QB Passer Rating

[BobbyC81]

Josh getting the “perfect” 158.3 brings to mind the issue I have with the Passer Rating.   It is so dumb.  So, Josh got the “perfect” score.  Was he perfect? No.   Did he complete all his attempts?  No.  Many QBs have received the perfect rating and there is no common defined data for them to get it.

 

First, I’ll take that part on.   To me, a perfect score should be for a QB throwing one pass for a TD for 99 yards.  The only way to match that should be to go 2 for 2 with both passes for 99 yard TDs.  Their system is flawed.  There are 4 calculations based on Pass Attempts, Completions, Passing Yards, TD Passes and INTs.   
 

One of the calculations is:

 

d = 2.375 -  (INT/ATT x 25).   
 

WTF!!  Where did they come up with the 2.375?   What does the 25 represent?
 

Then there’s a comment that if any calculation is greater than 2.375, it is set to 2.375.  If any result is less than zero, it is set to zero.  What?!!!

 

Many numbers we experience in life in the US of A are based on tens and hundreds.  Why do they have a perfect score be 158.3?
 

 

[Dr.Sack]

100% 

1 minute ago, BobbyC81 said:

Josh getting the “perfect” 158.3 brings to mind the issue I have with the Passer Rating.   It is so dumb.  So, Josh got the “perfect” score.  Was he perfect? No.   Did he complete all his attempts?  No.  Many QBs have received the perfect rating and there is no common defined data for them to get it.

 

First, I’ll take that part on.   To me, a perfect score should be for a QB throwing one pass for a TD for 99 yards.  The only way to match that should be to go 2 for 2 with both passes for 99 yard TDs.  Their system is flawed.  There are 4 calculations based on Pass Attempts, Completions, Passing Yards, TD Passes and INTs.   
 

One of the calculations is:

 

d = 2.375 -  (INT/ATT x 25).   
 

WTF!!  Where did they come up with the 2.375?   What does the 25 represent?
 

Then there’s a comment that if any calculation is greater than 2.375, it is set to 2.375.  If any result is less than zero, it is set to zero.  What?!!!

 

Many numbers we experience in life in the US of A are based on tens and hundreds.  Why do they have a perfect score be 158.3?
 

 

Agreed. Also hurdles and angry run stiff arms should count. 

[sven233]

It really is a strange calculation.  During the "Perfect Game" against NE* in the Playoffs a couple years ago, he actually had a perfect rating until he threw his last TD pass.  Yup.....a completed TD pass actually brought his rating down.  I remember the discussions about this happening and yeah.....it's a very strange metric and calculation.

Edited October 3, 2023 by sven233

[LABILLBACKER]

I kinda ignore the rating and go with the qbr. At least it factors in the qb's ability to run.  Josh is ranked 3rd in the NFL behind Purdy & Tua. In 3-4 weeks I can see Josh lead the NFL in QBR.

[GoBills808]

i prefer ANY/A for QBs personally

 

qb rating has a ton of flaws

[GoBills808]

27 minutes ago, BobbyC81 said:

Josh getting the “perfect” 158.3 brings to mind the issue I have with the Passer Rating.   It is so dumb.  So, Josh got the “perfect” score.  Was he perfect? No.   Did he complete all his attempts?  No.  Many QBs have received the perfect rating and there is no common defined data for them to get it.

 

First, I’ll take that part on.   To me, a perfect score should be for a QB throwing one pass for a TD for 99 yards.  The only way to match that should be to go 2 for 2 with both passes for 99 yard TDs.  Their system is flawed.  There are 4 calculations based on Pass Attempts, Completions, Passing Yards, TD Passes and INTs.   
 

One of the calculations is:

 

d = 2.375 -  (INT/ATT x 25).   
 

WTF!!  Where did they come up with the 2.375?   What does the 25 represent?
 

Then there’s a comment that if any calculation is greater than 2.375, it is set to 2.375.  If any result is less than zero, it is set to zero.  What?!!!

 

Many numbers we experience in life in the US of A are based on tens and hundreds.  Why do they have a perfect score be 158.3?
 

 

It's designed (back in the early 1970s mind you) so that each component would be constrained to 2.375 because they had set 1 as the baseline average QB performance...that measures out to a 66.7. That was an average QB performance in 1971 according to passer rating

[MJS]

It's perfectly fine because we all understand, in general, how good of a game the passer had. The closer to 158.3, the better they threw the ball. The lower, the worse they threw the ball.

 

It isn't the only metric you use to look at a QB. That doesn't exist. You have to take into account many different metrics. Passer rating is one, and it should be one. Part of the reason why it should be one is because everyone is used to it and immediately comprehends what a good and bad passer rating is.

 

I like passer rating better than QBR, because I think that inflates rushing stats, but that is another metric to consider, with all the rest. Nobody should look at only one metric and expect to understand how a player performed. They need to all be taken together.

19 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

i prefer ANY/A for QBs personally

 

qb rating has a ton of flaws

It doesn't have any flaws. It does exactly what it purports to do. The flaw is in the interpretation. If someone looks at passer rating and expects to completely understand how a player performed just from that, they are misusing the metric.

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, MJS said:

It's perfectly fine because we all understand, in general, how good of a game the passer had. The closer to 158.3, the better they threw the ball. The lower, the worse they threw the ball.

 

It isn't the only metric you use to look at a QB. That doesn't exist. You have to take into account many different metrics. Passer rating is one, and it should be one. Part of the reason why it should be one is because everyone is used to it and immediately comprehends what a good and bad passer rating is.

 

I like passer rating better than QBR, because I think that inflates rushing stats, but that is another metric to consider, with all the rest. Nobody should look at only one metric and expect to understand how a player performed. They need to all be taken together.

It doesn't have any flaws. It does exactly what it purports to do. The flaw is in the interpretation. If someone looks at passer rating and expects to completely understand how a player performed just from that, they are misusing the metric.

it has a ton of flaws

 

first of all it counts completions twice, so essentially passer rating says a completion is worth about 20 yards of offense when we know that most completions go for far less

 

it also penalizes interceptions too heavily...INTs are worth about -100yards according to passer rating and that's simply an inaccurate assessment considering a TD is only worth about 80

 

you like it and thats fine but saying it doesn't have any flaws is not correct

[Sierra Foothills]

57 minutes ago, BobbyC81 said:

Josh getting the “perfect” 158.3 brings to mind the issue I have with the Passer Rating.   It is so dumb.  So, Josh got the “perfect” score.  Was he perfect? No.   Did he complete all his attempts?  No.  Many QBs have received the perfect rating and there is no common defined data for them to get it.

 

First, I’ll take that part on.   To me, a perfect score should be for a QB throwing one pass for a TD for 99 yards.  The only way to match that should be to go 2 for 2 with both passes for 99 yard TDs.  Their system is flawed.  There are 4 calculations based on Pass Attempts, Completions, Passing Yards, TD Passes and INTs.   
 

One of the calculations is:

 

d = 2.375 -  (INT/ATT x 25).   
 

WTF!!  Where did they come up with the 2.375?   What does the 25 represent?
 

Then there’s a comment that if any calculation is greater than 2.375, it is set to 2.375.  If any result is less than zero, it is set to zero.  What?!!!

 

Many numbers we experience in life in the US of A are based on tens and hundreds.  Why do they have a perfect score be 158.3?
 

 

 

I'm not gonna post in your topic if you're gonna be angry and use swear words.

 

[MJS]

2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

it has a ton of flaws

 

first of all it counts completions twice, so essentially passer rating says a completion is worth about 20 yards of offense when we know that most completions go for far less

 

it also penalizes interceptions too heavily...INTs are worth about -100yards according to passer rating and that's simply an inaccurate assessment considering a TD is only worth about 80

 

you like it and thats fine but saying it doesn't have any flaws is not correct

It's not correct to say it is flawed. That's your opinion too. The metric measures what the original person who created it wanted it to. To them, an INT is worth more than a TD, and I completely agree. Throwing an INT is worse for your team than throwing a TD is good for your team. If your TD's equal your INT's, that is a poor day throwing the football.

 

Passer rating is perfectly fine if we understand it and don't try to make it something it isn't.

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, MJS said:

It's not correct to say it is flawed. That's your opinion too. The metric measures what the original person who created it wanted it to. To them, an INT is worth more than a TD, and I completely agree. Throwing an INT is worse for your team than throwing a TD is good for your team. If your TD's equal your INT's, that is a poor day throwing the football.

 

Passer rating is perfectly fine if we understand it and don't try to make it something it isn't.

a TD is always worth 6 points

 

an INT is NOT always worth -6 points, in fact EPA of an interception is nearer -4.5

[Thurman#1]

3 hours ago, BobbyC81 said:

Josh getting the “perfect” 158.3 brings to mind the issue I have with the Passer Rating.   It is so dumb.  So, Josh got the “perfect” score.  Was he perfect? No.   Did he complete all his attempts?  No.  Many QBs have received the perfect rating and there is no common defined data for them to get it.

 

First, I’ll take that part on.   To me, a perfect score should be for a QB throwing one pass for a TD for 99 yards.  The only way to match that should be to go 2 for 2 with both passes for 99 yard TDs.  Their system is flawed.  There are 4 calculations based on Pass Attempts, Completions, Passing Yards, TD Passes and INTs.   
 

One of the calculations is:

 

d = 2.375 -  (INT/ATT x 25).   
 

WTF!!  Where did they come up with the 2.375?   What does the 25 represent?
 

Then there’s a comment that if any calculation is greater than 2.375, it is set to 2.375.  If any result is less than zero, it is set to zero.  What?!!!

 

Many numbers we experience in life in the US of A are based on tens and hundreds.  Why do they have a perfect score be 158.3?
 

 

 

 

It's flawed.

 

Still a useful stat, though. More useful than most.

[Thurman#1]

2 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

a TD is always worth 6 points

 

an INT is NOT always worth -6 points, in fact EPA of an interception is nearer -4.5

 

 

A TD is always worth six points.

 

But the EPA of an interception depends on where on the field it happens.

 

More, If your TD is taken away from you, by a penalty or a drop, you don't lose six points of EPA. Unless it was 4th down, you've got another chance at a slightly lower EPA. You might easily run the next down and score the six points on the ground.

 

He's absolutely right that throwing an INT is worse for your team than throwing a TD is good. If you had run instead of throwing you might also have scored a TD.

 

 

Edited October 3, 2023 by Thurman#1

[GoBills808]

Just now, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

A TD is always worth six points.

 

But the EPA of an interception depends on where on the field it happens.

 

More, If your TD is taken away from you, by a penalty or a drop, you don't lose six points of EPA. Unless it was 4th down, you've got another chance at a slightly lower EPA.

yes correct

 

i was explaining that the EPA of an INT averages a little more than 4pts

[Thurman#1]

8 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

yes correct

 

i was explaining that the EPA of an INT averages a little more than 4pts

 

 

Yes, but a TD pass can be worth a ton less in terms of EPA.. Most TDs are from the red zone. And red zone TDs aren't worth all that much in terms of EPA. Not to mention that a one yard TD pass is worth zero more than a one yard TD run.

 

TD passes are not as helpful to your team as INTs are harmful.

 

Total passer rating (team passer rating minus your team's defensive passer rating) correlates very well with team success.

 

 

Edited October 3, 2023 by Thurman#1

[GoBills808]

to illustrate why passer rating is hopelessly flawed and too heavily weights completions

 

QB1: 20/40 for 600 yards no TDs or INTS- passer rating of 95.8

QB2: 20/20 for 150 yards no TDs or INTs- passer rating of 97.9

 

passer rating basically says the inherent value of a completion (for zero yards mind you) is still somehow worth 22.5 yards lol...QB1 is getting 15 yards every time he throws the ball while QB2 gets 7.5

[GunnerBill]

Passer rating is imperfect. It is still better than QBR. 

[Doc Brown]

Some nerd should take all the different QB rating metrics out there (passer rating, pff grade, qbr, DVOA, EPA, etc.) and average it out to give the most accurate ranking.  To me the eye test of a skilled observer will always win out though.

[skibum]

For the London game, they will be using the metric system. Josh will have a passer rating of 100. 

[Chaos]

Oddly for all the complaints about passer rating, over the course of a season it is pretty effective at identifying the top QBs, and it correlates very well with winning football games.