Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jim Irsay: We Can Make It Work With Peyton Manning

Romo's Defeats

We are in the thick of the off-season, so how about some more meaningless and irrelevant in-depth Tony Romo statistical analysis? The Cowboy signal caller is 27-12 as a starter in the regular season, a winning rate of nearly 70%. In those 27 victories, Romo has performed at an outrageously fantastic level, with passing statistics that simply cannot be matched by another NFL quarterback, living or dead:

 

893 attempts

603 completions

67.5%

7793 yards

8.73 yards per attempt

64 touchdowns

29 interceptions

 

That’s an NFL passer rating of 105.1 (according to www.primecomputing.com), for those of you keeping score at home.

 

In fact, Romo has started just one regular season win in which he completed less than 50% of his passes (14 of 29 in a 37-20 beating of Miami). His accuracy, yards per attempt, and TD to INT ratio are probably the main reasons that the Cowboys have won those 27 starts over the last 2.5 seasons.

 

Ah, but when Romo is being discussed, it’s not about how unbelievably awesome he’s been in leading the Cowboys to victories 70% of the time; no, the talk usually centers on how No.9 chokes or “is a bum.” So let’s take a look at Romo’s statistical performances in the twelve losses of his career (from left to right, it goes opponent, year, attempts-completions-yards, TDs-INTs, passer rating and fumbles/fumbles lost):

           

@ Washington’06        36-24-288-2-0                        109.0

vs. New Orleans’06     33-16-249-1-2                        58.8

vs. Philadelphia’06        29-14-149-1-2                        45.5

vs. Detroit’06               32-21-321-2-1                        111.6   4-2

vs. New England’07     29-18-199-2-1                        91.0

vs. Philadelphia’07        36-13-214-0-3                        22.2     2-0

@ Washington’07        16-7-86-0-1                34.9

vs. Washington’08        48-27-300-3-1                        90.7

@ Arizona’08              38-24-321-3-0                        116.1   3-1

@ Pittsburgh’08           36-19-203-1-3                        44.9     1-1

vs. Baltimore’08           42-24-256-2-2                        66.2

vs. Philadelphia’08        39-21-183-0-1                        55.8     2-2

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

414 attempts

228 completions

55.1%

2769 yards

6.67 yards per attempt

17 touchdowns

17 interceptions

12 fumbles/6 fumbles lost

 

Romo’s performance overall in those twelve losses is fairly mediocre, earning just a 72 rating. Of these losses, though, Romo performed very well statistically in five of them.

 

5 good games: 183-114-62.2%-1429-7.81-12-4 (99.2 rating)

 

Of these five games, you could realistically claim that Romo was somewhat responsible for just one loss, the 2006 Detroit game. Despite throwing for 321 yards and 2 touchdowns, Romo did fumble four times and commit 3 turnovers, which led to 10 Detroit points and stopped a Dallas drive on the Lions’ eight yard line. But yet, he didn’t negate a interception return for a TD on the game’s first play by Thong, he didn’t muff a punt that led to a Lion touchdown, and he didn’t allow touchdown receptions to former defensive back Mike Furrey and one of the NFL’s all-time busts at WR, Mike Williams.

 

The other “good Romo” game losses could not have been attributed at all to the quarterback. He didn’t play defense and give up 48 points to the Patriots, he didn’t let Clinton Portis run roughshod and make Jason Campbell look like the second coming of Sonny Jurgensen, he didn’t give up two special teams TDs to Arizona, and of course he didn’t play any role in the Mike Vanderjadgt blocked kick-Sean Taylor return-unsportsmanlike penalty-turned game-winning FG against the Redskins…unless you think maybe he should have tackled Taylor before he made much progress. By the way, in those last two games (Arizona 2008, Washington 2006), Romo led game-tying and potentially game-winning drives at the end of regulation to give the Cowboys prime opportunities to win, only to have the special teams blow it.

 

That leaves seven losses in which Romo performed poorly statistically. Of these seven games, I do not believe that he could reasonably be held responsible for the New Orleans loss in 2006 (42-17) or the season-ending Redskins loss in 2007, in which many starters were rested and Romo played only a half. I’d contend that Romo’s poor performance did play significant roles in losses to Pittsburgh and Baltimore in 2008 (more so the former than the latter, but the latter nonetheless), and in the three losses to a particular team from the City of Brotherly Love.

 

What sticks out when looking at Romo’s statistical performances is that each year he lays a giant stinking egg against the Eagles. Take a look at his stats for his three losses when facing the Eagles:

 

104-48-46.1%-535-5.14-1-6 (41.1 rating)

 

These are simply terrible numbers, and while it doesn’t help that the Eagles defense has also stymied the Dallas running game each time, or that the Cowboys special teams were outplayed every game, or that Donovan McNabb was consistently competent in these three matchups, the fact is that Romo cannot and should not escape the majority of blame for these specific losses. To be honest, I could see him agreeing with that statement. However, the Eagles defense has traditionally been disastrous for opposing Cowboy quarterbacks. While Hall of Famer Roger Staubach was 13-3 against Philadelphia as a starter (mostly when the Eagles sucked in the seventies), he threw more interceptions than touchdowns, and his passer rating was roughly eight points lower than his career average. Meanwhile, Hall of Famer Troy Aikman hardly ever did well statistically against Philadelphia, and he didn’t even win half of his games against the Eagles. Romo has at least shown the ability to tear apart Jimmy Johnson’s defense, with two spectacular performances in wins in 2007 and 2008 (combined rating of 133.7), so there is some glimmer of hope.

 

Using this statistical and historical overview, it seems apparent that we can attribute five Dallas Cowboy losses over the last 2.5 seasons directly to the play of Antonio Ramiro Romo. That’s not so bad.

 

But we also might want to consider the quality of the Cowboys opponents in these defeats. The Cowboys’ 2008 losses with Romo at the helm were against rather impressive opponents: a tough division opponent (Redskins), both conference championship game losers (Baltimore and Philadelphia), the Super Bowl loser (Arizona) and, of course, the 2008 NFL Champion (Pittsburgh). In 2007, Romo lost to the playoff-bound Redskins, the 8-8 Eagles, and a Patriots team that went 16-0; in 2006, he was beaten by the NFC East champs (Philadelphia) and winners of the NFC South (New Orleans). So in truth, the only really bad loss was the season-ending home defeat to the 3-13 Detroit Lions.

 

Meanwhile, he led the team to wins against playoff teams like the Colts and the Giants (2006), the Super Bowl champion Giants (twice) and Green Bay (2007), and the Eagles and Giants in 2008. Overall, as a starter Romo is 7-8 against playoff teams, which is a record that could stand improvement. 

Speaking of “playoffs,” that’s where the Cowboys really need Romo to start playing well, statistically and otherwise. That is where he has not proved himself, and in fact has suffered humiliating defeats. His statistics and his regular season record may be impressive, but until he answers this question and leads his team to success in the postseason, the legacy of Tony Romo will be decidedly mixed. Only time will tell.

Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.

Comment 92 comments  |  8 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Well done

I’d say the argument about his statistical performance is nearly irrefutable.

The one problem: the NFL doesn’t hand out Lombardis for stats. You have to win the big, important, emotionally and physically challenging playoff football games.

I’ve said this before and will continue to say it;

Until Romo wins big in the playoffs and WILLS the team to victory in ways I’ve seen Emmitt, Troy, Roger and others do, the critics will continue to paint him as Jessica’s boyfriend and the guy who can’t get America’s team over the hump.

Whether people like it or not, that is the REALITY of the situation.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 22, 2009 12:23 PM CDT reply actions  

A player willing his team to victory is not reality

Its simply a myth, just like it was said Jordan willed his team to victory…as JJT likes to say..poppycock.

The fact is Troy, Emmitt nor Irvin never willed the team to victory, they simply played great football, along with the 42 other players on our dynasty teams.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 22, 2009 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions  

I luv ya 5B and Terry ... BUT DO I HEAR AN ECHO???

After Ware, Romo is the best player on the team.

Tar Heels = National Champs in Basketball ... #1 in Baseball ... Top 10 this year in Football?

by DalaiLuke on May 22, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions  

+1

True story. Best post I’ve seen about Romo. David – good work.

Hooah.

by .FRoST.USAF on May 22, 2009 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions  

Yes

This is where Terry and I have divergent paradigms.

The good news is that I only disagree with him because he is sead wrong.

:-)

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 26, 2009 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

I disagree

I can think of one particular game that Emmitt willed the team to victory. The game in the Meadowlands where he played the second half with a separated shoulder, that was willing your team to victory.

First to six!!!

by sduncan24 on May 24, 2009 12:26 AM CDT up reply actions  

Amazing how you can callously mitigate the will of a great one and it's impact on the team

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 26, 2009 6:38 PM CDT up reply actions  

there is a huge difference

between willing a team to win and motivating a team to win, one is possible, the other is impossible.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 27, 2009 7:42 AM CDT up reply actions  

I agree

One guy can do everything he can to try to win a game and play perfect but if his team doesnt play there going to be blownout.

by regaberto on May 27, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions  

And his teammates responded...

They even say in the retrospective how his will to win motivated them to take their own game to another level. They were winning their indiviidual battles because of his heroism.

It happens in hospitals and schools and battlefields every single day. Even in a large team environment, one individual can have a massive, widespread impact on those around them.

In fact, it could be viewed as the contrapositive to the T.O. dynamic. Owens, through his selfishness, lowers the standard of the team in the same way Emmitt elevated it.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 26, 2009 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions  

I actually hate the term in football "willed" to victory.

Especially with QB’s.

QB’s depend so much on the players around them, unless they are a dual threat in college.

So when Jackie Smith dropped a pass in the endzone from Staubach, did that mean that Staubach didn’t will his team to victory, the same way Romo didn’t will his?

Do I think that there are plays that certain individuals can make?

Or course, but at one point you have to be able to depend on players to make those catches when you get one of those miracle throws ALA Crayton.

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by AirforceBat on May 27, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions  

Give Romo or even me Emmitt, Aikman Irvin, Novecek, That Oline and D and he'll/I'll will you to victory.

The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on May 22, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

Good Article

You seemed very objective. Good stuff.

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by AirforceBat on May 22, 2009 12:36 PM CDT reply actions  

Forgot to mention about Aikman and the Eagles

That despite having bad stats and an overall losing record against the Eagles in the regular season, Troy did manage to go 2-0 with a 106 rating when it counted most – in two NFC Divisional Playoff victories.

by DavidH22 on May 22, 2009 12:59 PM CDT reply actions  

BOOYAH!!!

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 26, 2009 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions  

Romo had plenty of luck in last year's AZ game. I wouldn't say he played that well; if at all.

A dropped pick and two lost fumbles that weren’t called. Also, he only got close to 300 yards passing because of the Barbarian’s 70-yard catch-and-run that was all Marion. Even his TD pass to Crayton was a simple pitch and catch where PC bobbed and weaved his way to an uncharacteristically flashy TD.

Of course, Romo was getting killed every time he dropped back so it’s not like he was given much chance to succeed in that game. I will say the last second field goal drive was vintage Romo. Otherwise, he was just as wreckless with the ball as he was in that ’06 Lions game.

by MadMick on May 22, 2009 1:19 PM CDT reply actions  

Funny how "wreckless with the ball" and "was getting killed every time he dropped back" go hand in hand...

Tar Heels = National Champs in Basketball ... #1 in Baseball ... Top 10 this year in Football?

by DalaiLuke on May 22, 2009 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions  

Yeah, but 5 fumbles......

….Or however many he would’ve had if the zebras didn’t bail him out. There’s nothing funny or excusable about that.

Plus the pick that got dropped was just a piss poor throw.

by MadMick on May 22, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

I agree slightly, but you have to hold Romo to an NFL standard-

He needs to learn to protect the ball and not hold it out there like a baton, and also to just TAKE THE SACK sometimes!
I rewatched that Emmitt game against the Giants on the NFL network, and didn’t remember how often Aikman knew the gig was up and just went down.
He has to learn when to try and create and when to take the sack.

by Realist Larry on May 23, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions  

Only when describing Romo

I watched Roger take worse beatings than Romo ever has, and still, no bonehead mistakes.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 26, 2009 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions  

really??

I’ve seen Roger fumble plenty when getting killed inside and outside the pocket.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 27, 2009 7:44 AM CDT up reply actions  

Romo fumbles when running or when grazed...

Roger needed to be blasted to give up that pill.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions  

That's because

when he’s looking down field, he holds the ball out like a loaf of bread, same with when he runs.

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by AirforceBat on May 27, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions  

Correct

What blows me away is that it seems so easily fixable through coaching and technique modification.

Tony spent all last off season working on different throwing angles. Here’s a thought: why not spend some time this off season working on how to hold the ball differently?

I know, crazy, right?

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions  

You know I get it, but I don't get it.

I’m sure he’s worked on it, but I know that when adrenaline is going through your body its really easy to revert on what comes natural.

That isn’t saying that he can’t work on it, but I’m sure there are times when he even looks at tape and is like, “why was I just holding it out there?”

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by AirforceBat on May 27, 2009 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions  

Crayton holds the ball poorly on punt returns...

I HATE IT!!!

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions  

And again...

I think Romo really misses David Lee’s firm hand here.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions  

Ya

Romo was 2nd in fumbles last year and 2nd in turnovers. Just think how many game changing fumbles and picks were made last year. If Romo cuts his turnovers down we will be a major contenter.

by regaberto on May 27, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions  

I think anyone would be a little reckless and try to start forcing things if

They had 280-300 pounders running after them every play… That game is the one that sticks out as our Oline’s worst game.. There were some that were close but that was horrible

"We play to win the game" - Herm Edwards

by nicholas.rodriguez on May 22, 2009 2:45 PM CDT reply actions  

Nobody ever mentions that his late season struggles always seem to coincide with...

1) A late season defensive collapse
2) The yearly tale of “our OL can’t block my grandma in December”

Take a look at just the Philly wins and losses:

Losses:
12/25/06 Romo: 14-29 142 1 TD 2 INT 3 sacks
                 Dallas D: 222 passing 204 rushing 426 total 2 sacks 23 points 1 turnover
12/16/07 Romo: 13-36 214 0 TD 3 INT 4 sacks
                 Dallas D: 181 passing 134 rushing 315 total 4 sacks 10 points 1 turnover
12/28/08 Romo: 21-39 183 0 TD 1 INT 4 sacks 2 fumbles
                 Dallas D: 166 passing 137 rushing 303 total 1 sack 30 points 1 turnover

Wins:
11/4/07 Romo: 20-25 324 3 TD 1 INT 0 sacks
                Dallas D: 250 passing 66 rushing 316 total 3 sacks 17 points 3 turnovers
9/15/08 Romo: 21-30 312 3 TD 1 INT 0 sacks 1 fumble
                Dallas D: 259 passing 78 rushing 337 total 4 sacks 30 points 1 turnover

The most telling numbers in this for me are obviously the sacks allowed by Dallas. ZERO in 2 wins against Philly, 11 in the 3 losses. And also the rush defense. We gave up an average of 158.3 yards per game in the 3 losses. An average of 72 yards per game in the wins.

So let’s see, give up half as many rushing yards and ZERO sacks on our QB. That is the difference between a win and a loss against Philly.

Just goes to prove in my opinion what I’ve always said about QB’s in the NFL. They get too much credit for wins, and too much blame for losses. The other 51 guys contribute to every win and loss every week in the NFL.

by mhuff13 on May 23, 2009 12:10 AM CDT reply actions  

I'm a HUGE Romo supporter, but this is TOTALLY TRUE ...

Teams with Solid O-Lines (better rushing attacks) and great defenses (think Ravens) can win without an amazing QB.

Romo deserves some credit for the wins and some fault for the losses. But in all his play is outstanding. But even great QBs don’t deserve all the credit for the wins, as these examples demonstrate.

Tar Heels = National Champs in Basketball ... #1 in Baseball ... Top 10 this year in Football?

by DalaiLuke on May 23, 2009 4:01 AM CDT up reply actions  

+100000000

I know and have said he needs to improve decision making but holding him accountable for every failure is too much. When the other team is moving the ball consistently and pulling ahead you have to make plays. That means holding the ball a little longer and throwing it away less. Forcing a big play can lead to big gaffes. Romo has been vilified wrongly on some of these games. He could have thrown away or threw a 3 yard pass when we needed 4. That would improve your ratings and lessen your TOs but your further away from winning.

The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on May 23, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

Great Point

When you’re down and not sure which part of your team is going to collapse faster, your O-line or your defense, and know that it’s really up to you to win the game as Romo knew last year, then it’s really hard to say “just take the sack” or “just throw it away”. How do you do that when you know you have to keep scoring to keep pace with how many points your D is giving up?? The best part of playing smart football is when you have a defense that makes sure you’re not constantly behind or needing a comeback.

You can do a lot of things in life. You can't stab a teammate with a pair of scissors. - Kevin Smith

by kameleon_o on May 23, 2009 10:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

I can't even count how many times last year,

when Romo had to sidestep a rusher. It seemed on every pass play someone came free. It really showed when Slow Hand Luke and Blowinger were in there.

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on May 26, 2009 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions  

OK

But guys like Roethlisberger and others have to do the same thing and don’t turn the ball over the way Romo does.

The point is that SOMETIMES, it’s better to take the stupid sack or throw the ball away and live to fight again on the next play.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 26, 2009 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions  

Big Ben

Turns the ball over all the time. He benefits from having an elite defense.

by DoomsdayD75 on May 26, 2009 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions  

I love how people use the current Super Bowl winning QB to try to prove a point

It was done with Sheli last year.

Guess who had more turnovers last year, Romo or Ben?

That would be Ben with 22.

Ben is a turnover machine.

by mhuff13 on May 26, 2009 10:01 PM CDT up reply actions  

That's interesting, but horribly, horribly wrong...

You used highly flawed stats to make a point that is indefensible. Ben played 16 games, was sacked 46 times and committed 22 turnovers. Romo played 13 games, was sacked only 20 times and committed 21 turnovers.

So if you look at sacks to turnovers, sacks to fumbles, turnovers to games played, or whatever objective, non-homerized view of the statistical turnover performances between the two, there is no comparison that Tony wins. That isn’t Tony-bashing, it’s the facts, laid out in an objective way that you chose not to present. Again, that’s fine, but incorrect.

Your comment about Ben being a turnover machine, makes Romo out to be something much worse, statistically. And, to make matters worse, the turnover machine has two SB rings. Ben has had an o-line that gives up a ton more sacks than Romo’s (3 straight years with 46 sacks or more!), but seems to be able to make the right plays at the right time, and isn’t that what separates winners from losers? I always say that is why McNaab doesn’t win the big one. Cowboy fans tend to agree, but refuse to apply the same logic to our own QB. Don’t get me wrong, I get it, this isn’t always going to be a logical, fact-based discussion.

Finally, I would use guys like Brady and Manning in the conversation, but Romo hasn’t earned the right to be mentioned in the same sentences with them, yet.

As a Dallas fan, I want Cowboys players to aspire to be the best and the best means the Super Bowl winner. Romo could learn a lot about mental toughness and knowing when to take a sack or throw the ball away from Roethlisberger (and other, non-Super Bowl winning QB’s too) because I’d like to see him hoist a Lombardi this year.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions  

not true

Ben fumbles just as much as Romo, but because his team has two SB titles, he gets a pass I guess.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 27, 2009 7:45 AM CDT up reply actions  

You guess?

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

Terry

Romo played in 3 fewer games than Romo and had only 1 less turnover. He needs to protect the ball alot better.

by regaberto on May 27, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions  

I agree

however Ben turns the ball over just as much yet the Steelers won the SB, so that kinda defeats the argument we would have been more successful if Romo turned the ball over less.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 27, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions  

How does it defeat the argument?

I don’t see a connection. Isn’t every situation different. I am sure Rothlisberger turned the ball over more than Peyton – so are turnovers by the QB actually good?

I guess our line doesn’t need to play any better because they are already better than the Steelers, or would O line improvement be possibly beneficial?

All the twists and turns in the name of defending all that is Romo. Fascinating.

by I_miss_Switzer on May 27, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions  

But you don't acknowledge his football IQ

…which manifests itself in taking sacks instead of forcing the ball to a double covered T.O.

That’s what I want to see from Romo.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

I could reply to this with a long list of decision making gaffes

…from Romo.

But I won’t, because I don’t want to prove you wrong.

I’ll just say the Ben is the better QB at this point but also that I hope Romo can make a quantum leap this year.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 28, 2009 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions  

and I could reply with a long list

of decision making gaffes by Roethlisbeger to prove you wrong.

If you think Ben is better, that’s your opinion, I just happen to disagree.

The team as a whole needs to take a quantum leap this year, just not one or two players.

Win as a team and lose as a team, bottom line.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 28, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions  

You tend to see the o-line as Romo's biggest hurdle

but Ben has had a worse o-line with lesser WR’s and still delivered.

You could argue his defense was better, but even if you strip that away, Ben makes the plays that win games more consistently than Romo.

You might take Romo over Ben, but most would disagree with you…

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 29, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions  

I disagree

If you go back game through game, you’ll see Romo has made just as many plays to help his team win as Ben.

It just appears the other way because Ben has had more opportunities to make more plays in the playoffs which everyone remembers more and why is Ben in the playoffs more?? His defense.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 30, 2009 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions  

At some point...

you have to stop blaming others for your misfortune and take responsibility and shoulder the burden.

Your stance is one I hope Romo never adopts.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on Jun 1, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

yeah, you're right

The QB should take all the blame for losses and all the credit for wins..I mean it is a team sport after all.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Jun 1, 2009 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

Or, it's always the...

offensive line’s fault.

Or the defense’s fault.

No wait, it’s Garrett’s fault.

Darn, blame it on injuries.

It’s (insert least favorite WR’s name here) fault.

Dang running game never got it going!!!

TEAM sport doesn’t mean you get to always blame someone else on the TEAM.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on Jun 1, 2009 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions  

Hilarious stuff........

I agree BTW with your assessment

by texstar on Jun 1, 2009 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions  

Isn't the true test of a player

what happens when things AREN’T going their way?

IT’s easy to look good when you have 5 seconds to sit in the pocket and never get your jersey dirty. I want to know what happens when he gets a bloody nose or throws a bad pick. Does he get up and play better or does he throw 3 more and fumble twice?

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 28, 2009 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions  

I agree

and I think Romo answered that question about himself in the Buffalo game two years ago.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 28, 2009 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions  

Some games yes, some not so much

That’s what I mean by elevating your play.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 29, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions  

I thought he did respond pretty good...

in last years Giants game, when he was getting crushed.

But I can see what you’re saying.

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by AirforceBat on May 28, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions  

Let's not forget the category of win, but shouldn't have won games.

Case in point, Buffalo. He totally wrecked the team for 3 quarters or so. We frankly should have lost that one about 50-10 or so, if they had been less conservative and had a non-rookie QB in Trent Edwards who gave us a game saving interception near the end. Give Tony credit for battling back and not losing his cool, but he was absolutely awful.

Some of those other late game heroics also had to come because he had played poorly early. I’d like to see a breakout of Tony’s 27 wins for performance.

He’s played fantastic usually, and I wouldn’t trade him for ANY other QB in the league right now. With him we have a chance we haven’t had since Aikman was good circa 1996 or so. We will win playoff games with him, and have a chance at a trophy as well. I believe this year will probably be the beginning of that, barring injuries.

by mdlusk on May 23, 2009 2:33 PM CDT reply actions  

any QB with a record of "comeback wins" could be categorized as such

Many of Roger Staubach’s fantastic finishes (not all, of course) were needed because he/the offense/coaching was bad in the first place. John Elway’s “The Drive” was necessary because he was something like 11 of 21 for 105 yards and an int. (8 yards and an OT drive later, he was 37-22-244-1-1, decent stats and a win for the ages.

by DavidH22 on May 23, 2009 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions  

True but you have games you should have won but loss to balance it out.

The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on May 23, 2009 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

good post

best we’ve had for awhile

by sublimezg on May 23, 2009 11:03 PM CDT reply actions  

Great Post

Plenty of research for that post and well said.

by Boyz4Life on May 24, 2009 1:25 AM CDT reply actions  

great analysis

I’ve thought about a lot of these points when considering Romo. There are about 7 games (out of 35+) that Romo has played poorly in. Which is why i without a shadow of a doubt would take him over eli, mcnabb and a couple other qbs. Problem is, when hes bad, hes REALLY bad – the games when Romo plays poorly are almost unwinnable for us.

The Eagles games seem to be determined entirely by our start. If we have a good first quarter, we’re golden. If we don’t, we’re screwed. They seem to be the one team Garrett just cannot adjust to when things aren’t going well.

by foyesboys on May 24, 2009 7:44 AM CDT reply actions  

I also agree, GREAT post

I’m not sure how the detractors can get around the stats — 80% of the games Romo has played in, he’s put up not just good numbers, but HALL OF FAME numbers.

Romo, along with the rest of the team, didn’t get it done at the end of the Steelers game, the end of the Ravens game, the second half of the Giants playoff game, and the last stinger – the entire Philly game. I’m not blind to the fact that Romo needs to play better, but let me repeat …

HALL OF FAME stats for a guy about to start his third full year. Yet people want to complain as if the Romo lovers are cheering for Quincy.

Tar Heels = National Champs in Basketball ... #1 in Baseball ... Top 10 this year in Football?

by DalaiLuke on May 24, 2009 8:36 AM CDT reply actions  

the one part of this missing

is his performance in december. what’s his statistics in december. that’s when the pressure is on, that’s where games are more important. that’s where it all really matters and intesity goes up and every possession is important. Romo is kind of careless with the ball and in december every turnover is important and significant. If romo was a little more careful with the ball, then we would be in much better shape in december.

by CowboysFanatic on May 26, 2009 9:13 AM CDT reply actions  

I thought about that point

Romo is 4-8 as a starter in three Decembers, which of course is woefully inadequate. His stats over the last four weeks of each season are:

408-240-2738-14-17 (73.5 rating)
15 fumbles, 5 fumbles lost

This is actually a point or two above his rating for his total career regular season losses. But it’s an irrelevant point. He still has 22 turnovers in those 12 games. He’s fumbled 15 times! Those are unacceptable numbers. There is more than enough blame to go around for the Cowboys’ December woes, but Tony Romo’s play should probably shoulder most of the brunt.

by DavidH22 on May 26, 2009 11:00 AM CDT reply actions  

that's the key

to raise the level of play when it counts most. that’s why I have described Romo as talented but a bit aloof. his attitude helps him shrug off bad games even during the game ala the victory against the bills two years ago. but that same attitude hurts him in december when the intensity is higher and every little thing counts. if he gets to focus a little more in december then we will see the cowboys succeed.

by CowboysFanatic on May 26, 2009 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

I'm sorry but this is just absurd

The NFL is a 52 man team. Not 1.

Sure he has had his mistakes, but I ABSOLUTELY HATE IT WHEN PEOPLE give a QB’s record.

Tony Romo’s record isn’t 4-8 in December, the Dallas Cowboys record is 4-8.

I’m sure Romo’s troubles in December have absolutely nothing to do with the defense or OL completely breaking down every year right on cue in December.

Once again. QB’s get too much credit for success and too much blame for failure.

by mhuff13 on May 26, 2009 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions  

They do get too much credit/blame

But Romo’s play in December was not good enough, regardless of the performance of others.

I thought he looked highly unsettled at the start of the Ravens and Eagles games.

by I_miss_Switzer on May 27, 2009 12:02 AM CDT up reply actions  

If you paid attention

Romo has started over 90% of every game he’s played that way, he always starts out cold and finishes hot, the only exception being the Steelers game last season.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 27, 2009 7:49 AM CDT up reply actions  

Oh, I didn't realize that makes it okay Terry - you are so kind to enlighten me.

So I guess his INTs and fumbles are okay as well because they are consistent?

He is often a slow starter, but that isn’t the same as looking unsettled.

I agree that his slow starts are not acceptable, but I don’t expect perfection. Do you think the slow starts are caused by a lack of preparation, lack of concentration, immaturity, or something else? Will these slow starts continue to be an issue?

Thanks for your continued arrogance and condescension towards all posters who don’t show proper deference to your golden boy.

Did he finish the Eagles game hot, or is that another “only” exception? Let me guess – you don’t count that game for some entirely subjective reason.

by I_miss_Switzer on May 27, 2009 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions  

although you have a point

there are some games that can be blamed on him. when its crunch time at the end of the game, then taking care of the ball is important. that’s when the game is on the line. ala the pittsburgh game last year. or the ravens game when two of his Ints led to scores. now, I know our defense gave up two long runs, but we should have never been in that position if we took care of the ball, played conservative and understand that turnovers lead to losses. in fact over 65% of the teams that had one more turnover than the opposition lost. over 80% of the teams that had two more turnovers lost. that’s an alarming statistics. make it three and its over 95% guaranteed that you will lose.

by CowboysFanatic on May 27, 2009 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

This is a QB-centric league

The play of that one position, more often than not, has more to do with the team’s success than any other.

Romo will get blamed for losses and lauded for wins, as will every other QB. For those that want to harp on how “the rest of the team lets him down”, that’s fine, but no one who isn’t a Dallas fan will believe that for a minute. In fact, lots of Cowboys fans will reject that too.

The cold, hard reality of the NFL is that there is a very fine line between winning and losing (and thusly, winners and losers), and Tony won’t be considered a winner until he leads this team to a breakthrough season culminating in a Super Bowl win.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 12:39 PM CDT reply actions  

if your argument holds any water

than I guess Jim McMahan, Jeff Hostetler, Jim Plunkett, Jeff Hostetler, Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson can be considered great QBs because they had more to do with winning a SB than others on their team.

Why aren’t they in the HOF, it’s a cryin’ shame!

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 27, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions  

Whoa Terry...

That’s not fair. You have chastised people for not reading all of your posts and then you go and put words in my mouth here. I didn’t suggest, in any way shape or form, that greatness should be attributed to SB winning QB’s.

What I did suggest is that someone like Danny White, who I think was a very good (bordering on great) QB in this league, will never be mentioned in that conversation because he failed to get his team over the hump. The fact is that we all know those names you listed mostly because they played the most important position on a Super Bowl championship team. Whether it was some great leadership trait in the huddle, a superb passing performance or just being mentally aware enough not to make boneheaded plays that would hurt their team, they found a way to win. As a result, nobody can call them an also-ran like White. It’s sad, but nonetheless true and isn’t that exactly the same thing that separates us from a team like the lowly Eagles? The championships?

HOF? No, not simply on the strength of winning it all, but right or wrong, QB’s are immortalized for being a Super Bowl winner. The members of that club get a free pass for their illiegitimate children and their poor career completion percentages, their high turnover rates and their choice of girlfriends.

You can keep arguing the point, but deep down, I know you are smart enough to know that it simply is what it is.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions  

those qbs didn't find a way to win

those teams won because they were really good teams and those qbs didn’t have anymore to do with winning a SB than the other 44 players on the roster who contributed as well.

The fact is Danny White was a much better qb than any qb I listed above, the only reason they have a SB ring and White doesn’t is because they played on better teams. Their qb play wasn’t the reason their teams won championships.

I’m not saying your argument isn’t adhered to by others, I’m saying it’s not right.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 27, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions  

Nor is...

any critique of Romo’s on-field decision making, the media’s post-draft grades, criticism of Romo’s trip to Cabo, etc.

Every society needs an idealist like you, Terry. Maybe none moreso than the fan base of America’s Team.

I may not always agree with you, but I am very glad you’re here to help maintain the balance.

At some point, I’ll have to do an ‘Ode to Terry’ fanpost in your honor. :-)

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 27, 2009 6:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

Check your logic

He doesn’t call them great, or suggest that they belong in the HoF.

by I_miss_Switzer on May 27, 2009 1:11 PM CDT reply actions  

Well of course if Romo wins a Super Bowl he moves up

But he hasn’t won anything, really. Meanwhile, White won 5 playoff games (6 if you count the 1978 NFC divisional playoffs). I think their stats are pretty comparable, too, at this point in their respective careers – both sat on the bench for 3+ years then started piling up gaudy numbers immediately. I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Daniel Wilford White.

by DavidH22 on May 27, 2009 4:18 PM CDT reply actions  

+!

Good man, good QB.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."

- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers

by 5Blings on May 28, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions  

LOL

In Romo we might Trust!

by rocj55 on May 30, 2009 2:55 PM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Dallas Cowboys blog for the SB Nation network. We talk Cowboys 24/7/365. Join the discussion but follow the community guidelines.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Jason_garrett_head_coach_small
Rohpuri's Spin on MTD's Latest Mock Draft: Cowboys Edition
Largestssescape_color_small_small
Myth Busters: Dallas' Sad Pass Rush
Small
Is Mario Williams on the Cowboys' radar?
Fountain_small
The Stanford Routt Situation
Zombie_cap3_small
Two Options for how to fill the Cowboys roster holes

Recent FanPosts

97946_giants_cowboys__football_large_small
The Hindsight Games Part 1: J.J. Watt
Small
How The Giants GM Would Fix The Cowboys Overnight ... Good Read Jerrah!!!!
Zzzzwww_small
Twitter GM Mock
97946_giants_cowboys__football_large_small
The Anthony Spencer Scenario
Small
2012 FA and 1st Round Projection
Cb1_small
Is the long term answer to the Cowboys NT already on the team?
Small
The Cowboys should sign Routt and franchise Spencer
Small
Hail Mary or a 5 Year Plan?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Editor

Head_shot1_small Dave Halprin

Lead Writer

Captain_small One.Cool.Customer

Profile_small Brandon Worley

Ollogo3_copy_small KD Drummond

Contributing Writers

Hotdoglu_small Aaron Novinger

Emmittintro_small rabblerousr

Dr_fate_small Tom Ryle

Moderators

Ns_08bstockb-thumb-200x185_small scottmaui