John Elway's take on QB rating system

[baja]

http://www.nfl.com/ce/feature/0,3783,4644182,00.html



Elway: The ratings game

By John Elway
QB Club

(Dec. 5, 2001) -- I never had a strong grasp of the NFL's passer rating formula when I was playing. I still don't. What I do know is that the guy who created the formula never played quarterback in the NFL.

Using the passing efficiency rating to compare quarterbacks is like comparing apples and oranges. To me, it's one of the greatest fallacies in the league.

Every quarterback is in a different situation, a different system. And therefore every quarterback is asked to do different things. I think the best coaches are the ones that mold the system around the type of quarterback they have, rather than trying to plug the quarterback into the system.

There are so many things outside that rating that makes a quarterback valuable. To me, the No. 1 job of a quarterback -- besides winning, of course -- is what he does on third down. The most important job for a quarterback is to keep his team on the field. He can be 0-for-2 on first and second down, pick up the third down, and that 33 percent is better than a quarterback who completes three short passes and punts on fourth-and-1. The quarterback rating does not reflect that.

A quarterback is penalized in the rating system for throwing the ball away on first down to avoid a sack, but now it's second-and-10 instead of second-and-18.

To me, the most important stat would be "third-down rating." Ranking the players who are most effective on third down would be far more informative than an overall rating.

Another thing that doesn't go into that quarterback rating is if a guy runs for a first down, whether it's a scramble or a designed play. That's being an effective quarterback.

And maybe that's the key word -- "effective." It's more meaningful in this case than "efficient." Sure, you can be an efficient passer without winning football games. But you've got to be effective in order to win.

Doug Flutie is a perfect example of an effective quarterback. He'll never have a great passing efficiency rating -- his rating this year is 74.0, which is 24th in the league. But he's helped the Chargers go from 1-15 last year to 5-7 this season. He's not necessarily a statistical darling, but he knows how to win. And to me, that's a characteristic that elevates a quarterback's status from good to great.

West Coast bias
It's no surprise that Steve Young and Joe Montana have the highest career passer ratings in NFL history. Taking nothing away from these great players, it should be noted that the West Coast offense, without question, is a system that lends to a high passing efficiency. It's the type of offense that aims for a high completion percentage, and it allows for more touchdown passes because they throw a lot inside the 10-yard line.

It's no surprise that my best years, ratings-wise, came when the Broncos switched to the West Coast offense. My highest career rating was actually my final season in the league, 93.0 in 1998. My second-best rating was 92.8 in 1993 -- that was the year Jim Fassel came in as offensive coordinator and installed the West Coast offense. Despite the high rating, however, we didn't make the playoffs that year.

On the other hand, I also had some years where the rating was pretty bad -- and some of those years ended in the Super Bowl. Here are my ratings for the first three years we played in the Super Bowl:

1986 - 79.0
1987 - 83.4
1989 - 73.7

Right after the head coach, the quarterback is next in line as far as being responsible for wins and losses. So it's hard for me to understand why winning and losing wouldn't be part of the passing efficiency rating. I understand that, in our society, there's always a need to compare everybody. I just think there can be a lot of adjustments made to this rating system that would give people a better idea of who the most effective quarterbacks are.

And that's not completing an 8-yard pass on third-and-12.

Some of the best quarterbacks in the NFL today are at or near the top of the ratings -- guys like Rich Gannon, Jeff Garcia, Kurt Warner, Brett Favre and Tom Brady.

But here are a few examples of quarterbacks who are playing much better than their ratings imply:

Jay Fiedler, Dolphins: Ranks 17th in the league with a rating of 78.7, but his team's in first place. Miami's philosophy is to win with defense and try not to turn the ball over, so passer rating isn't as important. But last week, Fiedler found his team down by 10 in the fourth quarter and he figured out a way to score a couple of offensive touchdowns and help the Dolphins win.

Kordell Stewart, Steelers: Ranks 16th with a rating of 80.8. Here's a perfect example of an offensive coordinator doing a great job of molding the system around what his quarterback does best -- keeping him out of situations that he doesn't handle as well.

Jim Miller, Bears: Ranks 26th with a rating of 73.1. But anybody quarterbacking a team that's 9-2 has got to be doing something right.




Elway thinks Jay Fiedler is one QB who is playing better than his rating implies.
• NFL quarterback rating formula
• Record & Fact Book
• Boomer's Week 13 notebook
• Simms: Attacking with the 3-4

[Broncoman13]

I think ratings are totally overrated!!!

How can one argue against W's. That's what it's all about is it not. I'd take a guy like Tom Brady over a guy like Culpepper any day. Some QB's can put up great #'s...some QB's just win at all costs. Give me the QB that wins at all costs!

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Kordell Stewart, Jay Fiedler and Jim Miller! :unamused:

Green's third down rating was 108.9.

Plummer's was 81.8.

[scorpio]

Kordell Stewart, Jay Fiedler and Jim Miller! :unamused:

Green's third down rating was 108.9.

Plummer's was 81.8.

You're getting desperate, Bob. Digging up 4 year old articles to illustrate some imagined point? :nono:

[Bob's your Information Minister]

You're getting desperate, Bob. Digging up 4 year old articles to illustrate some imagined point? :nono:

I am sorry I posted this thread. What is my punishment.

[24champ]

I think ratings are totally overrated!!!

How can one argue against W's. That's what it's all about is it not. I'd take a guy like Tom Brady over a guy like Culpepper any day. Some QB's can put up great #'s...some QB's just win at all costs. Give me the QB that wins at all costs!

So if QB ratings are overrated then TRINT is overrated.....

[scorpio]

I give you this one chance to come clean and admit you are gay for the Broncos. If you accept, you can begin your career as a Broncos plebian and (continue to) take the abuse and insults of your fellow OManers until such time as you are deemed "okay."

Otherwise, your harassment on Tuesday will be merciless. MERCILESS.


Choose wisely.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Do you think I should delete this thread?

[Arkie]

To me, the No. 1 job of a quarterback -- besides winning, of course -- is what he does on third down.


2003, 2004, and 2005 to date:

Plummer has a 72% winning percentage.
Green has a 65% winning percentage.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Why isolate three years?

[Arkie]

Why isolate three years?

That's two years and two games that Jake played for Denver.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

That's two years and two games that Jake played for Denver.

Indeed. Why isolate only that portion of his career?

[scorpio]

Do you think I should delete this thread?

I think you should drink bleach.

[Arkie]

Indeed. Why isolate only that portion of his career?

I guess because Arizona isn't a fair place to measure a QB's effectiveness. Kurt Warner looked great in Vermeil's offense too, even better than Green.

[baja]

Do you think I should delete this thread?

Yes Bob go ahead and delete this thread.

[Arkie]

Bob's confused.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

I guess because Arizona isn't a fair place to measure a QB's effectiveness. Kurt Warner looked great in Vermeil's offense too, even better than Green.

What a load of crap. Let's eliminate the portion of the data that blows a giant hole in your argument. Yeah, that's fair.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

You're getting desperate, Bob. Digging up 4 year old articles to illustrate some imagined point? :nono:

I think Scorpiosnow is the one that's confused.

[Broncoman13]

Why isolate three years?


Why ask stupid questions???

[ludo21]

I cant argue with the GOAT

[Play2win]

I think the Duke is right on with his thinking. Along those lines, I think a very good stat to be made an official stat, would be First Downs Made. 3rd Down coversions are extreamly crucial, but what of all those 1st downs made on 2nd down, or even 1st down, you are still moving the chains.

I might goes as far to say, you find the QB that makes the most 1st down (regardless of what down he is on), and you would have one of the very best in the game. That would be a good bar for measuring QBs by, First Downs Made.

[scorpio]

I think the Duke is right on with his thinking. Along those lines, I think a very good stat to be made an official stat, would be First Downs Made. 3rd Down coversions are extreamly crucial, but what of all those 1st downs made on 2nd down, or even 1st down, you are still moving the chains.

I might goes as far to say, you find the QB that makes the most 1st down (regardless of what down he is on), and you would have one of the very best in the game. That would be a good bar for measuring QBs by, First Downs Made.

But that discriminates against QB's who complete long passes. In some circumstances you might only have 3 first downs but still score a TD

[Play2win]

But that discriminates against QB's who complete long passes. In some circumstances you might only have 3 first downs but still score a TD
That is true, Maybe a percentage of 1st downs made compared to all plays (passing and scrambling) made. That way if there were only 3 plays, but they were all big plays, he would be batting 100% on his FDP.

[Mediator12]

This is crazytalk. Denver's horrible defense was #1 the last two years in first down's surrendered. We can not use anything positive to reflect their impact on this team. If it's negative however, FIRE COYER!

[Atlas]

I am sorry I posted this thread. What is my punishment.


Do you want another spanking by Bubba.. I thought so.

[Rocket 7]

John Elway's QB rating was never the best. His fourth quarter comebacks 47 and all-time wins 148 is the best

[Rocket 7]

5-1 in AFC Championship games. 6-0 if it wasn't for Carlton F'N Bailey. Just as well Washington would of killed us in Super Bowl XXIV

[watermock]

The Duke never had great ratings, yet he was always considered a premier QB, even when Reeves throttled him and frustrated him, asking him to pull wabbits out of the hat in crunch time.

It's nice John wrote a little about it. I would think he would have his hands full with the WORLD CHAMPION CRUSH, and his golf game at Cherry Creek, but he's completely correct in his analysis. Pass rating is an odd mixture of completion percentage and voodoo economics. Just for an example...suppose a QB throws a pick that makes the coach change his game plan. Compare that to Jake, who was hopelessly behind in the 4th and threw two picks in desperation. I didn't like the picks, but I understand them. Does the computer?

[Rocket 7]

A quarterback drives his team from his ten. Dinking and dunking his way to their five. Fumbles the snap and the ball is returned for a touchdown. The rating didn't help him in winning the game This is an overrated way to rank quarterback's in such a team dominated sport.

[orange 4 life]

the article is obviously dated, but its right on the money.

ive been saying that for years.
"qb rating" is the single most overrated stat in all of SPORTS.
its flawed in so many area's its laughable that its used as a measuring stick
by so many.

in football more than ANY other sport, stats as a whole are overrated.

in baseball, what a guy is batting is pretty easy to gauge, and pretty accurate to how good he is. sure, who he hits behind and what division he plays in are a factor, but overall, you can pretty easily judge by stats.

in basketball, its a definate team sport, but at the same time individuals make an impact. sure, who's dishing the ball makes a difference as does the surrounding talent, but you can gauge pretty well who's doing what by the stats.

hockey too. linemates are extremely important, but if you score you score, and if you get the assist you get the assist. assists of course are VERY dependant upon linemates, but the stats are still very relevant.

football is a different breed.
everything is so COMPLETELY dependant upon the offensive system, the line, the backs, receivers, etc.
its SO dependant on SO MANY things that stats can and often are EXTREMELY misleading.

so how do you know you who's the best?

simply WATCH the games and you'll see. you might see a back average 3 yards a carry and be better than a guy averaging 5.
clevelands system or denvers for a back?
thats what i thought.
denvers 80's system for a qb or the niners 80's system?
no question.

the stats can be a tool, but not a very reliable one.
the best tools for judging football talent is a good set of eyes and a brain.
watch the game, watch the player, and for God's sake take into consideration the surrounding talent, the system, and the situations.
in todays fantasy football crazed atmosphere, very little of this real analysis actually happens. people just look at stats and think thats the tale of the tape.
its not......by a long shot.

jake

[Circle Orange]

DANG. And here I thought this was a #7 "Comeback" thread...http://scosoft.com/s/p/38356717.gif

[Bob's your Information Minister]

you might see a back average 3 yards a carry and be better than a guy averaging 5.

WTF?

[GreatBronco16]

WTF?


Lets just say that a RB puts ups 90 yards on 20 carries and has 3 TDs and his team wins, compared to a RB that has 150 yards on 20 carries and has 0 TDs and his team wins by the same score. Who would you say had the better day? I know your answer. Your answer is the guy with more yards.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Lets just say that a RB puts ups 90 yards on 20 carries and has 3 TDs and his team wins, compared to a RB that has 150 yards on 20 carries and has 0 TDs and his team wins by the same score. Who would you say had the better day? I know your answer. Your answer is the guy with more yards.

Depends. Corey Dillon had alot of great days in Cincy but his team lost because he had ****e around him.

I think it's safe to say anyone that averages 3 yards a carry over the course of a season is not even close to a RB that averages 5 yards a carry. Bad example by Orange 4 Life. But then, this is the guy that is in love with Jake Plummer.

[Dukes]

"Every quarterback is in a different situation, a different system. And therefore every quarterback is asked to do different things. I think the best coaches are the ones that mold the system around the type of quarterback they have, rather than trying to plug the quarterback into the system"

I thought that was an interesting statement, considering that Shannahan molds his QB's around the system. It truely his Shanny's way or the highway

[GreatBronco16]

Depends. Corey Dillon had alot of great days in Cincy but his team lost because he had ****e around him.

I think it's safe to say anyone that averages 3 yards a carry over the course of a season is not even close to a RB that averages 5 yards a carry. Bad example by Orange 4 Life. But then, this is the guy that is in love with Jake Plummer.


Ok. Guy A has a 3.5 ypc average and 1200 yards for the season and scores 15 TDs rushing. Guy B has a 5.2 ypc average and 1300 yards for the season and scores 3 TDs rushing. Who would you say had the better year overall?


IMO, it is really just a matter of opinion. Between those two, I'd take the guy that scores more. Given his average, he still manages to move the chains and get first downs.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Ok. Guy A has a 3.5 ypc average and 1200 yards for the season and scores 15 TDs rushing. Guy B has a 5.2 ypc average and 1300 yards for the season and scores 3 TDs rushing. Who would you say had the better year overall?


IMO, it is really just a matter of opinion. Between those two, I'd take the guy that scores more. Given his average, he still manages to move the chains and get first downs.

When was the last time anyone that averaged 3.5 ypc scored 15 touchdowns?

Conversely, when was the last time someone that averaged 5.2 ypc scored less than 10 TDs?

[Mediator12]

And who does this sound like:

And that's not completing an 8-yard pass on third-and-12.

Hmmm, sounds like 5 or 6 situations from the SD game to me. It's funny how no one has the cajones to compare Jake from Elways analysis.

[GreatBronco16]

When was the last time anyone that averaged 3.5 ypc scored 15 touchdowns?

Conversely, when was the last time someone that averaged 5.2 ypc scored less than 10 TDs?


It's a hypothetical question boob. If you just want to dodge the simple question then just say that you pass.

But I'll answer your question.

LT last year, Bettis last year, Davis(CAR) last year. All three had 13 or more TDs, LT had 17 and all three had less than 4.0 ypc.

Now spin away.

[GreatBronco16]

Conversely, when was the last time someone that averaged 5.2 ypc scored less than 10 TDs?


Last year was the last time. Only one RB averaged 5.0 ypc or better last year and he only had 4 rushing TDs last year. S.Jackson from the Rams.

[GreatBronco16]

Conversely, when was the last time someone that averaged 5.2 ypc scored less than 10 TDs?


Just to add to the list. Westbrook in 2003 had a 5.2 ypc and only had 7 TDs. Should I keep adding or do you want me to stop now? I could add Dunn and Barlow in 2003 to that list also but I'm sure you will find a problem with it.

Also in 2003, Marshall Faulk had a 3.9 ypc average and had 10 TDs. Rick Williams had a 3.5 ypc average and allmost got there with 9 TDs.

[DivineLegion]

Last year was the last time. Only one RB averaged 5.0 ypc or better last year and he only had 4 rushing TDs last year. S.Jackson from the Rams.

and how many games did he start...

[GreatBronco16]

and how many games did he start...


Enough to be included in the stat book for average. He played in 14 games.

How bout this. Last year there were 29 RBs that had a 4.0 ypc average or better. Of those 29 RBs, only 7 of them had 10 or more TDs. If you inclued M.Vick, than there are 30 with that average but still only 7 that score 10 or more times.

[yavoon]

what I dont like about all these ninnies who go around and say this statistical rating is crap and that statistical rating is crap is u can make ur own rating! want to include 3rd down conversion? want to include successful runs off audibles? want to include anything u want! as long as u can give it a weight u can do it.

the difference between how john elway evaluates quarterbacks and how the qb rating does it is much less than ppl think. they both use a multitude of criteria weighted in a particular way. the only thing is elway's way is foggy and hard to nail down(as most anyone's subjective opinion is), whereas the qb rating system is a formula for anyone to look at. were we actually able to wrench elway's way out of him I'm sure we could then tear it apart as it would hold all his prejudices over his life.

[DB-Freak]

what I dont like about all these ninnies who go around and say this statistical rating is crap and that statistical rating is crap is u can make ur own rating! want to include 3rd down conversion? want to include successful runs off audibles? want to include anything u want! as long as u can give it a weight u can do it.

the difference between how john elway evaluates quarterbacks and how the qb rating does it is much less than ppl think. they both use a multitude of criteria weighted in a particular way. the only thing is elway's way is foggy and hard to nail down(as most anyone's subjective opinion is), whereas the qb rating system is a formula for anyone to look at. were we actually able to wrench elway's way out of him I'm sure we could then tear it apart as it would hold all his prejudices over his life.
How about that DOAV rating?

I'm not sure of the exact name, but if I heard that is a pretty good rating system for QBs.

[yavoon]

How about that DOAV rating?

I'm not sure of the exact name, but if I heard that is a pretty good rating system for QBs.

yes dvoa. its footballoutsiders.com which is a site dedicated to indepth statistical analysis. it stands for value over average(forget what the d is at this time, I think its a weighting for SOS(strength of schedule)).

its basically an analysis of the value gained by a players performance over what a typical or average player would do in a similar situation.

[DB-Freak]

yes dvoa. its footballoutsiders.com which is a site dedicated to indepth statistical analysis. it stands for value over average(forget what the d is at this time, I think its a weighting for SOS(strength of schedule)).

its basically an analysis of the value gained by a players performance over what a typical or average player would do in a similar situation.
How you like it?

I don't know how it is made exactly.

[yavoon]

How you like it?

I don't know how it is made exactly.

I think its fun to read about. its proprietary, they may or may not actually give u how to do it, but I doubt it. it goes play by play, not box scores. its done on excel.

[yavoon]

for instance last years total dvoa ranks were

new england
pittsburgh
indy
philly
buffalo
jets
denver
san diego
baltimore
kansas city

I hope everyone notices 3/4 of the afc west is in the top 10.

[DB-Freak]

it goes play by play, not box scores.
Wow that's a very interesting.

[ozomulsion]

Wow that's a very interesting.

ROFL! yavoon is a very interesting guy.

[DB-Freak]

I meant to say that's a very interesting concept.

[DB-Freak]

ROFL! yavoon is a very interesting guy.

I don't follow you.......

[ozomulsion]

I don't follow you.......

Jokes DB, just jokes