W/L Record: QB stat or not?

[Nav22]

It’s pretty simple, but I see CZ members struggle with this mightily on a regular basis.

IF YOU BELIEVE W/L RECORD IS A QB STAT:

Dak is 53-32 in the regular season and 1-3 in the playoffs. Those are his records, period. You don’t get to take away his great regular season record and only blame him for the playoff record. Nor can you credit him for the regular season record without blaming him for the playoff record.

IF YOU DON’T BELIEVE W/L RECORD IS A QB STAT:

You can’t blame Dak for the 1-3 playoff record, just like you can’t credit him for the 53-32 regular season record. Those are TEAM stats.

Thanks, and go Bills tonight!

 

[Nav22]

For the record, I personally believe it’s justifiable to call W/L record a QB stat in a general sense, because there’s such a strong correlation between how good a QB is and how good their team’s W/L record is.

There’s exceptions every year (Romo’s 8-8 years, Drew Brees’ 7-9 years, etc.), but the best QBs in NFL history all have very good CAREER records in the regular season.

Not a coincidence.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

W/L is a team stat.

The QB only plays on 1 of 3 parts of the team.

 

[Nav22]

W/L is a team stat.

Fair enough. Then don’t blame Dak for the playoff losses like you’ve done in the past. Those were team losses.

 

[Tangle_Foot]

It's a team sport, how many games have we lost because we couldn't stop the run, getting consistently gassed, one could make an argument that the W-L record is a defensive tackle stat

You generally lose if you can't stop the run.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

It is strongly affiliated with being a QB stat, but not directly one no.

QBs can win their team games they should have definitely lost. QBs can also lose their team games they should have definitely won.

It’s not unlike win/loss in baseball. Is that REALLY a pitching stat? Well yes kinda, but all-encompassingly no.

 

[jazzcat22]

It is used by fans and media to prop up or put down a QB
Otherwise it is a team stat.

 

[thunderpimp91]

It's a huge grey area. I think W/L matters, but with all stats around the NFL you need deeper context. Put Dak on the Bears this year and I still don't think they win more than 5 games. Put Dak on the Rams and they are still a legitimate super bowl contender. Over the long haul though a QB W/L record tends to tell an accurate story more often than not.

 

[Adreme]

For the record, I personally believe it’s justifiable to call W/L record a QB stat in a general sense, because there’s such a strong correlation between how good a QB is and how good their team’s W/L record is.

There’s exceptions every year (Romo’s 8-8 years, Drew Brees’ 7-9 years, etc.), but the best QBs in NFL history all have very good CAREER records in the regular season.

Not a coincidence.

It is a coincidence. Matt Stafford did not suddenly become a great QB last year, but now people finally see how good he has been his entire career. The league has had no shortage of good to great QBs who were stuck on bad teams. Now great players do tend to win more so there is a slight correlation but they are no more a QB stat than a G stat or a K stat.

 

[KJJ]

The QB is the only player given a W/L record because they influence the outcome of games more than any other position. Pitchers in baseball are given W/L records. Head coaches are given W/L records and are judged by them.

 

[zrinkill]

Only if ......
It's good and you like the QB
Or .......
It's bad and you do not like the QB

 

[Nav22]

It is a coincidence. Matt Stafford did not suddenly become a great QB last year, but now people finally see how good he has been his entire career. The league has had no shortage of good to great QBs who were stuck on bad teams. Now great players do tend to win more so there is a slight correlation but they are no more a QB stat than a G stat or a K stat.

It’s way more than a “slight correlation.”

Teams with good to great QBs usually have good to great records.

Teams with crappy QBs usually have crappy records.

Of course there’s exceptions every year, but over the course of a QB’s career, their W/L record is USUALLY pretty indicative of how effective they were.

 

[Brax]

It’s pretty simple, but I see CZ members struggle with this mightily on a regular basis.

IF YOU BELIEVE W/L RECORD IS A QB STAT:

Dak is 53-32 in the regular season and 1-3 in the playoffs. Those are his records, period. You don’t get to take away his great regular season record and only blame him for the playoff record. Nor can you credit him for the regular season record without blaming him for the playoff record.

IF YOU DON’T BELIEVE W/L RECORD IS A QB STAT:

You can’t blame Dak for the 1-3 playoff record, just like you can’t credit him for the 53-32 regular season record. Those are TEAM stats.

Thanks, and go Bills tonight!

W L is QB, HC and team stat, they are all judged by it HC get fired because of it . QBs get payed to win big games that just hasn’t happened for many years in Dallas , it’s better to keep looking than pay joe average QB who doesn’t have the ability to take the team to the next level. QB and HC have W L records it is what it is.

 

[Nav22]

W L is QB, HC and team stat, they are all judged by it HC get fired because of it . QBs get payed to win big games that just hasn’t happened for many years in Dallas , it’s better to keep looking than pay joe average QB who doesn’t have the ability to take the team to the next level. QB and HC have W L records it is what it is.

Then Dak’s 53-32 regular season record counts as HIS record.

You don’t get to blame him for the playoff losses while pretending the stellar regular season record has nothing to do with him.

 

[Jake]

Greatest comeback in SB history, Brady bringing the Patriots back from 3-28 to win 34-28 in OT.

Brady could've put up all of those late points, but if the Falcons keep scoring it becomes "garbage time" stats. His defense shut out Atlanta. He doesn't play defense.

W/L is a team stat.

 

[thunderpimp91]

Then Dak’s 53-32 regular season record counts as HIS record.

You don’t get to blame him for the playoff losses while pretending the stellar regular season record has nothing to do with him.

I mostly agree with you, and my thought process is that W/L records carry more weight with larger sample sizes so a four game playoff record isnt really fair to judge a qb off of.

To play the other side of that argument though does it make sense to weigh playoff games and records more than regular season games? I'm not sure of the answer but the argument that your record in the playoffs going against the best teams carries some sort of value.

 

[Nav22]

Greatest comeback in SB history, Brady bringing the Patriots back from 3-28 to win 34-28 in OT.

Brady could've put up all of those late points, but if the Falcons keep scoring it becomes "garbage time" stats. His defense shut out Atlanta. He doesn't play defense.

W/L is a team stat.

Great point.

And then Brady would’ve been blamed for contributing to the 28-3 deficit in the first place.

 

[Brax]

Then Dak’s 53-32 regular season record counts as HIS record.

You don’t get to blame him for the playoff losses while pretending the stellar regular season record has nothing to do with him.

You look at it with blinders on, look at his whole body of work and against who those W came against. Be honest Dak has disappeared in games that are critical and he excelled against lower end teams. We aren’t talking about a QB that beat the dregs and beat good teams to play in 10 SBs or makes it to ccg’s often. To me Daks W L records when viewed in context to the teams success and his play in crucial games makes him a mid level QB and his poor play for 2 to 3 quarters in those games makes him a large part of the blame. A QB has to play at a high level the majority of a game and to this point in time that just hasn’t happened. Can that change, yes but based on history it isn’t going to unless the D can cover up his warts and hold teams to less than 14 points a game. Simple fact is Dak is just not going to win games on his talent like marquee QB’s do with less talent around them. Dak around 9 to 14 without elite talent on both sides of the ball isn’t going to get it done.

 

[KJJ]

W L is QB, HC and team stat, they are all judged by it HC get fired because of it . QBs get payed to win big games that just hasn’t happened for many years in Dallas , it’s better to keep looking than pay joe average QB who doesn’t have the ability to take the team to the next level. QB and HC have W L records it is what it is.

QBs who give you a chance get paid. If you don’t want to pay a good QB who keeps you in contention you’ll be stuck with an average Joe and be stuck picking in the top 10 every April.

 

[Brax]

QBs who give you a chance get paid. If you don’t want to pay a good QB who keeps you in contention you’ll be stuck with an average Joe.

And how’s it working out with the QB lately? In the NFL any QB after 5 or 6 is just a different level of average joe.