Josh Allen vs. Mahomes: Last 32 regular season starts

[Shaw66]

23 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Forget passer rating/QBR since they're jokes.  I'm talking about total yards, TDs and turnovers, and completion percentage.

Doc - Passer rating IS total yards, TDs, turnovers and completion percentage.  It's the best single number to measure passers, and probably quarterbacks generally. 

 

[PatsFanNH]

2 hours ago, TH3 said:

I mean….what are we even talking about…McCorkle gonna be goat2 right?

 

Gotta love the radio boys up here in NE….they got the Pats in the AFCCG already🤪

Dont know who you listen  but on 98.5 they still see them as a fringe playoff team.  Anyone can see that they are a few pieces on O away from challenging the Bills. 
 

also I stand by saying Mahomes is a better QB than Allen.  I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

[TH3]

3 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dont know who you listen  but on 98.5 they still see them as a fringe playoff team.  Anyone can see that they are a few pieces on O away from challenging the Bills. 
 

also I stand by saying Mahomes is a better QB than Allen.  I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

well you can go on about Mahomes better than JA…Happy we have JA and not really worried about a PM comp…..You should be worried though that McCorkle will never be good enough for any comparison to JA🤪

[Doc]

23 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

They're not jokes. They are just one of many ways to quantify a QB's success or lack of. Same as TD's, total yards, turnovers and completion percentage. Of the four you mentioned I believe Mahomes leads in all four of them over Allen unless we throw in rushing/receiving TD's. Of course, turnovers is one you don't want to lead in.

 

Yes, total yards, TDs and turnovers, including rushing.

 

11 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Doc - Passer rating IS total yards, TDs, turnovers and completion percentage.  It's the best single number to measure passers, and probably quarterbacks generally.

 

It doesn't factor-in rushing yards and TDs, and fumbles IIRC.

[Shaw66]

45 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

 

I asked you previously how you felt about pitchers and goalies getting wins that you didn't answer. I don't mind, just bring it up again because I feel like that's the reason why they are given wins and loses. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pitchers and goalies aren't the same.   It is at some level about simple mathematics.   The question is how much of credit does one person get for a win or a loss in an athletic contest.    At it's most fundamental, the amount of credit one player gets is the ratio of his contribution to to other players' contribution.   All things being equal, a basketball player gets 1/5.   He's one player out of five.   Okay, you should factor in minutes played, but for discussion purposes assume five guys go the whole game.   So, a basketball player gets 20% of the credit.  A tennis player playing singles gets 100% of the credit.   Same with a golfer.  

 

A hockey player gets 1/6. a baseball player gets 1/9 in the national league, 1/10 in the American league.  A football player gets 1/22, forgetting about special teams.   

 

So a hockey play gets 16%, a baseball player gets 10%, a football player gets less than 5%.   So without looking at it any more carefully than that, its obvious that crediting wins to one football player makes a lot less sense than to one pitcher or one hockey player.   Then you make adjustments for position.   A hockey goalie isn't 16%, he's more like 30%, and a pitcher who goes 9 isn't 10%, he's also more like 30%.  A quarterback gets more than 5% of the credit - maybe double, or 10%.  Or maybe even 15%.   But probably no more than that. 

 

It's just obvious on the numbers that QBs as less responsible for wins than goalies and pitchers.  Or golfers. 

 

Football is the ultimate team game.  Football is the game where teamwork and team precision creates a huge value added beyond the actual talents of the individuals.  

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

 

 

It doesn't factor-in rushing yards and TDs, and fumbles IIRC.

Yes, it doesn't.   What I said is that it's the best way to evaluate PASSERS, and a good way to evaluate quarterbacks.   At the end of the season, with very few exceptions, the guys with the best passer ratings were both the most effective passers in the league AND the most effective quarterbacks.   Why?   Because you to have a high passer rating you have to be among the best at reading defenses, because reading defenses is how you find easy throws, and easy throws gets you a high passer rating.  And the best QBs in the league are the best at reading defense.  

 

So, yeah, you have to add in rushing yards and TDs and fumbles.   But seriously, other than Lamar Jackson, and Murray, and Allen, rushing yards for QBs are negligible.   

[HappyDays]

23 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

 

If he is hurting why is he running out of clean pockets and missing open reads? Also his defense won him the Giants game. This year Allen has been much better than Mahomes, period. There is no reasonable argument you can make to the contrary.

[Doc]

12 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Yes, it doesn't.   What I said is that it's the best way to evaluate PASSERS, and a good way to evaluate quarterbacks.   At the end of the season, with very few exceptions, the guys with the best passer ratings were both the most effective passers in the league AND the most effective quarterbacks.   Why?   Because you to have a high passer rating you have to be among the best at reading defenses, because reading defenses is how you find easy throws, and easy throws gets you a high passer rating.  And the best QBs in the league are the best at reading defense.  

 

So, yeah, you have to add in rushing yards and TDs and fumbles.   But seriously, other than Lamar Jackson, and Murray, and Allen, rushing yards for QBs are negligible.   

 

But that's the point Shaw.  A guy like Josh (or those other guys) is more than just a passer and therefore passer rating/QBR aren't effective measures of him (them) as QBs as a whole. 

[GoBills808]

37 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Doc - Passer rating IS total yards, TDs, turnovers and completion percentage.  It's the best single number to measure passers, and probably quarterbacks generally. 

 

Adjusted net yards/attempt is more closely correlated with winning than passer rating. It’s the superior metric for evaluating quarterbacks imo.

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

You can't say to guys who won a Superbowl "you are not winners".

Like I told you before, they’re Champions!  

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

5 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Mahomes > Allen right now..

In your dreams 🛌 

 

[starrymessenger]

I will see Greg Cosell and I will raise him. JMO but I think Josh Allen will eventually (not today and probably not tomorrow) take the art of playing quarterback to a level not previously seen. I think he has the physical and mental wherewithal to do that and I think he fully intends to do it. I do think that PM has maybe pretty much plateaud, albeit at a very high level. He’s a great player and his troubles this year, however we chose to account for them, do not imo detract from what we have already seen and know. But Josh Allen has not plateaud. Though already a superstar, he’s today maybe 70%- 80% the player he will be. There are still rough edges to his game that he will refine. His talent and his prospects have yet to mature. Meanwhile there will be bad plays and also subpar games. Given the untrodden path that has led him to stardom, his career is really just getting started. Barring injury he might well play for the next 10-12 years or more.

Winning of course is important but there are some great QBs, including HoFmers, who never got there, so winning cannot be determinative in QB evaluations. Is Brady six times better than AR? Don’t think so. Its a team sport. Fortunately Allen now has the horses to help him continue to develop but its worth mentioning that it goes both ways and my eyes tell me that he actually makes them better than they make him. Josh Allen leads his team in every possible way. 

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

Like I told you before, they’re Champions!  

 

Sport is about being Champions. It is about titles and championships. It is winning those, and only those, that makes you a winner. 

[LeGOATski]

3 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dont know who you listen  but on 98.5 they still see them as a fringe playoff team.  Anyone can see that they are a few pieces on O away from challenging the Bills. 
 

also I stand by saying Mahomes is a better QB than Allen.  I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

When did he get hurt?

[Rico]

9 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

When did he get hurt?

Suffered severe exposure in the SB.

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Sport is about being Champions. It is about titles and championships. It is winning those, and only those, that makes you a winner. 

I agree with a majority of what you post Gunner, but there's not a snowballs chance in hell I'm calling Trent Diller a winner. The Ravens won the Super Bowl in spite of him, not because of him. Career numbers include a 58-55 record, more INTs than Tds(113 vs 129), completed 55.5% of his passes, averaged below 160 yards a game(Only once in his 13 year career did he average over 200 yards a game) and a QB Rating of 70.2.

 

 Even in their 4 postseason games.... Completed 47.95% of his passes, less than 148 yards a game, less than a TD a game QB Rating of 83.7.

 

He was so bad that in their 2nd game of the playoffs(Against Tenn.) he only completed 5 passes all game. Nah, they won in the regular season, playoffs and Super Bowl solely because of the defense. Anyone could've been the QB of that team, don't turn the ball over and wins will come. That defense was really good and were even better in the playoffs only giving up 5.75 points a game.

 

Diller is not a winner, he's lucky.

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

I agree with a majority of what you post Gunner, but there's not a snowballs chance in hell I'm calling Trent Diller a winner. The Ravens won the Super Bowl in spite of him, not because of him. Career numbers include a 58-55 record, more INTs than Tds(113 vs 129), completed 55.5% of his passes, averaged below 160 yards a game(Only once in his 13 year career did he average over 200 yards a game) and a QB Rating of 70.2.

 

 Even in their 4 postseason games.... Completed 47.95% of his passes, less than 148 yards a game, less than a TD a game QB Rating of 83.7.

 

He was so bad that in their 2nd game of the playoffs(Against Tenn.) he only completed 5 passes all game. Nah, they won in the regular season, playoffs and Super Bowl solely because of the defense. Anyone could've been the QB of that team, don't turn the ball over and wins will come. That defense was really good and were even better in the playoffs only giving up 5.75 points a game.

 

Diller is not a winner, he's lucky.

 

He is a winner. He has the hardware to prove it. It doesn't mean he is great, or even good. That is a different thing entirely. I dunno maybe winner has some different colloquial meaning in the US but by the actual meaning of the word Trent Dilfer being a winner is a simple matter of fact.  

[78thealltimegreat]

10 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dude! Mahomes led his team to 2 SB in 3 years and the other year they went to the AFC CHAMPIONSHIP game!  (Only playoff losses came to Brady led teams) Yes Mahomes is having a down year but I bet it’s an injury that no one knows about.. Mahomes > Allen right now.. that can change but not for at least another year and Mahomes struggling again. 

You mean a Super Bowl he lost 38-9 in and another where he’s lucky Jimmy Garafolo missed a wide open Emmanuel Sanders in the 4th quarter that would have sealed the game for the Niners? It’s not like in either Super Bowl he was exactly Joe Montana 

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

He is a winner. He has the hardware to prove it. It doesn't mean he is great, or even good. That is a different thing entirely. I dunno maybe winner has some different colloquial meaning in the US but by the actual meaning of the word Trent Dilfer being a winner is a simple matter of fact.  

It’s the chip on the shoulder effect. If Dilfer is a winner, Kelly is a loser. Can’t have that. If Mahomes is a winner, Josh isn’t (yet.)

[Doc]

The Ravens could have won that SB with literally any QB.  Kerry Collins threw 4 INTs, one of which was returned for a TD, and the Ravens scored on a KO return.  That was enough to win the game considering the Giants only scored 7 points, from a KO return of their own.

[Scott7975]

Tyrod Taylor and Rob Johnson are also winners.  They both were on teams that won the super bowl and have rings.