- 8 Nov 2013
- 2:03pm EST
My friend and evil waster of my work productivity Will recently replied to one of my numerous defenses of Cowboys QB Tony Romo with the following harrumph:
I’m sorry dude, but his QB rating notwithstanding, Romo’s CV is full of ill-advised throws in the 4th quarter. More than I can remember. Are they exclusively his fault? Of course not, but he’s the QB and should accept complete responsibility. His legacy to date is that of a choke artist. I love and root for the guy, and he’s a great fantasy QB, but IRL he has some issues.
Let’s leave aside the “complete responsibility” aspect, because it’s ridiculously broad and is exactly why sabermetrics and value-above-replacement metrics were created. The perception that Romo—he of the 100+ 4th quarter & overtime QB rating—is weak in the clutch is just not true. I decided to dig further into the numbers to pull out a couple of specific periods in a given game: 5:00 left or 8:00 left in the 4th quarter, and situations within those timeframes where the game is within one score (+/- 8 points). These cover the 7.5-season period since Romo became a starter, and includes the best seasons most of these guys have had (including Brady’s 18-1, the Mannings’ 3 combined rings, etc.). I also limited the analysis to players who own a SB ring, because of Will’s earlier contention that the exclusive hallmark of a great QB is a ring.
The numbers don’t show that Romo is the Greatest of All Time candidate, but they certainly show that he’s no worse than some established candidates for GOAT.
Late Fourth Quarter
In the last half of the fourth quarter, Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning are the gold standard, and you’ll see them stay that way throughout these stats. When you limit the scope to one-score games, Kurt Warner and Eli Manning do pretty well, too. Romo’s in the middle of the latter pack, he’s been put in close, late-game situations more than any other QB, save for Ben Roethlisberger. Incidentally, Roethlisberger has been sacked way more often than anyone else on this list, as defenses seek to treat him the way he treats the ladies.
The frequently made comparison between Romo and his (and Nies’s) boyhood hero Brett Favre just makes Romo look considerably better in tight games: Favre is tied with Eli for the worst interception percentage, and has dismal accuracy to boot. And then there’s Tom Brady, who comes in dead last in passer rating the last half of the 4th, and is especially bad in close games. More on this later.
Last Five Minutes
But when you think “clutch”, you’re likely thinking of the last drive or two in a tight game. The last 2 minutes are often just kneeldowns after the other side failed to perform in the fabled clutch situation, so I expanded the time to include the last five minutes—enough for the final two drives of the game.
In the last five minutes of any game, Romo comes in as the third-best QB in the list of Super Bowl-winners he’s snuck into. BUT WAIT—THE CLOSE GAMES SHOW HOW HARD HE CHOKES ALL THE GAMES AWAY!!11 Not so fast. There are a couple of factors at play:
- First, again, Romo is put in close end-of-game situations more often than most other quarterbacks here. And these numbers don’t even count comeback attempts from 2+ scores down, where Romo has a 95.7 rating for his career and a 100+ passer rating in each of the last 4.5 seasons.
Note that the only guy with as many attempts in those situations is Big Ben, who holds onto the ball long enough to get sacked twice as much as the next guy here. (Even calculating on a per-season basis, Big Ben gets sacked 50% more than Flacco.) He’s losing yardage to the turf instead of turning the ball over, but both hurt the team in tight situations. To wit: if you’re constantly forced to try to make things happen, sometimes those things will be bad.
- Second, let’s point out that in both sets of close-game numbers, Romo is among the most accurate QBs. (This holds true against non-SB winners, as well.) Unlike, say, Eli or Easy Hands Ben, Romo is finding ways to get it to his receivers. However, his high accuracy combined with the INTs back up my lament about poor route running: this is a guy whose receivers are using compasses to navigate a magnet factory.
If you want a guy who really did carelessly chuck the ball down field, look no further than Brett Favre. His spectacularly bad completion rates and high interception percentages show a guy who was hoping to will the chains forward…and often failed. Since 1999 (the earliest game situation stats Pro Football Reference has available), Favre has only completed 53.1% of his completions with a 57.7 passer rating, so this isn’t a case of a star on the downswing. This is who Brett always was.
There are three other key factors in clutch QB success, both relating to other people as you might expect:
- First, the strength of the running game makes a big difference when you’re maintaining the lead. Roethlisberger, Favre, Flacco, and the Mannings get help for all or part of this sample set. On the other hand, when you have to decide between Tashard Choice and Felix Jones, you lob it to Witten in the flat.
- Second, there’s the gift of a strong offensive line, which can turn a run-out-of-town Alex Smith into an undefeated Alex Smith. Eli Manning and Joe Flacco have had arguably had good protection in front of him every year until this year—with predictable results. If Romo couldn’t run, he would now be David Carr with nicer golf clubs.
- Finally, there’s the defense, which I started to look at further. In both close game situations, Dallas’s defense has performed in the bottom third of the league in both % of plays resulting in a first downs and % of plays resulting in a turnover. Other QBs at least have the luxury of defenses that hold tough (like the Giants and Steelers) or get the ball back (Patriots, Colts, Saints), so they can afford to be choosy with their pass plays.
That was a lot of words. Here’s the most important selection of those words:
- Tony Romo is not the Clutch God of Lore, but he certainly fares better than some of the most celebrated QBs in the league. Where he is forced into turnovers, he is frequently bailing out terrible defensive performances only to be undone by poor route running and the occasional O-line sieve.
- Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning are pretty damned good in the clutch. Kurt Warner is actually really underrated, considering he did some great work in close games with the Arizona Cardinals.
- Big Ben’s passing progressions really do take as long as they seem to.
- Tom Brady is shockingly bad late in close games. There are definitely some missing variables here. The Pats’ defenses during these years got much more lax than in the early Belichick years, so these may have been games with complete defensive collapses. I also suspect that some of it is because he’s rarely had all-star receivers, but these games include some of his most prolific passing years. It’s possible that since 2006, the Pats don’t even know how to win without blowing teams out (cf., the rainy Bengals game).
- Brett Favre really did play like a kid out there. A moody, undisciplined kid who really just wants you to look at his junk.
- 16 Oct 2013
- 11:25pm EST
- This post contains political opinions. Reader discretion is advised.
I’ve seen about a million Facebook posts and tweets about the democracy-suspending, Reichstag-burning coup the Tea Party Republikkkans brought about on October 1, citing the YouTube video of Representative Chris Van Hollen (D-attention) standing in the face of Republican tyranny like a latter day Tank Man. The problem is that, as usual, it’s a whole mess of hyperbole.
The Popular Story
Rep. Van Hollen heroically tried to end the impasse on Saturday, October 12 by asking to bring the Senate version of the 2014 budget up for an immediate vote. The House Speaker pro tempore, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), told him that the House had already passed a resolution (H.R. 368) that allows only the Majority Leader or his minions to bring the bill for an up-or-down vote. Rep. Van Hollen was shocked by this…though he somehow had props in his hands ready to go for this exchange.
Then the internet exploded.
The Actual Timeline
Here’s the timeline of events:
- September 20: The House passes House Joint Resolution 59, which continues funding the government for the fiscal year 2014 until December 15, 2013. This resolution eliminates all funding for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, or “Obamacare” for those of you who prefer that).
- September 21: The Senate amends H.J. Res. 59, changing the expiration date to November 15 and stripping §137 (debt prioritization) and §138 (defunding PPACA).
- September 28: The House passed two perfecting amendments (amendments to the Senate amendments) that 1) repeal the medical device tax, and 2) again delay the PPACA, respectively.
- September 30: The Senate tabled the House perfecting amendments.
- October 1: The House voted for the notorious H.R. 368. The text of the bill states that:
Resolved, That the House hereby (1) takes from the Speaker’s table the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 59) making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes, with the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, (2) insists on its amendment, and (3) requests a conference with the Senate thereon.
SEC. 2. Any motion pursuant to clause 4 of rule XXII relating to House Joint Resolution 59 may be offered only by the Majority Leader or his designee.
Rule XXII, clause 4 says that
4. When the stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill or resolution with House or Senate amendments, a motion to dispose of any amendment shall be privileged.
So when there’s a House-Senate deadlock, any motions to remove amendments (which presumably are the reason for the deadlock) get special precedence. That is, anyone can interrupt proceedings to get rid of an amendment.
So in H.R. 368, the House resolves 1) to continue funding the government with the House version of the bill, and asks that the Senate meet for a conference committee to determine this, and 2) to suspend the rule by which any House member can interrupt proceedings to shed amendments (which is what adopting the Senate version of the bill would do) while this is going on.
- October 12 Rep. Van Hollen asks to pick up the Senate version of the bill (the “clean” resolution) off the table and pass it. Rep. Chaffetz says no.
In other words…
So had Section 2 not been passed, Rep. Van Hollen would have taken a bill that was currently being debated between the leadership of the two houses of Congress and passed the other house’s version. In the unlikely event that the member of the minority would’ve been successful in the vote, he would have basically hijacked the legislative process to ram through a bill that was still being hashed out by grown-ups.
First, yes, it sucks that this process has taken so long. In my opinion, Senate Majority Leader Reid shares some of the blame in the impasse—after all, he’s opposing a funding resolution that had more votes than the PPACA had in the first place. But regardless of your side in the budget debate, let’s admit that this is the process by which bills become law, including funding bills. If the Congressman wants to bypass conference committees, then by all means, he can pass a resolution when he’s in a leadership role (which he theoretically will be the next time the Dems have a House majority) to require a 2/3ds vote to suspend House Rule XXII. Spoiler alert: he probably won’t.
Second, let’s correct some of the rhetoric:
- The House GOP did not “guarantee a shutdown” with H.R. 368. The House guaranteed that they’d be able to go a conference committee with the Senate without the bill changing or getting passed while they were in the middle of negotiating.
- This is not an unprecedented move. The House leadership—regardless of party—often changes the rules to make the legislative process go more smoothly. Newsflash: members of Congress want to get the hell out of the chambers quickly to get a drink as much as anyone else. Anything to get this process going faster is encouraged.
- This is not rigging the rules. The rules were changed by following still other rules. Was the Rep. Van Hollen gagged and tied to a railroad track while H.R. 368 was passed? How did he manage to lose seven fellow Democrats to the other side of the vote on this resolution? Only when the shutdown became real, and Rep. Van Hollen had a chance to score some political points, did H.R. 368 magically become THE END OF DEMOCRACY AS WE KNOW IT!!!111
Finally, the fact that I had to type all this up, and could find not one voice on the right explaining that Speaker John Boehner is not an orange Snively Whiplash is evidence enough that the GOP has no idea what the hell it’s doing, and has all the strategy of a classic wildcard. With zero PR efforts on their side, this clearly was a Republican political suicide mission.
- 9 Jun 2013
- 9:50pm EST
- & Cetera
Hey there, three people who are still reading my blog! I finally uploaded a selection of the (literally) one thousand photos from our wedding in Maryland last October. You can see them in slideshow format and find links to the full sets at our wedding website. Thanks again to our photographer Theresa Choi.
Now, off to sort through and upload the six hundred photos from the Indian wedding…
- 7 Feb 2012
- 1:16am EST
- This post contains political opinions. Reader discretion is advised.
Ah, it’s campaign season again, which means it’s time for me to hear how I should join the Brown People Bandwagon™ and support the President—like Shefali Duggal Razdan, Deven Parekh, Sunil Sabharwal and Kavita Tankha, all named by the Hindustan Times* as typically oblivious fundraisers for the President’s re-election campaign.
Maybe I should climb aboard that bandwagon. I mean, clearly leading Indian-Americans seem to have no problem with the administration’s inability to understand innovation without their branding, let alone the Vice President’s Michael Scott-like racial observations. (Good thing he’s not George Allen or we’d have to care!)
* n.b.—I still have a grudge against the HT, who very casually linked a holy figure in my faith to an ideology that has helped kill hundreds of millions world wide. So yeah, f*ck the HT while we’re at it.
- 22 Jan 2012
- 11:22pm EST
John Gruber thinks it’s hilarious that Samsung is scrambling to find a device that can work all day on a single battery charge. HAR HAR That would be FUCKING HILARIOUS if my regular iPhone 3GS would work as expected with iOS 5.
Yeah, pretty sure that wasn’t in the fancy Tim Cook guidelines for not fucking up.
edit Heh, forgot the link. Yay inebriated posts.
WordPress.org recently posted on why the abomination known as SOPA (House)/PIPA (Senate) needs to be stopped. Good arguments all around; the law has virtually no upside and a whole lot of draconian downside. But I found this bit interesting:
Laws are not like lines of PHP; they are not easily reverted if someone wakes up and realizes there is a better way to do things. We should not be so quick to codify something this far-reaching.
What, like massive restrictions on the financial industry that make it harder for tech startups to get funding? Or a hastily-written, multi-trillion dollar health care entitlement scheme? No? Never mind, then, carry on myopically.
- 11 Jan 2012
- 12:34am EST
- & Cetera