. He'll make more mistakes than Smith, but that's because he presses harder because he's generally had to. I don't think either Dalton or Smith are in Cutler's class as a quarterback, and I suspect their respective contracts will demonstrate that the NFL agrees.I'm not sure how you defend Cutler by laughing at Alex Smith and Andy Dalton. They all dam near put together the same kind of season. And Cutler has never played on the level Smith did last season, granted he's never been as bad as Smith pre- good coaching either. Whatever, i just found that interesting since Cutler is more of a fan/media fave of the bunch.Adam Harstad said:Sure. These rankings are strictly meant as an "if I had to play a game tomorrow, and I had a perfectly average team in every way, who would I want quarterbacking it?"Just Win Baby said:
Top tier:
Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Tom Brady. I'll let someone else argue the order, since it's irrelevant to this discussion.
Second tier:
Russell Wilson, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, Tony Romo. Probably in that exact order.
Third tier:
Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, Jay Cutler. It's a lot harder to put an order to these guys. Looking at it and going over it, I'd probably put Cutler last in this group, which would make him QB12 instead of QB10. So I'm glad I said "probably" among the top 10 and not "definitely" among the top 10.
Notable omissions-
Robert Griffin III: will easily be there some day. Is not there today.
Matt Stafford: His amazing beginning to the season convinced me I was wrong about him, but the way he fell apart without Calvin convinced me I was wrong to think I was wrong. Too reliant on huge volume and the best receiver in the NFL to be a top-12 QB.
Nick Foles: Hard to imagine a better start to his career, but I think Chip Kelly makes him look better than he is, and I'd need to see a larger sample size.
Joe Flacco: Pretty sure I've covered that already this thread.
Colin Kaepernick: He was close for me. Like Griffin, he'll be there someday, but I wouldn't put him there today.
Andy Dalton: Lol, no.
Alex Smith: Double lol, no.
Eli Manning: He's Joe Flacco on the downside of his career.
Michael Vick: One of the most dangerous weapons in the league, but we're a couple years removed from any quality film on him.
Anyone I missed? Which do you disagree with?
Last edited by a moderator:
RBM
Footballguy
Cutler much more talented. Both make real bad decisions on a regular basis. Romo has a huge edge based on stats but that doesn't mean much to me. Cutler has been on some real bad offenses.
Very close, but I'd lean Cutler purely for talent and potential. Anything less than a career year in his 2nd year with Trestman and those weapons will be very disappointing.
Very close, but I'd lean Cutler purely for talent and potential. Anything less than a career year in his 2nd year with Trestman and those weapons will be very disappointing.
The_Man
Footballguy
Adam, these are great posts. Very interesting. I'm a big fan of "advanced stats" and your research makes the case that, statistically, Romo is an outstanding QB, even late in close games.
And yet ... I can't quite shake the feeling that calling him "the opposite of a choker" is not true. Maybe I'm still old-fashioned enough to believe that certain moments are bigger, more clutch, than the aggregated fourth quarter stats of an entire career. That a playoff game, or a Week 17 game with the division title on the line, means more than leading a game-winning drive in Week 7 vs. a two-win team. And those are the rare occasions when Romo struggles - perhaps making both narratives true.
And yet ... I can't quite shake the feeling that calling him "the opposite of a choker" is not true. Maybe I'm still old-fashioned enough to believe that certain moments are bigger, more clutch, than the aggregated fourth quarter stats of an entire career. That a playoff game, or a Week 17 game with the division title on the line, means more than leading a game-winning drive in Week 7 vs. a two-win team. And those are the rare occasions when Romo struggles - perhaps making both narratives true.
Last edited by a moderator:
RBM
Footballguy
Nothing old-fashioned about it. They do mean more. He's the epitome of a choker. Advanced stats are not how you evaluate football. Ultimate goal for every team in the league is to win the Super Bowl, and Romo has proven time and time again he does not have what it takes. Romo could never have a postseason like Flacco had last year.
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
For starters, these aren't advanced stats. These are pretty basic stats- yards, touchdowns, interceptions, interception rate, and passer rating. They're the most basic stats available through which to measure quarterback play. I'm merely filtering these basic stats to only include the sample we want to look at- they're "situational stats", but not "advanced stats".
Anyway, the problem becomes one of defining samples. Tony Romo sucks in big games, and "big games" are defined as "games where Tony Romo sucks". Suddenly, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
For instance, look at 2012. After week 12, Dallas was 5-6 and realistically needed to go on a major run to make the playoffs. Over the next 4 games, Tony Romo averaged 332 passing yards, with 10 TDs vs. 1 INT (note to RBM- those numbers over that 4-game stretch are virtually identical to Joe Flacco's numbers in the playoffs last year, so I'd say he's absolutely capable of a run like Flacco's). Dallas won three straight, then lost in the 4th, but you can't blame Romo for that. Down 14 points with less than 5 minutes to go, Romo led Dallas 80 yards in 65 seconds for a touchdown. New Orleans ran some time off the clock and punted, and Romo got the ball back down 7 with a minute and a half to go. Romo led the Cowboys 64 yards to score the game-tying touchdown with 21 seconds left. Dallas lost by a field goal in overtime, but you can't say that Tony Romo wasn't "clutch" there.
Then, because of Tony Romo's heroics over the preceding month, Dallas found themselves in a "win-and-you're-in" game in week 17, and Tony Romo laid an egg. Suddenly, everyone remembers him laying an egg in a must-win game, but nobody remember that the only reason it was a must-win game is because of Tony Romo's clutch play over the entire preceding month.
Same thing happened this year. Tony Romo didn't get a chance to play in week 17, but in week 16, Dallas realistically needed to win each of its last two games to make the playoffs. And what happened? Tony Romo threw a game-winning touchdown pass on 4th-and-10 with a minute left in the game. But because that game came in week 16, it's not a "must-win" game, so it doesn't go down as a "big game" for Tony Romo- even though it WAS a must-win game, by any meaning of the word. Had Dallas lost that game, they would have been eliminated from the playoffs. So why doesn't that game count towards Romo's record in "elimination games"? Because it would hurt the narrative, that's why.
I feel like the problem with "clutch" is that it's a terribly defined term, which really just makes it a moving goal post. When a player gets deemed "unclutch", that just means the goal posts are going to be continuously moved to where they need to be to keep that player from being "clutch". For instance, Peyton Manning is the career leader in 4th quarter comebacks, but since he's not "clutch", we just conveniently ignore that fact and only focus on the playoffs. Tony Romo is an absolute demon late in 1-score games, but we just decide which 1-score games we're going to count and which we're not. Tony Romo does great in low-pressure situations. If you turn the pressure up a little bit (say, the 4th quarter), he does even better still. If you turn the pressure up even more (say, the 4th quarter of 1-score games), he does even better still. If you turn the pressure up even more (say, the final 2 minutes of 1-score games), he does even better still. But if you turn the pressure up even more (say, the final 2 minutes of 1-score games that happen against divisional rivals in week 17 where the loser gets eliminated from playoff contention), suddenly Romo's numbers fall, and our conclusion is that the previous samples just didn't reach the required threshold of pressure to count as "clutch" (and not, say, that the final sample just represents a ridiculously tiny sample size).
Tony Romo has the most 4th quarter comebacks of any QB in Dallas history (yes, more than Aikman or even Roger Staubach, Captain Comeback himself). He's the highest-rated 4th-quarter passer in NFL history, and leads the league in TD:INT ratio at the end of 1-score games. He once broke a rib, sat out the second half until his backup stunk up the joint too bad, then went back into the game and led his team on a 2-score rally for the win. I don't think "clutch" is a real thing at the NFL level, but if it was, then Tony Romo would be it.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
Just out of curiosity, of the 10 quarterbacks I named in this post (Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Wilson, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Ryan, Newton, Luck), which two would you leave out of your top 10 to make room for Romo and Cutler?
Run It Up
Footballguy
Hate to cop out of answering after saying definitely, but the truth is the way that I see tiers is that the 3rd tier of QBs is quite crowded in my opinion, of players that on any given Sunday could show up big and put up elite performances or on a bad night let a mediocre game get well out of hand.
In no particular order:
T1: Brees, Brady, Peyton and Rodgers
T2: Stafford and Cam
T3: Wilson, Rivers, Ryan, Roethlisberger, Romo and Cutler
Of the list you gave, the only one I consider markedly below the above players (including Stafford whom I added) is Luck, even though I wouldn't be shocked if he shoots up that list over the next couple seasons. To be honest I think at the moment Luck is in just that next tier, with Eli and Dalton.
Last edited by a moderator:
ryno1980
Footballguy
These tiers look like a fantasy ranking to me. If I were fantasy drafting a real life team, stafford comes after Luck, who belongs with all the tier three guys you have listed.
Run It Up
Footballguy
They aren't the former or the latter its where I have them personally ranked currently as NFL QBs, based on their careers and performances thus far.
If this was 2012 my opinion of Wilson would be similar to that of Lucks, between last season and this one Wilson has continued to impress me however, whereas Luck appears to be in a sophomore slump -- apparently Reggie Wayne was doing work in Indy and Wilson is making do with Golden Tate...
ryno1980
Footballguy
Sophomore slump? 23 tds, 9 picks. Wins over Seattle, Denver, San Fran. Lol huh? I'm more of a Wilson fan but I can't imagine ranking Him a tier higer than luck. But to each his own. I just wouldn't say luck had a slump.
And golden Tate is a great route runner, what's he got to do with it?
Last edited by a moderator:
Hoss Style
Footballguy
Ok, this is a long read, but give it a shot. It's got some interesting stuff in here, and I tried to make it easy to read, keeping out too many detailed stats or explanations.
Ok, Adam. A question for you -
First, when people say Tony Romo chokes in "Big games" or "Big situations", posting his stats over his career for every 4th quarter (or late 4th quarter) doesn't really shut down the argument. It shows that he's got talent, which is what many are saying. But "Big Games" wouldn't be "Big" if they happened every game. It definately helps your argument, though, which leads me to...
Here's my question - are you saying that Romo has actually had less bad plays in "big" situations than other top 10 QBs? I use top 10 because it seems that's the debate - is he top 10 or not. From what you posted, I would believe that you think he gets that tag only because he's the Cowboys QB, and you believe that he'll actually have less chokes in big time situations. Is this correct? I honestly don't know the answer to that (and am not taking sides here), but if you answer yes, I will hunker down over the next few days and go over every game considered "big" (like going for a division title, playing for a playoff spot, playing another top ranked team (assuming his team is ranked similar in the standings)) and I'll find out how he did. I'd be curious, as I have no idea, other than what I see when I watch him (usually a nationally televised game - which many times is considered "big").
The eye test (which is a crappy test many times) tells me that Romo will have more big time chokes in there than another "top 10" caliber QB in similar games or situations. If I do decide to put in the massive legwork it'll take to scour every "big game" Romo's had in his career, and someone says "Well, other QBs with similar talent had just as many or more", then I'll expect them to back it up with examples, just as I did.
You may be right, Adam, if you are indeed saying that Romo is actually better in big time situations, and this whole "Romo chokes" meme is simply fabricated by Cowboy haters - using every mistake to support their cause. But I usually don't buy into that stuff, and the guy's convinced me. I may have been hookwinked, bamboozled...
Either way, I couldn't find the original article I was talking about earlier, but I did save a lot of the narrative (don't ask why, I save all kinds of stupid crap for silly reasons). Here's what I saved:
The author (I hate not giving him credit here, sorry :( ) looked at one season - the 8-8 2012 season (the last full season when the article was written).
He goes on to say that "In a game they are trailing by a score, he’s good. In a game they are trailing by more than once score, he’s fantastic. In a game they are tied or leading in, he is absolutely incapable of either giving them the lead or putting the game out of reach."
If this is true, then it would easily allow Romo to have great 4th Qtr stats, yet still have those "choke" moments.
Now, I noticed you quote the QB Rating. It's a horrible stat (no offense, but I think you probably agree when people use it to determine if a QB is good or not). The NFL QB Rating - in place and unchanged for over 40 years (from what I've read) - only factors in 4 stats (completion %, yards per attempt, TDs per attempts and INTs per attempt). The author of the article I'm referencing from used the new ESPN QBR which factors in wins and plays you contribute in "winning time". The ESPN QBR has flaws as well (I'm not a fan of it) but if using it to rate QBs it's leaps and bounds better than the NFL QB Rating. It's the lesser of two evils, basically. So, here's a stat for you:
- In the first 12 minutes of 4th Qtrs, Romo's QBR is 80. In the final 3 minutes it's 44. (Remember, QBR factors in big plays in big moments, and also factors in plays contributing towards a win).
-Here's another one: Tony Romo has more 4th quarter interceptions when the game is tied or the Cowboys are up by a touchdown or less than any other QB since 2006. He's great when playing catch up. He's not great when holding the lead or the other team is catching up. What does that say? I'm not really sure, but it doesn't seem good.
So let's go through the 2012 season and see what happens (all these are in my own words based off of the stats I saved from the article):
Week 1 - Giants
Romo plays well. Cowboys up in the 4th and both teams score some TDs. With just over 2 minutes left, Romo connects with Ogletree to seal the game. Nice play, Romo. He's doing well after Week 1.
Week 2 - Seattle
No "big plays" here. Cowboys got drubbed. Romo didn't play well, but neither did his team. I don't think anyone is arguing Romo can carry a team on his back like Brees, Brady, Manning, etc. So no +/- here for the argument, really.
Week 3 - Tampa Bay
Cowboys lead 13-7 in the 4th. No big pressure here, but Romo has a chance to seal it late because Dez returned the ball to the 6 yard line of Tampa. 3 plays to seal the deal but he can't. The Boys get a FG and hold the Bucs off to win. Romo didn't have pressure on him late to win. The Cowboys D hold the Bucs off.
Week 4 - Chicago
Loss. Romo throws 5 picks.
Week 5 - BYE
Week 6 - Baltimore
Cowboys start 4th down 24-20. Dez gets a big punt return and the Cowboys get a FG. Ravens get a TD.
Cowboys need a TD and 2pt conversion. Romo gets them down the field (moderate pressure here, but not "the" big play), scores a TD. Now he has to have this 2 point conversion. This is a big play. Incomplete pass.
Dallas gets an onside kick. Only big plays left in this game, now. Romo can't get them in FG range. They lose.
Week 7 - Carolina
Romo had a chance to put the game out of reach in the 4th, but they had to take a FG. There was a 12 men in the field penalty missed that saved Romo from being blamed for having to settle for that FG. Cowboys eek out a win.
Week 8 - Giants
Close game. Division Rival. Game has been hyped all week. Going into the 4th the Boys are up 24-23. A few scores later and the Cowboys are down by 5 with 3:30 to play. Romo drives them down the field. Inside the Giants 25 yard line. Big play coming up. 4th and 1 - and Romo throws a pick.
He drove then down the field again later and almost had a TD but Dez Bryant had a finger out of bounds (I'm sure many of you remember that play). But you don't get second chances a lot in the NFL, late in the games. He missed his initial shot.
Week 9 - Atlanta
Cowboys down 10 in the fourth. Nothing to lose here, just wing it, Romo. And he does. Plays well. Last drive to take the lead, though, and the Boys can't get it done. A loss. Great 4th Qtr stats, though.
Week 10 - Philly
Two defensive TDs and a Punt Return TD to help the Cowboys get the win. No big play here to seal the win. Romo has a great game, though.
Week 11 - Cleveland
4th Qtr and down 10. Time to wing it, Romo, and he does. Gets a TD. Cleveland fumbles at their own 16. A short TD for the Cowboys. They are up 4 in no time.
Now, time to seal the game later in the 4th. Romo fumbles. Oof. The Dallas offense struggles later, but gets a FG. Game goes to OT. A long punt return sets up a FG. Special Teams seals the win for the Cowboys.
Week 12 - Washington
Cowboys getting hammered. 35-13 in the 4th. Nothing to lose? No pressure? Romo goes off. Another stellar 4th Qtr for the Cowboys QB. A loss for the Cowboys, though. Late in the 4th it was actually within 7, but the Cowboys D gave up a FG and then the Cowboys offense stalled.
Week 13 - Philly
This was close (and looking like a loss when the Cowboys couldn't finish a big drive to get the lead) but the Dallas defense scored a TD. Whew, Tony dodged a bullet here. 38-33 win.
Week 14 - Bengals
This is one of Romos good moments. He led the team to a win in the 4th. Pressure moments and he delivered. It's why we know he can do it, and why we groan when he doesn't. Remember, we are comparing him to other QBs with similar talent. He's got as much as anyone.
Week 15 - Steelers
Cowboys down 7 and need a score in the 4th. Offense fails. Another chance later in the game with just over 3 minutes. Offense fails again. Romo can't make the plays on the big downs. Luckily, the defense saves the day again, and gets a TD for the win.
Week 16 - Saints
Down 7 in the 4th. No single "big play" moment, just get the TD to force OT. Romo does it. In OT? Can't make the plays to seal the win and Saints win.
Week 17 - Redskins
This is a HUGE game for the Cowboys. The playoffs loom in their future. Romo throws a devastating INT deep in his own territory with 3 minutes left to seal the game for the Redskins. Game. Set. Match.
So, this article was written by a Dallas fan who knows far more than I. But just look at that Week 17 INT. It was HUGE. His 4th Qtr numbers are oftentimes great. But he has bonehead plays like the Week 17 listed above. Sure, other QBs have them too (maybe not as many), but they also have big game winning drives to balance them out.
If you're a Romo fan, don't jump on me. I don't know what is actually true. I just think it's interesting to show both sides of Romo, and I'd like to point out that there actually is a reason many fans feel this way about him.
I'm kind of curious, and might go through every game of every season Romo's played, just for fun. He choked big time in 2012 in Week 17. I wonder how many other similar situations he has, if any.
If I decide to do each season, I'll post it somewhere - for reference for Romo haters or lovers - whichever way the facts direct us.
*Apologies for errors. I'm in a hurry - writing while working. And I have to run...*
Ok, Adam. A question for you -
First, when people say Tony Romo chokes in "Big games" or "Big situations", posting his stats over his career for every 4th quarter (or late 4th quarter) doesn't really shut down the argument. It shows that he's got talent, which is what many are saying. But "Big Games" wouldn't be "Big" if they happened every game. It definately helps your argument, though, which leads me to...
Here's my question - are you saying that Romo has actually had less bad plays in "big" situations than other top 10 QBs? I use top 10 because it seems that's the debate - is he top 10 or not. From what you posted, I would believe that you think he gets that tag only because he's the Cowboys QB, and you believe that he'll actually have less chokes in big time situations. Is this correct? I honestly don't know the answer to that (and am not taking sides here), but if you answer yes, I will hunker down over the next few days and go over every game considered "big" (like going for a division title, playing for a playoff spot, playing another top ranked team (assuming his team is ranked similar in the standings)) and I'll find out how he did. I'd be curious, as I have no idea, other than what I see when I watch him (usually a nationally televised game - which many times is considered "big").
The eye test (which is a crappy test many times) tells me that Romo will have more big time chokes in there than another "top 10" caliber QB in similar games or situations. If I do decide to put in the massive legwork it'll take to scour every "big game" Romo's had in his career, and someone says "Well, other QBs with similar talent had just as many or more", then I'll expect them to back it up with examples, just as I did.
You may be right, Adam, if you are indeed saying that Romo is actually better in big time situations, and this whole "Romo chokes" meme is simply fabricated by Cowboy haters - using every mistake to support their cause. But I usually don't buy into that stuff, and the guy's convinced me. I may have been hookwinked, bamboozled...
Either way, I couldn't find the original article I was talking about earlier, but I did save a lot of the narrative (don't ask why, I save all kinds of stupid crap for silly reasons). Here's what I saved:
The author (I hate not giving him credit here, sorry :( ) looked at one season - the 8-8 2012 season (the last full season when the article was written).
He goes on to say that "In a game they are trailing by a score, he’s good. In a game they are trailing by more than once score, he’s fantastic. In a game they are tied or leading in, he is absolutely incapable of either giving them the lead or putting the game out of reach."
If this is true, then it would easily allow Romo to have great 4th Qtr stats, yet still have those "choke" moments.
Now, I noticed you quote the QB Rating. It's a horrible stat (no offense, but I think you probably agree when people use it to determine if a QB is good or not). The NFL QB Rating - in place and unchanged for over 40 years (from what I've read) - only factors in 4 stats (completion %, yards per attempt, TDs per attempts and INTs per attempt). The author of the article I'm referencing from used the new ESPN QBR which factors in wins and plays you contribute in "winning time". The ESPN QBR has flaws as well (I'm not a fan of it) but if using it to rate QBs it's leaps and bounds better than the NFL QB Rating. It's the lesser of two evils, basically. So, here's a stat for you:
- In the first 12 minutes of 4th Qtrs, Romo's QBR is 80. In the final 3 minutes it's 44. (Remember, QBR factors in big plays in big moments, and also factors in plays contributing towards a win).
-Here's another one: Tony Romo has more 4th quarter interceptions when the game is tied or the Cowboys are up by a touchdown or less than any other QB since 2006. He's great when playing catch up. He's not great when holding the lead or the other team is catching up. What does that say? I'm not really sure, but it doesn't seem good.
So let's go through the 2012 season and see what happens (all these are in my own words based off of the stats I saved from the article):
Week 1 - Giants
Romo plays well. Cowboys up in the 4th and both teams score some TDs. With just over 2 minutes left, Romo connects with Ogletree to seal the game. Nice play, Romo. He's doing well after Week 1.
Week 2 - Seattle
No "big plays" here. Cowboys got drubbed. Romo didn't play well, but neither did his team. I don't think anyone is arguing Romo can carry a team on his back like Brees, Brady, Manning, etc. So no +/- here for the argument, really.
Week 3 - Tampa Bay
Cowboys lead 13-7 in the 4th. No big pressure here, but Romo has a chance to seal it late because Dez returned the ball to the 6 yard line of Tampa. 3 plays to seal the deal but he can't. The Boys get a FG and hold the Bucs off to win. Romo didn't have pressure on him late to win. The Cowboys D hold the Bucs off.
Week 4 - Chicago
Loss. Romo throws 5 picks.
Week 5 - BYE
Week 6 - Baltimore
Cowboys start 4th down 24-20. Dez gets a big punt return and the Cowboys get a FG. Ravens get a TD.
Cowboys need a TD and 2pt conversion. Romo gets them down the field (moderate pressure here, but not "the" big play), scores a TD. Now he has to have this 2 point conversion. This is a big play. Incomplete pass.
Dallas gets an onside kick. Only big plays left in this game, now. Romo can't get them in FG range. They lose.
Week 7 - Carolina
Romo had a chance to put the game out of reach in the 4th, but they had to take a FG. There was a 12 men in the field penalty missed that saved Romo from being blamed for having to settle for that FG. Cowboys eek out a win.
Week 8 - Giants
Close game. Division Rival. Game has been hyped all week. Going into the 4th the Boys are up 24-23. A few scores later and the Cowboys are down by 5 with 3:30 to play. Romo drives them down the field. Inside the Giants 25 yard line. Big play coming up. 4th and 1 - and Romo throws a pick.
He drove then down the field again later and almost had a TD but Dez Bryant had a finger out of bounds (I'm sure many of you remember that play). But you don't get second chances a lot in the NFL, late in the games. He missed his initial shot.
Week 9 - Atlanta
Cowboys down 10 in the fourth. Nothing to lose here, just wing it, Romo. And he does. Plays well. Last drive to take the lead, though, and the Boys can't get it done. A loss. Great 4th Qtr stats, though.
Week 10 - Philly
Two defensive TDs and a Punt Return TD to help the Cowboys get the win. No big play here to seal the win. Romo has a great game, though.
Week 11 - Cleveland
4th Qtr and down 10. Time to wing it, Romo, and he does. Gets a TD. Cleveland fumbles at their own 16. A short TD for the Cowboys. They are up 4 in no time.
Now, time to seal the game later in the 4th. Romo fumbles. Oof. The Dallas offense struggles later, but gets a FG. Game goes to OT. A long punt return sets up a FG. Special Teams seals the win for the Cowboys.
Week 12 - Washington
Cowboys getting hammered. 35-13 in the 4th. Nothing to lose? No pressure? Romo goes off. Another stellar 4th Qtr for the Cowboys QB. A loss for the Cowboys, though. Late in the 4th it was actually within 7, but the Cowboys D gave up a FG and then the Cowboys offense stalled.
Week 13 - Philly
This was close (and looking like a loss when the Cowboys couldn't finish a big drive to get the lead) but the Dallas defense scored a TD. Whew, Tony dodged a bullet here. 38-33 win.
Week 14 - Bengals
This is one of Romos good moments. He led the team to a win in the 4th. Pressure moments and he delivered. It's why we know he can do it, and why we groan when he doesn't. Remember, we are comparing him to other QBs with similar talent. He's got as much as anyone.
Week 15 - Steelers
Cowboys down 7 and need a score in the 4th. Offense fails. Another chance later in the game with just over 3 minutes. Offense fails again. Romo can't make the plays on the big downs. Luckily, the defense saves the day again, and gets a TD for the win.
Week 16 - Saints
Down 7 in the 4th. No single "big play" moment, just get the TD to force OT. Romo does it. In OT? Can't make the plays to seal the win and Saints win.
Week 17 - Redskins
This is a HUGE game for the Cowboys. The playoffs loom in their future. Romo throws a devastating INT deep in his own territory with 3 minutes left to seal the game for the Redskins. Game. Set. Match.
So, this article was written by a Dallas fan who knows far more than I. But just look at that Week 17 INT. It was HUGE. His 4th Qtr numbers are oftentimes great. But he has bonehead plays like the Week 17 listed above. Sure, other QBs have them too (maybe not as many), but they also have big game winning drives to balance them out.
If you're a Romo fan, don't jump on me. I don't know what is actually true. I just think it's interesting to show both sides of Romo, and I'd like to point out that there actually is a reason many fans feel this way about him.
I'm kind of curious, and might go through every game of every season Romo's played, just for fun. He choked big time in 2012 in Week 17. I wonder how many other similar situations he has, if any.
If I decide to do each season, I'll post it somewhere - for reference for Romo haters or lovers - whichever way the facts direct us.
*Apologies for errors. I'm in a hurry - writing while working. And I have to run...*
Last edited by a moderator:
False Start
Footballguy
I stopped reading after this, because anything else thereafter cannot mean much if the first line you said is in complete denial. I appreciate the attempt with all the writing you are providing, but at the end of the day does anything you say change the fact he fails in the 4th quarter? How many picks has he thrown in the 4th of close games compared to other players in the since 2006?
Most INT in 4th Quarter or OT - Score Tied or Leading by 7 or Fewer
Tony Romo 8
Tom Brady 7
Matt Ryan 7
Matt Schaub 6
Chad Henne 6
*Since Tony Romo’s 1st Season (2006)
In the same breath he also has the 3rd highest QBR, behind Manning and Rodgers and just ahead of Brees. What is the difference? They do not fall apart in the 4th like Romo, therefore he has that QBR because of the fact he has to throw the ball since we all know Dallas is not running in the 4th even if they are up 14 or even more.
But this isn't about Manning, Brees, Brady or any other QB other than Romo and Cutler who has a Rating of 102.7 this year alone with in the 4th quarter. You are making significant stretches to try to make a case for Romo. That is fine and dandy, but you clearly are on the Romo side without any respect for the facts that Romo is not a winner and turns the ball over at an unreal rate when it matters most. He has thrown more picks than Schaub for crying out loud.
He has not been a difference maker for his team with weapons like Dez, Austin, Witten and what I would call a dang good back in Murray. Romo to me is the ultimate choker.
Last edited by a moderator:
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
Here is a good place to start. http://youtu.be/QVuQ5aw0HAQI'm kind of curious, and might go through every game of every season Romo's played, just for fun. He choked big time in 2012 in week 17. I wonder how many other similar situations he has, if any.
If I decide to do each season, I'll post it somewhere - for reference for Romo haters or lovers - whichever way the facts direct us.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
This is *EXACTLY* what I mean about moving goal posts. Romo bashers come around and say "sure, his overall numbers in the clutch look good, but that includes a lot of meaningless early-season games. And what about that meaningless early-season game that Tony Romo choked in, it proves that he's not clutch!"Eminence said:
So, early-season games where Tony Romo throws a game-winning touchdown don't matter because they're not must-wins. But early-season games where Tony Romo throws for 500 yards and leads his team to 48 points, overcoming a 15-point second-half deficit and throwing not one but TWO go-ahead touchdowns in the 4th quarter, only to throw an INT at the end (and becoming the highest-scoring team in history to lose a game)... those are conclusive proof that he's a choker.
Perfect example of the "Tony Romo chokes in big games, and big games are defined as games where Tony Romo chokes" mentality. Had Romo not thrown that INT, that game would not have been a big game, because Tony Romo didn't choke. It would have just been lumped in with all those other meaningless early-season non-divisional games where they playoffs weren't on the line and where he accumulated all the rest of his stellar-but-meaningless 4th-quarter numbers.
So, let me get this straight: Manning leading all those fourth quarter comebacks in the regular season doesn't mean he's clutch, because regular-season games are low pressure. Manning failing against the Colts in the regular season this year means he's not clutch, because that was a high pressure game.Eminence said:
Another perfect example of the "Manning sucks in big games, and big games are defined as games where Manning sucks" phenomenon. Self-fulfilling prophecy. Had Manning killed the Colts, nobody ever would have held it up as evidence that he excels in high-pressure games, they simply would have said "well, it was the regular season, so it wasn't that high pressure..."
This is a first. I've never seen anyone try to argue that we should be judging Romo's clutchness based on his overall statistics, instead of his statistics late in close games.Eminence said:
That's fine, if you want to use his total body of work, Romo will still come out looking fantastic. He's not as good as Brees, Rodgers, Brady, or Manning, but nobody ever said he was. His statistics will look better than pretty much anyone but those four, though.
The passing statistics I used for everyone came from the same era, so it doesn't matter if it's a passer-friendly league. It's that exact same passer-friendly league for every single one of those quarterbacks Tony Romo outperformed.
If your point is that Tom Brady, Drew Brees, or Peyton Manning are better quarterbacks than Tony Romo, and they could have gotten one more win and made the playoffs with that Cowboy team, then... well, I don't know what to say. Yes, of course they are. I know of literally zero people in the known universe who would argue otherwise. At no point did I set out to argue that Tony Romo was one of the top 10 quarterbacks in the history of the NFL. I just set out to argue that this "Tony Romo isn't clutch" narrative is stupid and is directly contradicted by his actual play on the actual field. If "clutch" exists, then Tony Romo is it.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
Why are you only looking at games that are tied or leading by 7 or fewer? Wouldn't you say games where Tony Romo is down by 7 would also qualify as clutch? A game where he needs that one last touchdown drive to tie it or win it? I'd say those are the textbook definition of clutch.False Start said:
I already ran the numbers and posted them, which you'd know if you hadn't stopped reading my post one sentence in. I'll post it a second time, in the hopes that this time you actually read more than the first sentence of my post before responding.
Tony Romo earned the starting job in 2006, so I ran a search. The search looks strictly at plays since 2006 in the fourth quarter when a team was within 1 score (+/- 8 points). Adding a minimum of 100 pass attempts, I got a list of 53 quarterbacks. Of those 53 quarterbacks, Tony Romo ranks #1 in total attempts (630), #5 in comp% (64%, behind Brees/Manning/Pennington/Rodgers), #1 in yards per attempt (8.6), #1 in touchdowns (with 39, a whopping EIGHT more than anyone else in the sample), and #3 in passer rating (behind Rodgers and Peyton).
Ah, but what about the turnovers? Tony Romo ranks 8th in interceptions, behind Philip Rivers, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Jay Cutler, Tom Brady, and Matt Ryan (and tied with Matt Schaub). There's a whole lot of players on that list who are not known for making team-killing mistakes in close games, and yet they all do so at a substantially higher rate than Tony Romo. If you go by INT% (because, again, Romo leads the league in attempts in that situation), Romo falls even further down the list, behind guys like Ben Roethlisberger, Joe Flacco, Alex Smith, Chad Pennington, Russell Wilson, and a lot of other guys *NOT* known for making team-killing mistakes in close games (yet who have historically been more likely to make a team-killing mistake in a close game than Tony Romo).
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I laugh at the idea that a 51-48 loss is blamed on the quarterback. It reminds me of the knobheads who blamed the Packers 51-45 loss to the Cardinals in '09 on Aaron Rodgers because it was his fumble in OT that was returned for the winning score.
Coeur de Lion
Footballguy
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
False Start
Footballguy
Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncos
Last edited by a moderator:
Adam Harstad
Moderator
Not going to quote your whole post to avoid a wall of text, but it sounds like you're genuinely interested in getting to the bottom of this "Tony Romo is a choker/clutch" thing, so here's what I propose.Hoss Style said:
Step #1- We define our terms. What do we mean by "the clutch"? Are we talking the 4th quarter of 1-score games? The final 2 minutes? Only games against divisional foes or teams with winning records? Nationally televised games (this is a metric where I suspect Romo would fare poorly, as it seems an unusually high percentage of his bad games have been nationally televised)? I'm flexible on what definitions we use, but before we even look at the data we need to have very clear definitions of what we mean when we say "the clutch", and what constitutes a "choke".
Step #2- We define our controls. Who are we comparing Tony Romo to? Doesn't much matter to me which controls we use, I just want to establish them ahead of time so nobody can look at the data, see who performs the best, and then pick and choose which comparisons look most unfavorable to Romo.
Step #3- We define what qualifies as a success, and what qualifies as a failure.
Step #4- Only after we have set out ahead of time what our definitions are, what constitutes "success" or "failure", and who we are comparing to, we actually run the comparisons by hand on a game-by-game basis (instead of merely aggregating stats) and see where Tony Romo stands.
Does this sound amenable to you? If so, I would propose the following definitions, although everything is open to discussion up until the moment we actually look at the data.
"The clutch": I don't think anything before the 4th quarter can be considered "clutch", although I can see the argument for restricting the sample even further (final 7:30, final 5:00, etc). I'd prefer to avoid "final 2:00" as a definition of clutch, just because the samples will start getting small, and plenty of times a quarterback won't even get an opportunity in the final 2:00. Also, I would like to exclude any time the quarterback gets the ball back with 30 or fewer seconds to go, because I think that qualifies as more "desperation time" than a legitimate clutch opportunity.
I don't think anything that happens outside of a 1-score game can be considered "clutch". I prefer the +/- 8 points definition of "one score", although I'd be perfectly happy with a +/- 7 points definition instead (no, I haven't looked at the numbers, so I don't know if Romo does better in 8-point games than he does in 7-point games).
I would not filter games by quality of opponent, but if you want to apply such a filter, we can do so. I think when you get the ball back down by 5 points with 1:30 to go, that's a "clutch" situation whether the opponent is 11-4 or 4-11. I would also prefer not to use an "elimination games" filter, because it's rather arbitrary. As I mentioned, week 16 this year was technically an "elimination game", but it will never get counted as such. And going back by hand to find all of the other week 16 or week 15 games where the Cowboys would have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs would be... impractical.
I would include playoff games, though I wouldn't weight them extra- a drive in the clutch is a drive in the clutch, regardless of opponent. An opportunity to take the lead in a 1-score game is an opportunity to take the lead in a 1-score game, regardless of the week.
"The Controls"- We mentioned top-10 quarterbacks, which is a good control in my opinion, but I don't know how appropriate it would be to use young players like Russell Wilson or Cam Newton- both because the sample size will be quite small, and because it would be unfair to them since their rookie season would be disproportionately represented in their rate stats. I would propose using the top 10 passers (by passing yardage) since 2006 (when Romo earned the starting job). That would give us the following: Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Carson Palmer, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler, Matt Ryan. That seems like a pretty reasonable sample to me, with no one (with the possible exception of Peyton) known as a "choker" on the order of Tony Romo. Several players (Brees, Brady, Eli, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, possibly Ryan) are specifically known for their "clutch play". If Romo really is a choker, his performance should stand out from that group.
"Success"- I would prefer to measure success on a drive-by-drive basis, because it eliminates concerns about the relative quality of each quarterback's defense (a QB can lead a go-ahead drive, but then see his defense lose the game while he's on the sidelines; to me, that was still a success, because the QB did what he had to do). Every individual drive is an opportunity to score, turn it over, or whatever. For each of these quarterbacks, I would propose we go through by hand and log every drive they made during a 1-score game (again, +/- 8 points) since 2006. We would log starting time, score, starting field position, yards gained, and how the drive ended (touchdown, FG, INT, fumble by QB, fumble by teammate, downs, safety, time ran out). We could then track their TD%, FG%, Average points per drive, Average yards per drive, Turnover% (would we include QB fumbles?), and Success%. I would define a "success" as any drive that turned a deficit into a tie or a lead, any drive that turned a tie into a lead, or any drive that stretched a lead from 1 score to 2 scores. We would need to decide how we'd treat 2 point conversions, too. My first inclination would be to count them as 1/2 a drive (and each success as 1/2 a success), so getting the TD and the 2pc would count as 100% success rate, while getting the TD but missing the 2pc would count as 66% success rate. Does that seem fair? Also, we'd need to decide ahead of time whether we should track how much rushing support a quarterback received. I'd lean towards charting it whether we think we'll use it or not, simply because if we change our mind later it'll be nice to already have the data.
At the end, after we have calculated the Success% for all 11 quarterbacks, we will sort them by Success%. If Tony Romo ranks in the top 4, we will agree that he is "clutch". If he ranks in the bottom 4, we will agree that he is a "choker". If he ranks in the middle 3, then we will agree that he is neither clutch nor a choker.
Does all of this proposed methodology sound fair to you? Do you have anything you would change or add before we started looking? Once we get all the details hammered out, I can create a spreadsheet on Google Docs and we can start logging drives- there'd be no rush, we have the whole offseason ahead of us. It'd be a pretty decent-sized project, but at the end, I think we'd have the definitive look at whether or not Tony Romo has been less successful in "clutch" situations than his peers.
False Start
Footballguy
Did you just call Romo clutch with a straight face? Do all those playoff wins and results in the 4th quarter scream clutch? No wonder I will not read past the first sentence.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
Of course it had an impact on the loss. On the grand scale of how things impacted the loss, though, "Tony Romo throws an INT after passing for 500 yards, 5 TDs, and leading his team to 48 points" ranks much lower than "Tony Romo's defense allowed 51 points".Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncos
Again, Dallas was the highest-scoring team to ever lose a football game. Tony Romo overcame a 15-point second-half deficit. He led not one but TWO go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter. He had had four previous drives in the second half, and on those drives he had thrown FOUR touchdown passes. But somehow the fact that he couldn't lead THREE game-winning drives in the fourth quarter, the fact that he couldn't throw five touchdown passes on five drives in the second half, means that he's a choker? Please.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
By "results in the fourth quarter", I'm assuming you mean the fact that Tony Romo leads the NFL in 4th-quarter comebacks since he became a starter, and has the best TD:INT ratio in 1-score games over that span. In which case, yes, that pretty much screams "clutch" to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
False Start
Footballguy
My apologies, throwing an interception within your own 20 in a tie game with 2 minutes left is not choking. I have no idea what I was thinking. Carry on with this love fest for the greatest QB to ever grace a football field.Of course it had an impact on the loss. On the grand scale of how things impacted the loss, though, "Tony Romo throws an INT after passing for 500 yards, 5 TDs, and leading his team to 48 points" ranks much lower than "Tony Romo's defense allowed 51 points".Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story
/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncosOf course it had an impact on the loss. On the grand scale of how things impacted the loss, though, "Tony Romo throws an INT after passing for 500 yards, 5 TDs, and leading his team to 48 points" ranks much lower than "Tony Romo's defense allowed 51 points".Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncos
Again, Dallas was the highest-scoring team to ever lose a football game. Tony Romo overcame a 15-point second-half deficit. He led not one but TWO go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter. He had had four previous drives in the second half, and on those drives he had thrown FOUR touchdown passes. But somehow the fact that he couldn't lead THREE game-winning drives in the fourth quarter, the fact that he couldn't throw five touchdown passes on five drives in the second half, means that he's a choker? Please.
Again, Dallas was the highest-scoring team to ever lose a football game. Tony Romo overcame a 15-point second-half deficit. He led not one but TWO go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter. He had had four previous drives in the second half, and on those drives he had thrown FOUR touchdown passes. But somehow the fact that he couldn't lead THREE game-winning drives in the fourth quarter, the fact that he couldn't throw five touchdown passes on five drives in the second half, means that he's a choker? Please.
Coeur de Lion
Footballguy
Does one bad throw negate an entire game of spectacular lights out play? If Romo had throw for only 300 / 3, and Denver was up 20 at the end but Romo didn't throw a pick to end things would he be more "clutch?"It's absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss.
This entire narrative is beyond bizarre. Romo has been damn good -- he's largely been the reason that a flawed Dallas team has even been within sniffing distance of the playoffs, year in and year out. Remember when Steve Young couldn't win the big game? How about Peyton Manning?
These nitpicking type arguments based on a few plays over an entire career have a place when you're splitting hairs between say Brady and Manning as far as "best ever." Maybe. But they shouldn't be used to make up a narrative and label a player relative to a bunch of his peers who haven't been even remotely close to as good.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Of course it did, but blaming the loss solely on him is asinine.Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
Question: did you give Tebow all of the credit for those Broncos wins two years ago?
Because if Romo is to blame for a loss where he played great the whole game, but made one mistake at the end, then Tebow should get the credit for a win where he played poorly the whole game, but came up big at the end, right?
Adam Harstad
Moderator
Again, the dude led two game-winning drives in the 4th quarter, and we're calling him a choker because he didn't lead a third. That's crazy.My apologies, throwing an interception within your own 20 in a tie game with 2 minutes left is not choking. I have no idea what I was thinking. Carry on with this love fest for the greatest QB to ever grace a football field.Of course it had an impact on the loss. On the grand scale of how things impacted the loss, though, "Tony Romo throws an INT after passing for 500 yards, 5 TDs, and leading his team to 48 points" ranks much lower than "Tony Romo's defense allowed 51 points".Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story
/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncosOf course it had an impact on the loss. On the grand scale of how things impacted the loss, though, "Tony Romo throws an INT after passing for 500 yards, 5 TDs, and leading his team to 48 points" ranks much lower than "Tony Romo's defense allowed 51 points".Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncos
Again, Dallas was the highest-scoring team to ever lose a football game. Tony Romo overcame a 15-point second-half deficit. He led not one but TWO go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter. He had had four previous drives in the second half, and on those drives he had thrown FOUR touchdown passes. But somehow the fact that he couldn't lead THREE game-winning drives in the fourth quarter, the fact that he couldn't throw five touchdown passes on five drives in the second half, means that he's a choker? Please.
Again, Dallas was the highest-scoring team to ever lose a football game. Tony Romo overcame a 15-point second-half deficit. He led not one but TWO go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter. He had had four previous drives in the second half, and on those drives he had thrown FOUR touchdown passes. But somehow the fact that he couldn't lead THREE game-winning drives in the fourth quarter, the fact that he couldn't throw five touchdown passes on five drives in the second half, means that he's a choker? Please.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
I'd love to. The more mediocre or crappy QBs you add to the sample, the better Romo will look by comparison.
Still, I think the 10 names I proposed is a pretty good place to start. If you get too inclusive, it opens the door for people to say "well, more clutch than Alex Smith isn't the same thing as clutch".
Adam Harstad
Moderator
Expanding on this, let's look at Romo vs. Denver compared to Brady vs. New Orleans.
Tom Brady got the ball 3 times in the 4th quarter when tied or trailing by a single score. Tony Romo got the ball 3 times in the 4th quarter when tied or trailing by a single score. Here are those 6 drives.
Brady #1 - Pass for 4 yards, incomplete, incomplete, incomplete (turnover on downs)
Brady #2 - Interception on the first play
Brady #3 - Pass for 23, Pass for 15, Pass for 6, incomplete, incomplete, Pass for 9, spike, Pass for 17, touchdown.
Romo #1 - Incomplete, Pass for 15, Pass for 26, incomplete, Pass for 10, touchdown, pass for 2 point conversion is successful
Romo #2 - Pass for 27 called back for holding, incomplete, Pass for 10, Pass for 79, touchdown
Romo #3 - Sack, Interception
So of course Tom Brady is "clutch" because his defense gave up 1 yard, 0 first downs, and 3 points (which came on a 3-and-out after Brady turned it over to New Orleans at the 24), while Tony Romo is a "choker" because his defense gave up 124 yards, 8 first downs, and 10 points.
If Tony Romo had had Aqib Talib against Denver, he'd be clutch. But he doesn't have Aqib Talib, so clearly he's a choker.
The Cowboys did not win the game so the bolded is not true. Romo led two drives to take the lead but in the end Peyton Manning was able to finish what Tony Romo could not thanks to Romo throwing an int.Again, the dude led two game-winning drives in the 4th quarter, and we're calling him a choker because he didn't lead a third. That's crazy.My apologies, throwing an interception within your own 20 in a tie game with 2 minutes left is not choking. I have no idea what I was thinking. Carry on with this love fest for the greatest QB to ever grace a football field.Of course it had an impact on the loss. On the grand scale of how things impacted the loss, though, "Tony Romo throws an INT after passing for 500 yards, 5 TDs, and leading his team to 48 points" ranks much lower than "Tony Romo's defense allowed 51 points".Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story
/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncosOf course it had an impact on the loss. On the grand scale of how things impacted the loss, though, "Tony Romo throws an INT after passing for 500 yards, 5 TDs, and leading his team to 48 points" ranks much lower than "Tony Romo's defense allowed 51 points".Isn't it a little absurd to think that a pick at the end of the game didn't have an impact on the loss? Clearly a interception in a tie game with 2 minutes left within your own 20 yard line has an impact on the outcome.
Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs that day, but instead of the ridiculous heroics to keep his team in the game, all people will remember is the pick at the end. It's absurd.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000257618/article/tony-romos-pick-sinks-dallas-cowboys-vs-broncos
Again, Dallas was the highest-scoring team to ever lose a football game. Tony Romo overcame a 15-point second-half deficit. He led not one but TWO go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter. He had had four previous drives in the second half, and on those drives he had thrown FOUR touchdown passes. But somehow the fact that he couldn't lead THREE game-winning drives in the fourth quarter, the fact that he couldn't throw five touchdown passes on five drives in the second half, means that he's a choker? Please.
Again, Dallas was the highest-scoring team to ever lose a football game. Tony Romo overcame a 15-point second-half deficit. He led not one but TWO go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter. He had had four previous drives in the second half, and on those drives he had thrown FOUR touchdown passes. But somehow the fact that he couldn't lead THREE game-winning drives in the fourth quarter, the fact that he couldn't throw five touchdown passes on five drives in the second half, means that he's a choker? Please.
Adam Harstad
Moderator
So you agree with my premise that Tony Romo is not clutch because he doesn't have Aqib Talib? The difference between a go-ahead drive and a game-winning drive is entirely on the defense. Judging a player's "clutchness" by the quality of defensive support he receives- understanding that said support is completely out of a quarterback's control- is silly. Judge a quarterback by what he actually has control over, and in the part Romo controlled- the "ball in his hands in a 1-score game" part- Romo led Dallas to 15 points on 3 drives without a single running play. That seems clutch to me.
and then he threw an int to allow the other team to actually win the game. That also was in Romo's hands.
The_Man
Footballguy
Here's where I part ways with you pretty significantly. To me, "clutchness" is not so much about the waning moments of every single game. I feel like in today's NFL almost any QB can lead his team in a game-winning two-minute drive from time to time.
To me, it's about the overall performance in the games that mean the most. For example, if Troy Aikman got out to a huge lead in the Super Bowl and cruised to a win, that's a pretty clutch performance, even though it had nothing to do with the 4th quarter. Or Flacco's post-season last year was pretty clutch, even though the Denver game was the only one where the Ravens weren't leading comfortably in the 4th quarter (at least until the end of the Super Bowl).
My definition of clutch - and it's just mine, especially since I'm not crunching any of the numbers - would be more like, "All stats accrued in a post-season game, and in games between two teams with winning records in the final 5 weeks of the season."
My suspicion is that Matt Ryan is another guy who would grade out as very "clutch" by your definition, as it seems he is pulling out last-minute wins all the time (at least until this year, anyway). He had 6 game-winning drives in 2010 and 7 in 2012. And yet his career 1-4 playoff record is reminiscent of Romo's.
Coeur de Lion
Footballguy
Well yeah, but isn't expecting more than two TDs (plus one two pointer) out of three 4th quarter drives setting the bar pretty ridiculously high? Again, no one is saying Romo is better than Manning / Brees / Brady. But can you really say that you think Eli or Flacco (two guys routinely cited as "clutch" QBs) gives Dallas a better chance to win that Denver game looking at the game as a whole? Or even just in the 4th quarter? Romo played a spectacular game that day. It should elevate his reputation; instead it's somehow seen as more evidence that he chokes.
Similar threads
