For your consideration: Romo and Consistency

[Dirk Gently]

There's a perception out there that Romo is great when he's great but among the worst when he's not.

I've maintained for a while that this is bull, but someone compiled a stat that allows me to support that argument.

Worst 16 Games
Brees 2,879 Yards (5.4 Y/A), 56.5%, 3 TDs, 32 INTs, 48.5 QB Rating
Brady 2,625 Yards (5.1 Y/A), 53.8%, 7 TDs, 30 INTs, 48.4 QB Rating
P. Manning 3,418 Yards (5.7 Y/A), 55.9%,10 TDs, 41 INTs, 49.5 QB Rating
T Romo 3365 yds (6.24 ypa), 51.9%, 13 TD, 33 INT, 53.9 passer rating

Of particular note: Romo's TD/INT is roughly 1 to 2.5, compared to Manning and Brady both over 1 to 4 and Brees at 1 to 10

The idea that Romo is somehow costing his teams more games than the other star QBs in the league is pretty much a media/fan created perception rather than reality.
_________________

[Dirk Gently]

Adding to the argument, Romo's best 16 games are significantly weaker that the big three:

Romo 4886 yds (10.7 ypa), 70.9% (324-457), 51 TD, 6 INT, 137.4 QBR
Brady 4,959 Yds (10.9 Y/A), 78.6% (356-453), 60 TDs, 1 INT, 150.9 QBR
Manning 4,676 Yds (10.4 Y/A), 76.9% (346-450), 64 TDs, 0 INTs, 149.0 QBR
Brees 5,135 Yds (10.6 Y/A), 79.7% (385-483), 65 TDs, 2 INTs, 148.8 QBR

So if he's better than them when he's bad and worse than them when he's good, doesn't that, de facto, make him more consistent?
_________________

[GeneralDissaray]

I don't even make much of an attempt defending Romo anymore. Unless he wins a superbowl, he'll never get credit from a number of fans and the media. Whenever the lack of playoff and superbowl wins argument rises, I just agree and say yes Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are better than Marino and Fouts. It was their leadership skills that made the Tampa and Baltimore D's elite.

[plan9misfit]

[Baixis]

[plan9misfit]

[TheStarStillShines]

I'm with Plan in that the stats (both sets) are useless without context, such as who was the opponent, how good was his team, which week was the game, was it considered a key game, and what age were the QBs.

Manning started his rookie season on a terrible Colts team, so his numbers are going to be skewed.

Brees and Brady started in their 2nd seasons. Brees was 23 and Brady was 24. The Chargers were a so-so team while the Patriots were a defensive team that went on to win the SB.

Romo was 26 when he started on a playoff team that had good, but not great talent.

There are a lot more factors to consider, but taking each player's best and worst games is too simplistic.
_________________

[MaddHatter]

Probably a better case would be:
Worst season - 91.4
Best season - 102.5
Difference - 11.1

Brady - 31.5
Peyton - 37.0
Rodgers - 28.7

Even that, though isn't great ... probably an in-season metric would be much better
_________________

Ware Stat Tracker: 27 Pressures, 9 Hits, 10 sacks, 4 FF, 7 TFL (thru 8 games)

[Dirk Gently]

Plan, perhaps you are or aren't familiar with a concept called CEP, which stand for "Circular Error, Probable".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_error_probable

It's a measure, basically, of how close to where you point it a weapon will shoot. It's not far afield from "Standard Deviation"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation

Which is a measure of how far away from the mean performance a statistic will tend to vary.

Both of these statistics are used to measure consistency of data: how often does the data fall within a certain range. Basically we're talking about the width of the bell curve here.

What this data conclusively show is that Tony Romo has a narrower bell curve than the top three QBs. That, exactly contrary to popular thought, Romo has higher lows and lower highs than other top QBs. That the other top QBs, in fact, more fit the description fo "feast or famine" than Tony Romo.

If you find that a useless statistic, that's fine. Consistency may not be what you want. But the data do show, and show clearly and unmistakably, that compared to Brees/Brady/Manning, Romo's meltdowns are less disastrous and his exceptional games are not as good.

Someone who I think would excel in this comparison is Aaron Rodgers, who, in his entire career so far, has only had three games under a 50 QBR, and seven (including those three) under 70.
_________________

[Baixis]

[plan9misfit]

[GrassyKnoll]

Plan, well put. I think the end result of all this statistical data will find what some of us already know. Romo is generally a good to greet QB. However, he does tend to choke at te worst possible times & has, on more than one occasion, cost this team ages. I'm sure the same Dan be said for other top QBs, but Romo seems to have a penchant for doing it at crunch time.

[htfryar]

Romo is very consistent as a QB. Anyone who says other wise is full of it. In fact, I would say that he is the most consistent QB in the league. Romo consistently gets criticized about every little thing he does wrong. He consistently gets praised for evey little thing he does right. He consistently dated hot chicks and then married one. He consistently plays golf and wear goofy looking hats to press conferences. He consistently provides both the homers and the haters with things to argue about. Yep, Tony Romo is the most consistent QB in the league.
_________________

[Dirk Gently]

[Dirk Gently]

So, plan, what you are saying is that the range of a set is statistically irrelevant. Gotcha.
_________________