A Fix for failed Quarterback rating formula

[AKC]

The last time the NFL revised their QB rating formula was in 1972, long before the advent of the West Coast offense and its offspring.

 

Under the current system a player like Mark Brunnell is rated higher over his career than Jim Kelly as a passer. I can't hide my bias in JK's favor, but please folks, is there ANYONE objective who thinks Mark Brunnell is a passer deserving of mention in the same breath with Jim Kelly?

 

The two great flaws in the system as I see it are the reliance on pass attempts as the fundamental statistic upon which all the other indicators are measured, with the only weighting of those attempts being done on a yards gained basis. Ignoring the obvious flaw in yards gained versus yards thrown weighting, there is an even greater problem in ignoring defensible passes versus indefensible passes.

 

We've watched more and more as big passer ratings have been built upon little backfield passes, in fact some of the top rated QBs of the modern era play in systems where they are throwing 5-10% of their passes behind the LOS. Throwing most behind the LOS passes offers the extreme and unfair advantage that that type of pass that has little or no chance of being defensed or interrupted in any way by the defense such as by interception, with pressure, lane interference or being tipped. The very first measure the NFL should undertake in revising passer ratings is removing those types of passes from the general passer rating and possibly creating a seperate category for behind the LOS passes so as to cease penalizing the QBs in the league who play in traditional downfield offenses.

 

The second flaw is adding the Run After Catch yardage and crediting this in full measure for the QB, when the measure is supposed to be for passing. It's not like there's any mystery about the depth of passes today, there are plenty of services that measure this every week. When we're creating a measure for "passing", it seems disingenuous to convolute those numbers with the variables of whether a team has very good receivers at running after the catch or not. I can recognize that some QBs are better than others at delivering the ball to spots that allow for more RAC, but to credit the QB with the ensuing yardage gained on the ground is overall unfair to those with less swift receiving corps, etc.

 

The bottom line is we're supposed to be rating the passer's ability, not the abilities of the WRs or the lack of quality of the defenses faced, and certainly not the passer's ability to throw uncontested passes in their own backfield.

 

The measures that would result from adopting these revisions would never end the disagreements on the play of Quarterbacks, but it would go far in offering a more accurate measure of actual "passing" ability. In the quest for establishing a "passer rating" the league should take measures to stop diluting their formula with elements that offer major advantages to many lesser passers.

[Buckeye Eric]

Interesting post.

 

One thing that always got to me was that a tipped or deflected pass is counted as an INT. Once it touches another player it should be a loose ball and no longer the responsibility of the QB.

 

Additionally, when a QB is sacked scrambling with the ball, and it is obvious that he is not going to throw, it is a sack not lost yards rushing.

[smokinandjokin]

I agree, the system is whacked. They need to re-allign the numbers so that 100 is the perfect score. Enough of this 158.375 crap.

 

It is hard to say what the best changes would be. I can't say that I understand (or care, for that matter) how the current number is calculated. You make a good point about lateral or line-of-scrimmage passes, but it is hard to draw the line. I think, in most cases, yards after catch are a major function of the QB's pass. In your suggested changes, when a QB throws a 5-yard slant on the money that the receiver turns into a 30 yard gain, the QB is credited with the 5 yard pass. But what if later in the game, the other QB throws a 5-yard slant and the receiver has burnt his man off the line, but the pass is behind him and he catches it and gets hit for a gain of 5. Those two passes weigh equally, even though the second one, for lack of a better pass, would have gone for more yardage? You're punishing the first QB for putting the ball on the money and contributing to yards gained.

 

I agree, some room for changes, but I'm just not sure what those would be.

[stuckincincy]

I think the rating system is dumb in the first place. A 55% passer who goes 11 and 5 with 12 td's and 20 int's beats a 65% passer who goes 5 - 11 with 20 td's and 12 int's in my book.

 

I wonder if it's just a tool for use in contract negotiations, or NFL promotional hype...football is way over-analyzed. Folks like Lombardi would laugh.

[X. Benedict]

I think the rating system is dumb in the first place. A 55% passer who goes 11 and 5 with 12 td's and 20 int's beats a 65% passer who goes 5 - 11 with 20 td's and 12 int's in my book.

 

I wonder if it's just a tool for use in contract negotiations, or NFL promotional hype...football is way over-analyzed. Folks like Lombardi would laugh.

515621[/snapback]

 

as a point of comparison - who would you rather have Warner of Roger Staubach?

 

I think this list compliments your claims:

 

All time passer ratings

 

the one I like is Rodney Peete has a better rating than Bart Starr

 

Check that: Rodney is higher than Bradshaw not Bart.

Edited November 29, 2005 by X. Benedict

[smokinandjokin]

Vince Ferragamo ahead of Joe Ferguson

 

100 Lynn Dickey 70.94

101 Terry Bradshaw * 70.92

102 Kordell Stewart 70.7

103 TRENT DILFER 70.6

104 Bill Nelson 70.2

105 Vince Ferragamo 70.1

106 Steve Grogan 69.6

107 Doug Williams 69.4

108 Charley Johnson 69.2

109 Mike Tomczak 68.9

110 Eric Hipple 68.7

111 Joe Ferguson 68.4

[Bill from NYC]

 

the one I like is Rodney Peete has a better rating than Bart Starr.

515644[/snapback]

 

I think that I found one that is equally appalling.

Elvis Grbac is rated higher than Bert Jones.

I don't know if you are old enough to have ever seen Jones, but he (imo) was easily one of the 10 best qbs of all time. The guy had every single asset that any qb could possibly want.

Jones was the Earl Campbell of the qb position. Unreal skills and a shortened career. Grbac was a journeyman.

Yeah, this system is seriously flawed.

[X. Benedict]

I think that I found one that is equally appalling.

Elvis Grbac is rated higher than Bert Jones.

I don't know if you are old enough to have ever seen Jones, but he (imo) was easily one of the 10 best qbs of all time. The guy had every single asset that any qb could possibly want. 

Jones was the Earl Campbell of the qb position. Unreal skills and a shortened career. Grbac was a journeyman.

Yeah, this system is seriously flawed.

515686[/snapback]

 

A little before my time Jones, but I remember him best as the guy that snapped

Ivory soap in half. I have been trying to repeat that the rest of my life.

It seemed the Colts games back then, rarely sold out, so it was Van Miller.

[KD in CA]

Vince Ferragamo ahead of Joe Ferguson

515649[/snapback]

 

 

Dante Culpepper -- #3 QB all time.

 

Jeff Garcia ahead of Otto Graham.

 

Brian Griese 44 spots ahead of his father.

 

 

 

We could go on all day with this absurdity.

[Rico]

We could go on all day with this absurdity.

515705[/snapback]

Drew Bledsoe ahead of Doug Flutie.

[The Dean]

ESPN The Magazine had an interesting piece (yes, it IS hard to believe) about a new QB rating system a year or so ago. While I wasn't totally onboard with their system, it was an improvement over the current formula.

 

According to their new formula, Steve Young is the #1 QB ever...that works for me.

[AKC]

Drew Bledsoe ahead of Doug Flutie.

515713[/snapback]

 

You can't possibly still be clinging to that same invisible kite of BledsoeHate that doesn't allow you to recognize that Bledsoe has better overall talents as they relate the the NFL game than the circus act? Last check between the two is that one has led one team to the Super Bowl and earned a Super Bowl ring with another by supporting the other guys on his team while the bloody knife of.......- yeah, none of that makes any difference to the deluded.

 

The flaws in Bledsoe's game are very clear- but they are virtually invisible when measured against the flaws in the little guy's game. Do you refuse to acknowledge that there are only 7 QBs in NFL HISTORY who have more productive arms than Bledsoe's?

 

At some point it'd be best to stop embarrasing the balance of your family even if your own BledsoeHate obsession has taken on Taxi-Driveresque proportions.

 

But hey, I'm merely offering my own opinion- you should feel free to continue supporting the argument for extending euthanasia to include our underachieving youth !

[Hollywood Donahoe]

You can't possibly still be clinging to the invisible kite of BledsoeHate that doesn't allow you to recognize that Bledsoe has better overall talents as they relate the the NFL game than the circus act?

 

The flaws in Bledsoe's game are very clear- but they are nearly invisible when measured against the flaws in the little guy's game. Do you refuse to acknowledge that there are only 7 QBs in NFL HISTORY who have more productive arms than Bledsoe's?

Great points!

 

Plus, I saw in Bledsoe's passing splits on ESPN.com that his career QB rating is nearly a million and a half points higher than Flutie's.

 

I DARE you to challenge my numbers.

[AKC]

I DARE you to challenge my numbers.  

516158[/snapback]

 

There is only one thing more pathetic than a Pat's fan who has 1200 posts on a Bill's board prostelyzing the divinity of Tom Brady;

 

Any "NFL" QB throwing 4 INTs in a game.

 

 

 

Hey Bollywood- Perhaps you'd like to tell us all when the last time it was that the "horribly disgusting" Drew Bledsoe threw 4 INTs in a game?

 

The clock is ticking..........................................................................

[Rico]

You can't possibly still be clinging to that same invisible kite of BledsoeHate that doesn't allow you to recognize that Bledsoe has better overall talents as they relate the the NFL game than the circus act? Last check between the two is that one has led one team to the Super Bowl and earned a Super Bowl ring with another by supporting the other guys on his team while the bloody knife of.......- yeah, none of that makes any difference to the deluded.

516157[/snapback]

One helped save the franchise in Buffalo, the other did his best to kill it.

 

 

The flaws in Bledsoe's game are very clear- but they are virtually invisible when measured against the flaws in the little guy's game. Do you refuse to acknowledge that there are only 7 QBs in NFL HISTORY who have more productive arms than Bledsoe's?

516157[/snapback]

By your own historical standards, take a look at the #1 QB in the league this year.

 

 

At some point it'd be best to stop embarrasing the balance of your family even if your own BledsoeHate obsession has taken on Taxi-Driveresque proportions.

516157[/snapback]

You seem to like Taxi Driver a lot... I think it's overrated & far from Scorsese's or DeNiro's best.

[AKC]

One helped save the franchise in Buffalo, the other did his best to kill it.

By your own historical standards, take a look at the #1 QB in the league this year. 

 

516163[/snapback]

 

"Saved" a franchise- BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

So based upon your this idiocy post you and your alter ego Hollywood Donahoe are posting here tonight, you accept "passing yards" as a measure of productivity?

 

I approve! Where we differ is doing it for one season versus doing it over a career- but flushing your dual identities out has been a real vomit festival :-p

[Hollywood Donahoe]

There is only one thing more pathetic than a Pat's [sic] fan who has 1200 posts on a Bill's [sic] board prostelyzing the divinity of Tom Brady;

Where did I mention Brady?

 

Any "NFL" QB throwing 4 INTs in a game.

I wasn't aware that that had never happened before.

 

Hey Bollywood [sic]- Perhaps you'd like to tell us all when the last time it was that the "horribly disgusting"  Drew Bledsoe threw 4 INTs in a game?

 

The clock is ticking..........................................................................

The last time that springs to mind is against the Pats in Foxboro in '02.

 

You'd know better than I if it's happened since then.

[AKC]

Where did I mention Brady?

516165[/snapback]

 

How about in 1200 of the garbage posts you've put up on this board insisting Brady produces your household wine from his own urine!

 

4 picks- nice day of work for "the best ever"!

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Things "slow" over on the Pat's board? GET USED TO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

But leave your other posting name "Rico" here when you linevitably leave with your tail between your legs- we'll enjoy whipping you under either name!

[Hollywood Donahoe]

How about in 1200 of the garbage posts you've put up on this board insisting Brady produces your household wine from his own urine!

I don't recall making that claim.

 

4 picks- nice day of work for "the best ever"!

It was a bad game. It happens.

 

Things "slow" over on the Pat's board?

No, more active than usual, actually.

[AKC]

No, more active than usual, actually.

516169[/snapback]

 

Liars are the prey of the scavenger- please try to recover some semblance of dignity before retiring at least one of your screen names.