Buffalo News: PFF Breaks Down Josh Allen's Accuracy "Issue"

[Ronin]

22 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

Trubisky has really given me some hope. He's far and the way the closest comparison to Allen in terms of recent draftees. Would love to see that kind of second year jump for JA. Nagy has obviously made a world of difference in Chicago, but hey, Daboll is a hot HC candidate so who knows? My biggest fear is another Ryan Tannehill. A guy who lingers for years because he does just enough right to make people think he's the guy. Time will tell.

 

Well, just because someone is a "hot" candidate for something doesn't make them good.  At last check we currently possess the 31st ranked yardage as well as scoring offense as well as in passing offense.  The only thing separating our offense from Arizona's is Allen's rushing performance.  So I'm of the opinion let 'em have at Daboll.  He's got no significant track record of success anywhere, the hoopla on him is mindboggling.  His only success was spot duty at Alabama, a team with so much more talent than any other in the NCAA besides perhaps Clemson, and no one's ever going to give the credit for Tua Tagavaloa's development to Daboll.  

 

Otherwise, Trubiskly didn't/doesn't have the same hindrances coming into the NFL so that's not an apples-to-apples comp.  In fact, here's some of his draft-profile write-up from nfl.com; 

 

Trubisky:  

 

Quick through his progressions

Makes the standard "pitch and catch" throws with consistent accuracy.

His 62.1 completion percentage on intermediate throws easily outpaces the top quarterbacks in this draft.

 Calm field general. Very good pocket mobility. Can slide around circumference of the pocket without having to drop his eyes from their task.

Locates safeties and reads their intentions immediately after the snap. 

 

What people don't realize is that that last one is directly tied to the short-medium game, so when we see that a QB has a low compl. % it's typically for that reason, which actually magnifies, not mitigates, the issues with that QB's short-medium game.  

 

Also, Despite playing in a spread-based offense, he's a full-field reader who does a very good job of getting an early read on the safeties before crafting his course of action.

 

Now if we contrast that with Allen, also using nfl.com's profile;  

• Accuracy diminishes greatly when he's forced to move his feet
• Field-reading is spotty
• Needs to be more patient in allowing combo routes to develop
• Breaks from pocket without cause throwing off his timing with receivers
• Tries to overcome obstacles with arm talent and makes poor decisions because of it
• Takes too many chances with low percentage throws
• Needs to play smarter and place higher value on the ball
• Fastball pitcher whose touch could use improvement short

I mean we're talking about two different QBs here.  Also, don't forget to factor in that Trubisky played in the ACC against primarily power-5 competition.  He had some very good games against some very good P5 defenses.  Allen played 3 games against P5 competition and was miserable doing so, so miserable that he was worse that all of the undrafted QBs in doing so.  He played against Nebrask, Iowa, and Oregon St. I think was the last one.  None had phenominal D's or anything either.  Allen had 1 TD and like 11 TOs or something.  

 

And even so, Trubisky's not great, some criticize him even.  He's probably about at Tannehill level now and far from a proven franchise QB.  

 

As you said, time will tell, but honestly, I think we'll largely know the career trajectory next season sometime.  Allen's shortcomings are very difficult to coach up/in.  Those are things that he'll have to work thru, but he wasn't good at it at the collegiate level against inferior competition, so what are the odds that he'll do it in the NFL?  Just sayin'.  Yeah, maybe he'll shatter those odds, we'll see.  But if he does it'll have been an uphill battle and he'll have done exactly that, shatter the odds.  More often than not odds don't get shattered, right?  

 

[Doc]

3 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

Yup ........... completely what I expected.  I'm not going to argue those points with you.  It will not make a difference.

 

Probably a good idea.  You can't argue those points.

[Maine-iac]

Just now, Doc said:

 

Probably a good idea.  You can't argue those points.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.  I don't care enough.

[Doc]

5 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

The fan base cares more about QB potential (not even stats) than wins.  Yeah.  Good stuff. 

 

What's the alternative?

[LSHMEAB]

2 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Well, just because someone is a "hot" candidate for something doesn't make them good.  At last check we currently possess the 31st ranked yardage as well as scoring offense as well as in passing offense.  The only thing separating our offense from Arizona's is Allen's rushing performance.  So I'm of the opinion let 'em have at Daboll.  He's got no significant track record of success anywhere, the hoopla on him is mindboggling.  His only success was spot duty at Alabama, a team with so much more talent than any other in the NCAA besides perhaps Clemson, and no one's ever going to give the credit for Tua Tagavaloa's development to Daboll.  

 

Otherwise, Trubiskly didn't/doesn't have the same hindrances coming into the NFL so that's not an apples-to-apples comp.  In fact, here's some of his draft-profile write-up from nfl.com; 

 

Trubisky:  

 

Quick through his progressions

Makes the standard "pitch and catch" throws with consistent accuracy.

His 62.1 completion percentage on intermediate throws easily outpaces the top quarterbacks in this draft.

 Calm field general. Very good pocket mobility. Can slide around circumference of the pocket without having to drop his eyes from their task.

Locates safeties and reads their intentions immediately after the snap. 

 

What people don't realize is that that last one is directly tied to the short-medium game, so when we see that a QB has a low compl. % it's typically for that reason, which actually magnifies, not mitigates, the issues with that QB's short-medium game.  

 

Also, Despite playing in a spread-based offense, he's a full-field reader who does a very good job of getting an early read on the safeties before crafting his course of action.

 

Now if we contrast that with Allen, also using nfl.com's profile;  

• Accuracy diminishes greatly when he's forced to move his feet
• Field-reading is spotty
• Needs to be more patient in allowing combo routes to develop
• Breaks from pocket without cause throwing off his timing with receivers
• Tries to overcome obstacles with arm talent and makes poor decisions because of it
• Takes too many chances with low percentage throws
• Needs to play smarter and place higher value on the ball
• Fastball pitcher whose touch could use improvement short

I mean we're talking about two different QBs here.  Also, don't forget to factor in that Trubisky played in the ACC against primarily power-5 competition.  He had some very good games against some very good P5 defenses.  Allen played 3 games against P5 competition and was miserable doing so, so miserable that he was worse that all of the undrafted QBs in doing so.  He played against Nebrask, Iowa, and Oregon St. I think was the last one.  None had phenominal D's or anything either.  Allen had 1 TD and like 11 TOs or something.  

 

And even so, Trubisky's not great, some criticize him even.  He's probably about at Tannehill level now and far from a proven franchise QB.  

 

As you said, time will tell, but honestly, I think we'll largely know the career trajectory next season sometime.  Allen's shortcomings are very difficult to coach up/in.  Those are things that he'll have to work thru, but he wasn't good at it at the collegiate level against inferior competition, so what are the odds that he'll do it in the NFL?  Just sayin'.  Yeah, maybe he'll shatter those odds, we'll see.  But if he does it'll have been an uphill battle and he'll have done exactly that, shatter the odds.  More often than not odds don't get shattered, right?  

 

The Daboll bit was tongue in cheek. I'd be willing to bet 5k that he doesn't even get an interview. He's lucky to still have a job as an OC. I wasn't a fan of Trubisky and still believe Nagy is the main reason for his success. Although you point out some key distinctions, I still view them as similar QB's. But thanks for ruining that tiny flicker of hope I had/have for Josh Allen! Sheesh.

[nedboy7]

6 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

What's the alternative?

 

I dont think it is possible to explain that to you. 

[LSHMEAB]

41 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

I'll preface this by saying I really like Allen but that said this is the same group from last year.  Funny how the song has changed from horrible QB to horrible WR's.  Granted I thought it was horrible WR's the whole time but fans love to play to a narrative.

Dude. 2017 Kelvin Benjamin was a star and Zay Jones was damn near the Biletnikoff winner who'd be a stud with the right QB. All they needed was someone, ANYONE, besides Tyrod Taylor and the offense would start humming. It's the quarterback that makes the team. 

 

With the advances in modern technology over the last year, no quarterback can thrive without a tremendous supporting cast. Didn't you get the memo?

[nedboy7]

10 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Probably a good idea.  You can't argue those points.

 

Can't argue with someone who loves bad football. 

[Maine-iac]

5 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

Dude. 2017 Kelvin Benjamin was a star and Zay Jones was damn near the Biletnikoff winner who'd be a stud with the right QB. All they needed was someone, ANYONE, besides Tyrod Taylor and the offense would start humming. It's the quarterback that makes the team. 

 

With the advances in modern technology over the last year, no quarterback can thrive without a tremendous supporting cast. Didn't you get the memo?

I missed the memo ............... and Mahommes did also ?.

 

ps  Funnier if you saw the Chiefs last game.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2018 by Maine-iac

[Doc]

 

37 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

Whatever helps you sleep at night.  I don't care enough.

 

LOL!   If the best you can come up with is that "it's all Allen's fault because the offense is the same as last year," you shouldn't even bother talking. 

 

28 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

I dont think it is possible to explain that to you. 

 

Not by you at least. 

Edited December 30, 2018 by Doc

[Dr. Who]

1 hour ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Who is saying that?

 

 The only people that seem to be drawling conclusions are the folks that have declared him a guaranteed bust

Yep. Are these folks projecting the same kind of stark absolutes they frequently engage in onto those they disagree with or are they using a sophist tactic of replacing actual counter-arguments with ridiculous straw men and then asking folks to defend what nobody asserts?

[Ronin]

23 hours ago, Dr. Who said:

I thought your response to what appeared to me a rather thoughtful post was pithy and dismissive. It's just easy to respond to a long post with a brief pejorative. Possibly you didn't intend that. I think Allen's performance is not properly gauged by statistics. I think that was the main point of the other fella's post. I'm personally not bothered by "bottom-dwelling" because I believe much of that is due to surrounding talent and a rookie qb who is still learning to read NFL defenses. No doubt, Allen has to improve. I think it is likely he will and you don't. I am not an analytics guy and maybe your pessimism will prove correct. I think the team believes in Allen. I think they think he's going to be a good one and probaby have a better feel than what the numbers are saying right now.

 

Well, OK, think what you want.  It wasn't intended that way and I don't think that if you reread it objectively you'd say that it was.  I do my best to stick to facts and data and leave unfounded opinions out of  my posts.  

 

I think that most forum dwellers, A, have a thin skin, and B, throw out stuff like "he passes the eye test" without citing any factual or objective data as if merely watching someone that otherwise offers mediocre to bottom-dwelling performance somehow trumps any facts of the matter.  And before you get all worked up, no, I'm not referring to you, I'm referring to plurality of people that frequent message board forums generally speaking.  I can't say whether you fit the bill or not.  Either way, sorry you felt that way, it was not my intention.  

 

I will comment on your statement, "I believe much of that is due to surrounding talent and a rookie qb who is still learning to read NFL defenses."

 

Here's what I believe on that specific topic;  that Allen wasn't good in college in reading defenses.  Why do I believe that?  Because it was listed as a weakness in just about every (never say never/every) draft profile written on him.  I also witnessed it personally in reviewing numerous games of his while at Wyoming, particularlly against the teams that had defenders likely to advance to the next level, aka the NFL.  So if he learns to do it in the NFL, it'll be a first, right?  

 

I'n not sure I like those odds, particularly given that he's struggling in a big way with that right now.  

 

Then, "No doubt, Allen has to improve. I think it is likely he will and you don't. I am not an analytics guy and maybe your pessimism will prove correct."

 

I'll only briefly comment on the fact that you just stated that my response was "pithy and dismissive," without citing anything specific, but here you use the word "pessimism" followed by a contrast in how you define our beliefs.  Frankly, IMO that's condescending.  I'll move on now.  

 

As to your comment, here's another angle for you to consider;  perhaps I think it's "unlikely" for the simple reason that if he does it he'll be bucking some tremendous odds stacked against him.  So in that sense, and coupled with my having done way more research and analysis on Allen than I've seen even most draft "experts" conduct, my personal analysis has me aligning with those very odds.  

 

I distinctly recall last year when the team drafted Peterman, the team decried that he was a fifth-round steal and really "shoulda been a 2nd or 3rd rounder," etc., same tripe we've been spoon-fed for years.  My anaysis on Peterman was that he wasn't even as good as a bunch of undrafted QBs and I laughed at the  notion that he would ever amount to anything.  I was called pessimistic then too.  Same drill.  

 

The difference is that Allen obviously has a world of skills that Peterman simply doesn't possess.  But he still does not posses the essential skills that ALL franchise QBs do.  

 

In short, pessimism has nothing to do with it.  Frankly, I'm hoping that allen turns out to be the next Brady.  Not sure how someone that thinks like that could possibly be pessimistic.  I'm simply aware of a wealth of NFL history and realize that simply because he's a Bill doesn't meant that his chances for doing something that's highly unlikley are greater in the same way that Vinny in My Cousin Vinny asks "how could it take you five minutes to cook your grits when it takes the entire grit-eating world 20 minutes?"  He says "I don't know, I'm a fast cook I guess," which is the equivalent in that movie to the "passes the eye test" here.   So while that would be my hope, I wouldn't bet 20 bucks that it will happen.  Hope is meaningless in assessing talent.  

 

I'd say this, if Allen were on a different team would your take be the same?  Would everyon's take here be the same?  I think not.  In fact, Lamar Jackson's season is going very similarly to Allen's, except that the Ravens are winning with him at QB.  His RB talent isn't even what we have, his WRs aren't much better.  Both of their leading WRs are on their 2nd and 3rd teams so soon in their relatively brief careers.  Most people here will insist that we have a #1/2 D in the league although I discount that significantly, but either way, as long as we're using popular opinion to craft realities.  

 

So the circumstances are similar, yet the schtick on Jackson is far different than it is for Allen despite the fact that Jackson's efficiencies are much better.  He has a 2/1 TD/INT ratio to Allen's 2/3.  He's much better in the red zone and in the short-medium game otherwise.  And more.  Yet no one's talking about him like they are about Allen.  Why not?  In fact, it's to the contrary.  They're saying the same things about Jackson that I'm saying about Allen, again, despite the fact that Jackson's overall efficiencies are significantly better than Allen's.  How is that?  

 

Couldn't it simply be that Allen is just charismatic and exciting to watch despite the fact that he rarely gets the job done, and at a lesser rate than a QB that's taking far more criticism while doing it better?  

 

Enjoy the game today and Happy New Year!  

Edited December 30, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[Dr. Who]

45 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

The fan base cares more about QB potential (not even stats) than wins.  Yeah.  Good stuff. 

The team is 5 - 10 and with the talent on offense, it was never going to be a competitive team. If you develop a franchise qb, you have the most important piece in being a long-term playoff team. So you think the fan base is irrational to be caring more about qb potential this year?

Edited December 30, 2018 by Dr. Who

[CincyBillsFan]

59 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

I'll preface this by saying I really like Allen but that said this is the same group from last year.  Funny how the song has changed from horrible QB to horrible WR's.  Granted I thought it was horrible WR's the whole time but fans love to play to a narrative.

I don't know about others but I never thought Tyrod was a horrible QB I thought that he had clearly reached his ceiling and that wasn't good enough to lift Buffalo into being a playoff caliber team.  The degree to which a fluke play by the Bengal's ended the Buffalo playoff drought last year can not be understated.  In fact the very next week at Jacksonville we all saw why the Bills were not a legit playoff team with their horrendous offensive performance against the Jags. 

 

It was clear to me and I suspect a lot of other people that Tyrod was not getting any help from his receivers.  As a group they were bad last year.  My guess is that the Bills realized that they needed to upgrade both the QB and most of the skill positions after their offenses showing in Jacksonville.  The first step was upgrading the QB position where they signed McCarron and  finagled their way to move up in the draft and draft Allen.  It was always their plan to upgrade their skill positions in 2019 with all that CAP money.  The only thing that screwed with their plans was the performance of McCarron & Peterman at QB which caused the Bills to have to use Allen way before they wanted to.  As it turns out Allen has been entertaining AND the experience he's gained this year will prove invaluable for next year. 

 

 

[Ronin]

23 hours ago, Doc said:

 

What are the YPC when you remove the QB's rushes?  That's a far better metric of how good a team's running game is, not just total yards, which is dependent on number of attempts.

 

Good question, why don't you look them up, do the math, and get back. 

 

I do know that they're all below average, so not sure it's really going to be defining epiphany.  

[Dr. Who]

14 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Well, OK, think what you want.  It wasn't intended that way and I don't think that if you reread it objectively you'd say that it was.  I do my best to stick to facts and data and leave unfounded opinions out of  my posts.  

 

I think that most forum dwellers, A, have a thin skin, and B, throw out stuff like "he passes the eye test" without citing any factual or objective data as if merely watching someone that otherwise offers mediocre to bottom-dwelling performance somehow trumps any facts of the matter.  And before you get all worked up, no, I'm not referring to you, I'm referring to plurality of people that frequent message board forums generally speaking.  I can't say whether you fit the bill or not.  Either way, sorry you felt that way, it was not my intention.  

 

I will comment on your statement, "I believe much of that is due to surrounding talent and a rookie qb who is still learning to read NFL defenses."

 

Here's what I believe on that specific topic;  that Allen wasn't good in college in reading defenses.  Why do I believe that?  Because it was listed as a weakness in just about every (never say never/every) draft profile written on him.  I also witnessed it personally in reviewing numerous games of his while at Wyoming, particularlly against the teams that had defenders likely to advance to the next level, aka the NFL.  So if he learns to do it in the NFL, it'll be a first, right?  

 

I'n not sure I like those odds, particularly given that he's struggling in a big way with that right now.  

 

Then, "No doubt, Allen has to improve. I think it is likely he will and you don't. I am not an analytics guy and maybe your pessimism will prove correct."

 

I'll only briefly comment on the fact that you just stated that my response was "pithy and dismissive," without citing anything specific, but here you use the word "pessimism" followed by a contrast in how you define our beliefs.  Frankly, IMO that's condescending.  I'll move on now.  

 

As to your comment, here's another angle for you to consider;  perhaps I think it's "unlikely" for the simple reason that if he does it he'll be bucking some tremendous odds stacked against him.  So in that sense, and coupled with my having done way more research and analysis on Allen than I've seen even most draft "experts" conduct, my personal analysis has me aligning with those very odds.  

 

I distinctly recall last year when the team drafted Peterman, the team decried that he was a fifth-round steal and really "shoulda been a 2nd or 3rd rounder," etc., same tripe we've been spoon-fed for years.  My anaysis on Peterman was that he wasn't even as good as a bunch of undrafted QBs and I laughed at the  notion that he would ever amount to anything.  I was called pessimistic then too.  Same drill.  

 

The difference is that Allen obviously has a world of skills that Peterman simply doesn't possess.  But he still does not posses the essential skills that ALL franchise QBs do.  

 

In short, pessimism has nothing to do with it.  Frankly, I'm hoping that allen turns out to be the next Brady.  Not sure how someone that thinks like that could possibly be pessimistic.  I'm simply aware of a wealth of NFL history and realize that simply because he's a Bill doesn't meant that his chances for doing something that's highly unlikley are greater in the same way that Vinny in My Cousin Vinny asks "how could it take you five minutes to cook your grits when it takes the entire grit-eating world 20 minutes?"  He says "I don't know, I'm a fast cook I guess."   So while that would be my hope, I wouldn't bet 20 bucks that it will happen.  Hope is meaningless in assessing talent.  

 

I'd say this, if Allen were on a different team would your take be the same?  Would everyon's take here be the same?  I think not.  In fact, Lamar Jackson's season is going very similarly to Allen's, except that the Ravens are winning with him at QB.  His RB talent isn't even what we have, his WRs aren't much better.  Both of their leading WRs are on their 2nd and 3rd teams so soon in their relatively brief careers.  Most people here will insist that we have a #1/2 D in the league although I discount that significantly, but either way, as long as we're using popular opinion to craft realities.  

 

So the circumstances are similar, yet the schtick on Jackson is far different than it is for Allen despite the fact that Jackson's efficiencies are much better.  He has a 2/1 TD/INT ratio to Allen's 2/3.  He's much better in the red zone and in the short-medium game otherwise.  And more.  Yet no one's talking about him like they are about Allen.  Why not?  In fact, it's to the contrary.  They're saying the same things about Jackson that I'm saying about Allen, again, despite the fact that Jackson's overall efficiencies are significantly better than Allen's.  How is that?  

 

Couldn't it simply be that Allen is just charismatic and exciting to watch despite the fact that he rarely gets the job done, and at a lesser rate than a QB that's taking far more criticism while doing it better?  

 

Enjoy the game today and Happy New Year!  

Hoping for the next Brady but thinking Allen is "highly unlikely" to be a successful NFL qb seems to me compatible with pessimist as I understand it. Pessimist doesn't mean "rooting for Allen to be bad." I liked Allen before the draft and I am encouraged by his overall play, so it's evident our criteria and sensibility differ greatly. I really don't see Jackson and Allen as the same type of player, though both obviously are garnering benefit from running ability. You seem to have put a lot of time and effort into scouting Allen. I don't think you're insincere or stupid. I do not spend that kind of time in analysis. My life is invested elsewhere too much and I doubt I have the acumen to do the close analysis some on here do. I have watched a lot of football over a fairly long life and I'm going to stick with my holistic vision of a fella, even if the number crunchers think differently. Regrettable that you think my tone is condescending. I also wish you a happy new year.

Edited December 30, 2018 by Dr. Who

[Ronin]

22 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

Here's the thing about the above:

 

Anyone watching Allen knows he has had more very deep passes and deep passes for TD's dropped than any of his draft peers so I wont even debate that point as it would be silly.

 

You sure about that?  

 

I'm not, the stats suggest otherwise as to drops overall.  If it's merely deep-throws you're talking about, can't say, haven't seen splits like that.  What's the link, dying to find a site that breaks it out like that.  

 

Otherwise, you've nailed my primary point about Allen tho, that franchise QBs DO NOT have as their core and sole strength a deep-game.  Isn't this obvious to everyone that has watched football for more than few years?  

 

Also, his draft profiles speak to that.  

 

Lastly, I'm not sure how anyone merely "watching Allen" knows that he's had more deep passes dropped than any of his draft peers unless they've watched all those QBs too, and hand-counted them all.  Did you do that?   Or are you operating on the notion that only Buffalo's WRs have drops, seemingly like so many others?  Not even sure how that's possible without consulting the data/stats on the subject.  Again, highly interested in the link for dropped passes broken out by distance.  Haven't found one yet.  You've got me drooling over getting that one!  

 

Here's the kicker tho, every one of Allen's draft peers, including Jackson, is notably better at passing in the short-medium game, which means in the red zone since there is no more deep game down there, right?  

 

Since every franchise QB in the modern NFL must have that short-medium game strength, well, I'm sure you can connect the two dots yourself.  

 

 

Edited December 30, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I don't make a habit of helping out Spurs fans in their argument... but to me the response to this is consistency. Can you get to 10, 11 even 12 wins once or twice with a 58% passer with a sub 90 passer rating? 

 

Yes - you can. Can you build a consistent year on year contender that way in the modern NFL? To me the answer is no. Josh needs to make sure that at least one of those numbers is consistently high (60% + or 90+ passer rating) if he is going to have a career where he becomes a true franchise QB. Because over the long term I agree with jrober that those numbers do correlate with ppg and ultimately wins.

 

I think you'd have a really hard time demonstrating a correlation with PPG in the generally accepted meaning of correlation (better completion percentage/passer rating = more PPG).  You can't look at a list of the 10 best NFL teams in a season, and see that they are ranked in order of the QB's passer rating, or even correlate with a top-10 passer rating. Nor can you look at a given QB's passer rating and completion percentage, and generally, predict whether his team was 6-10 or 10-6 that year.

 

What I think you can show is that there's a floor - if completion percentage is below a certain point and/or passer rating is below a certain point, you aren't going to win too much unless you have special circumstances like a very effective running game as well as a stout D.   There's a similar situation with YPG.  In general higher YPG are not correlated with winning.  But there seems to be a floor where below it, there's not enough passing game to win consistently. 

And of course, the best QB - the true Magical Franchise Guys - tend to be very high in both year in and year out.

 

Empirically, based upon sorting basic QB stats until the QB most would agree "good QB, consistently does enough that team wins" are in one pile and the guys with questionmarks (even if they've had a successful year or two) are in another - I would say the floor is something like 59% completions, TD/INT ratio >1.5, and >6.5 YPA as well as >200-220 YPG  (Passer rating rolls in a bunch of stuff I don't think is as important, such as TD%, INT%, yards gained etc but generally speaking a guy who has these stats would have a passer rating >90)
 

Certainly I would agree that if Josh Allen is going to prove our long term answer at QB, he has to improve in all these aspects of his game.

[Doc]

23 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

I don't know about others but I never thought Tyrod was a horrible QB I thought that he had clearly reached his ceiling and that wasn't good enough to lift Buffalo into being a playoff caliber team.  The degree to which a fluke play by the Bengal's ended the Buffalo playoff drought last year can not be understated.  In fact the very next week at Jacksonville we all saw why the Bills were not a legit playoff team with their horrendous offensive performance against the Jags. 

 

It was clear to me and I suspect a lot of other people that Tyrod was not getting any help from his receivers.  As a group they were bad last year.  My guess is that the Bills realized that they needed to upgrade both the QB and most of the skill positions after their offenses showing in Jacksonville.  The first step was upgrading the QB position where they signed McCarron and  finagled their way to move up in the draft and draft Allen.  It was always their plan to upgrade their skill positions in 2019 with all that CAP money.  The only thing that screwed with their plans was the performance of McCarron & Peterman at QB which caused the Bills to have to use Allen way before they wanted to.  As it turns out Allen has been entertaining AND the experience he's gained this year will prove invaluable for next year.

 

Tyrod had some very good talent around him his first year in Buffalo.  He also had it with the Browns this year.  He is what he is.

 

16 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

Good question, why don't you look them up, do the math, and get back. 

 

I do know that they're all below average, so not sure it's really going to be defining epiphany.  

 

With the exception of Rosen, who is also looking bad and largely also because of supporting cast, the other QB's have good running games, better OL's (and WR's and TE's). 

Edited December 30, 2018 by Doc

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I think you'd have a really hard time demonstrating a correlation with PPG in the generally accepted meaning of correlation (better completion percentage/passer rating = more PPG).

You can not look at a list of the 10 best NFL teams in a season, and see that they are ranked in order of the QB's passer rating, or even correlate with a top-10 passer rating.

Nor can you look at a given QB's passer rating and completion percentage, and generally, predict whether his team was 6-10 or 10-6 that year.

 

What I think you can show is that there's a floor - if completion percentage is below a certain point and/or passer rating is below a certain point, you aren't going to win too much unless you have special circumstances like a very effective running game as well as a stout D. 

And of course, the best QB - the true Magical Franchise Guys - tend to be very high in both year in and year out.

 

The correlation is not as direct, no.