Breakdown of Weeden's 108.8 season rating

[windward]

Like I said, I'm well aware of passer rating's flaws, which is why I use my own stat.




Yes, all stats are flawed in that they can't tell the whole story by themselves, but TD-to-INT ratio is fundamentally flawed. Do you really think one TD and no turnovers is better than five TDs and one turnover? Seriously? And do you really think that if Romo had thrown a 1-yard TD pass to Murray against the Packers instead of handing it off to him for a 1-yard touchdown, that we would not have lost?

Is he mistaking differential for ratio?

 

[jnday]

Maybe they'll just disappear from the board for a long time, like you did while Romo lit it up last year and made all of your thousands of posts about him look even more stupid than they already did. I kept waiting for you and the ufc troll to come out of hiding as the team's wins piled up last year, but you two must have found a nice comfy spot under that cowardly rock you eventually crawled out from.

My absence from this board had nothing to do with the Cowboys winning or losing.

 

[KJJ]

Like I said, I'm well aware of passer rating's flaws, which is why I use my own stat.

I have my own way of looking at it and although I've used the term TD to turnover "ratio" I've been focusing more the past year on a QBs differential total TDs passing/rushing and total turnovers lost fumbles/int's. What wins games is putting TDs on the board and limiting turnovers.

Yes, all stats are flawed in that they can't tell the whole story by themselves, but TD-to-INT ratio is fundamentally flawed. Do you really think one TD and no turnovers is better than five TDs and one turnover? Seriously? And do you really think that if Romo had thrown a 1-yard TD pass to Murray against the Packers instead of handing it off to him for a 1-yard touchdown, that we would not have lost?

The more TDs a QB accounts for the more likely they can overcome a turnover or two unless it happens late in a game. Brett Favre built a HOF career overcoming turnovers by throwing a record amount of TDs. Brady had 2 turnovers in the SB but overcame them by tossing 4 TDs. Had Romo tossed a one yard TD to Murray against the Packers instead of allowing him to run the ball in it still would have added up to 3 scoring drives for Romo compared to 5 scoring drives for Rodgers. Romo completing almost 79% of his passes didn't lead to enough points but it led to him having a much higher passer rating than Rodgers.

 

[KJJ]

I have that same feeling. I wonder what the excuses will be when the stats finally reflect his play. I am sure there will be some entertaining posts.

The Cowboys could lose by 25+ tomorrow and if Weeden were to dink and dunk his way to a respectable passer rating due to having a high completion percentage that results in no turnovers Percy will undoubtedly show up with a page full of stats and comparisons to point out that his play correlated with his passer rating. He'll point to Brady's passer rating (aka defensive passer rating) as to why the Cowboys got throttled despite Weeden's efficiency. Percy uses all kinds of passer ratings to try and prove his point. He's so consumed by passer ratings he probably screams them out while he's asleep..."102.5!!!" His wife wakes him up "Percy are you okay you just yelled out 102.5 what does that mean???" Percy: "huh?...(fart) oh, it's nothing honey just Tony Romo's passer rating in the final 8 minutes of the 4th quarter when the Cowboys are down by 6 points or less.

 

[Doomsay]

Nothing like a balanced attack to help a QB attain record productivity.

 

[Hoofbite]

Anyone wanna post the abbreviated version of this thread?

 

[TheDude]

Anyone wanna post the abbreviated version of this thread?

Weeden has some good and bad stats.

He sucks

He's not been that bad.

Stats suck

No they dont

Weeden is 0-2

Thats not a fact and its lazy

"Stat guys are idiots"

Non-stat guys are idiots"

Stat dreams cause farts

 

[percyhoward]

The basic misunderstanding in this thread regards stats and sample sizes. People see Weeden's #6 ranking in passer rating, and most of them (myself included) don't expect him to finish his season ranked that high, or even nearly that high. The reason he ranks so high right now has to do with his tiny sample of 59 attempts.

ESPN's stat, Total QBR, ranks him at #8...
Rthlsbrgr 91.3
Dalton 87.7
Rodgers 87.3
Brady 83.1
Ryan 81.4
Palmer 80.3
Hasselbeck 77.2
Weeden 72.4
McCown 70.0
Romo 69.9

Pro Football Reference's ANY / A [net yards + (20 * td) - (45 * int)) / drop backs] puts Weeden at #7...
Dalton 11.11
Rthlsbrgr 9.22
Rodgers 9.05
Brady 9.05
Palmer 8.62
Ryan 7.98
Weeden 7.94
Rivers 7.54
Hoyer 7.53
Carr 7.53

@AdamJT13's ANY / A [net yards - (50 * int)) / drop backs] has Weeden at #5. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
Dalton 1126 / 118 = 9.54
Rthlsbrgr 777 / 94 = 8.27
Brady 1078 / 139 = 7.76
Rodgers 948 / 129 = 7.35
Weeden 463 / 64 = 7.23
Ryan 1059 / 149 = 7.11
Palmer 983 / 139 = 7.07
Hoyer 643 / 100 = 6.43
Rivers 974 / 153 = 6.37
Carr 799 / 126 = 6.34

Before anyone concludes that passer rating, ANY/A, and Total QBR are all worthless stats, it might be a good idea to consider Weeden's sample size of 2+ games, and look specifically what has gone into his rating so far. That was the purpose of the OP, to break down the rating into its component parts. There are aspects of his performance that don't lend themselves to sustainability over several games.

I posted this in another thread. This is how misleading a small sample of 3 games can be (and Weeden hasn't even played 3 full games).

Passer Rating
2014 rankings after 3 games (rank at end of season)
Kirk Cousins 4th (22nd).
Cam Newton 7th (29th)
Brian Hoyer 10th (33rd)
Ben Roethlisberger 17th (3rd)
Tony Romo 19th (1st)
Tom Brady 23rd (5th)

 

[Dodger12]

The reason he ranks so high right now has to do with his tiny sample of 59 attempts.

The reason it's so high is because he's taken safe throws, especially underneath. He benefited by some good YAC from the RB's in the Atlanta game the first half. When Atlanta started cheating up the second half, he was ineffective.

Personally, I have no issue with a back-up QB playing it safe, to a certain extent. But at some point you have to take shots downfield or you have no chance of effectively running the ball or winning.

I get the stats but I also know how he played to get those stats.

 

[percyhoward]

The reason it's so high is because he's taken safe throws, especially underneath...I get the stats but I also know how he played to get those stats.

As someone who actually broke down the rating, looked at things like the distance of his targets, and the number of times his completions have gained yards but ended up short of the sticks, and concluded that these things probably won't be sustainable over a larger sample of games...

I gotta agree with ya.

 

[Galian Beast]

The reason it's so high is because he's taken safe throws, especially underneath. He benefited by some good YAC from the RB's in the Atlanta game the first half. When Atlanta started cheating up the second half, he was ineffective.

Personally, I have no issue with a back-up QB playing it safe, to a certain extent. But at some point you have to take shots downfield or you have no chance of effectively running the ball or winning.

I get the stats but I also know how he played to get those stats.

His numbers are actually too high. I'd rather him have an 80 qb rating with a couple more touchdowns under his belt.

I want to think going forward after this next game, that the Cowboys will be more aggressive on offense with Weeden if they feel they can trust the defense to make a stop.

I'm actually impressed with what the defense was able to do missing about half of its star players. It wasn't a defense that could control the whole game, but if you put them in the right position, they would have been difficult to go down the field against.

The second half against the Falcons really skewed things, but it shouldn't have gotten to that point minus a ridiculous Weeden interception on what I believe was a first down in his own territory that kept the Falcons in the game.

I think Weeden was absolutely horrible in that game and the fact that the leading WR was Beasley with 49 yards, said a lot about what Weeden was able to do. When you have a team that you don't need to fear offensively, you feel like you can be more aggressive on offense without putting your defense in a bind. That's what happened in the second half. Atlanta became more aggressive and successful, and our offense did absolutely nothing for an entire half of football.

You can't rely on checkdowns all day, especially if you don't have a dominant running game... The funniest thing is that we were running the ball well in that game, but they wouldn't commit to the run.

We should be running the ball 30-40 times a game with Weeden.

 

[dallasdave]

Weeden has some good and bad stats.

He sucks

He's not been that bad.

Stats suck

No they dont

Weeden is 0-2

Thats not a fact and its lazy

"Stat guys are idiots"

Non-stat guys are idiots"

Stat dreams cause farts

 

[Dodger12]

His numbers are actually too high. I'd rather him have an 80 qb rating with a couple more touchdowns under his belt.

I want to think going forward after this next game, that the Cowboys will be more aggressive on offense with Weeden if they feel they can trust the defense to make a stop.

I'm actually impressed with what the defense was able to do missing about half of its star players. It wasn't a defense that could control the whole game, but if you put them in the right position, they would have been difficult to go down the field against.

The second half against the Falcons really skewed things, but it shouldn't have gotten to that point minus a ridiculous Weeden interception on what I believe was a first down in his own territory that kept the Falcons in the game.

I think Weeden was absolutely horrible in that game and the fact that the leading WR was Beasley with 49 yards, said a lot about what Weeden was able to do. When you have a team that you don't need to fear offensively, you feel like you can be more aggressive on offense without putting your defense in a bind. That's what happened in the second half. Atlanta became more aggressive and successful, and our offense did absolutely nothing for an entire half of football.

You can't rely on checkdowns all day, especially if you don't have a dominant running game... The funniest thing is that we were running the ball well in that game, but they wouldn't commit to the run.

We should be running the ball 30-40 times a game with Weeden.

This defense is what it is. Even with the injuries they should be at least on par with last season where we didn't have Lee and lost RoMac for a stretch. Crawford and Lawrence should be better, as well as Wilcox. I think Claiborne is playing better. We have another 1st round CB in Jones. And, of course, we have Golden Cock....no other team can make that claim.

What we're missing is a real running game which set the pace for Dallas on both sides of the ball last season. The D was a huge beneficiary of a good ground game and we just don't have that this season, not yet at least.......

 

[KJJ]

You can tell Chip Kelly could care less about passer ratings he swapped a QB who has a 94.4 career passer rating and had the 3rd highest passer rating in history 2 years ago of 119.2 for a QB with a career passer rating of 79.5 and who never had a higher passer rating for a season than 90.9.

 

[percyhoward]

You can tell Chip Kelly could care less about passer ratings he swapped a QB who has a 94.4 career passer rating and had the 3rd highest passer rating in history 2 years ago of 119.2 for a QB with a career passer rating of 79.5 and who never had a higher passer rating for a season than 90.9.

For multiple reasons, Kelly's not the best example you could have stumbled into.

The funniest one is that Kelly already had college football's #1 all-time career passer rating leader in Bradford, tried to trade the farm to get the #2 all-time career passer rating leader in Mariota, and had the #3 all-time career passing leader (Tebow) in camp this year.

 

[KJJ]

For multiple reasons, Kelly's not the best example you could have stumbled into.

The funniest one is that Kelly already had college football's #1 all-time career passer rating leader in Bradford, tried to trade the farm to get the #2 all-time career passer rating leader in Mariota, and had the #3 all-time career passing leader (Tebow) in camp this year.

The problem with Kelly is he sees these QBs for what they were in college and thinks his college offense will be just as effective in the NFL if he has the right QB. As NFL QBs Bradford has a career 79.5 passer rating and Tebow has a 75.3 career passer rating. Neither QB has been close to the players they were in college. Kelly is finding out what worked in college doesn't work near as well at the NFL level.

 

[AdamJT13]

I have my own way of looking at it and although I've used the term TD to turnover "ratio" I've been focusing more the past year on a QBs differential total TDs passing/rushing and total turnovers lost fumbles/int's. What wins games is putting TDs on the board and limiting turnovers.

Yes, TD-INT differential is much better to look at than TD-INT ratio.

However, you'd probably get a higher correlation by looking at the overall team stat (touchdowns minus turnovers) or even just total touchdowns (the team that scores more touchdowns almost always wins).

And it doesn't really help to say that in order to win, you need to "score more touchdowns." Well, duh.

 

[AdamJT13]

@AdamJT13's ANY / A [net yards - (50 * int)) / drop backs] has Weeden at #5. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
Dalton 1126 / 118 = 9.54
Rthlsbrgr 777 / 94 = 8.27
Brady 1078 / 139 = 7.76
Rodgers 948 / 129 = 7.35
Weeden 463 / 64 = 7.23
Ryan 1059 / 149 = 7.11
Palmer 983 / 139 = 7.07
Hoyer 643 / 100 = 6.43
Rivers 974 / 153 = 6.37
Carr 799 / 126 = 6.34

Just for the record, I have never used this as an individual stat, and I don't really care about the numbers for anything more than comparing one team to another within a single game. To me, the circumstances of the game are a key factor, so comparing different teams in different games is not necessarily helpful.

 

[KJJ]

Yes, TD-INT differential is much better to look at than TD-INT ratio.

However, you'd probably get a higher correlation by looking at the overall team stat (touchdowns minus turnovers) or even just total touchdowns (the team that scores more touchdowns almost always wins).

And it doesn't really help to say that in order to win, you need to "score more touchdowns." Well, duh.

Seeing that this thread has to with a QBs passer rating that's where my focus is. How a QB performs influences the outcome of games more than an other position and when they're accounting for TDs via ether the pass or the run and not turning the ball over via int's or lost fumbles that's going to equate to a lot of wins. The fact that Brandon Weeden has more career turnovers than TDs points to a big reason why he's only won 5 games as a starting QB and has lost his last 11 straight starts. Most of a teams TDs except for special teams scores are directly linked to how a QB is performing. If you're running the ball well they'll still be downs that a QB has to complete passes to keep drives alive. We're seeing how far the Cowboys have fallen without solid play from the QB position. If the Packers lose Aaron Rodgers they won't be the same team because most of their points are due to his efficient play where he accounts for a lot more TDs than turnovers. He keeps drives alive by extending plays we've seen the same thing with Romo.

Prior to last season Romo's elimination game record playoffs/season finales was 1-6 and some of that can be attributed to his 8-12 TD to turnover differential. When a QB is turning the ball over or can't move their offense that puts their defense back on the field. A lot of the issues we're currently seeing with the offense is affecting the defense that's having to spend a lot of time on the field. The D wore down in the second half yesterday due to an inefficient offense that's having trouble moving the chains and scoring points. A big part of the success the Cowboys had in 2014 was due to an efficient offense that kept the defense off the field an average of 13 fewer plays than in 2013. If a QB isn't getting it done it affects the entire team.

 

[garyv]

The problem with your eyeball test method is that it doesn't necessarily match my eyeball test method. That's why attempting to measure what's really going on makes so much sense.

I'm laughing because stats don't always tell you anything about game management skills. My biggest
complaint about Weeden hes driving a bus real slow staying several miles under the speed limit which
is fine however we have a place we need to be at in 30 minutes and at the rate of speed hes driving
the bus we want get there for 1 hour and 30 minutes now the problem is we are going to be 1 hour late.
The point is he can only drive the bus he can't press or push to the next level. He stalls drives by drifting
back to pass, and keep drifting maybe drifts a little more....oh than gets sacked. He doesn't make all his
progressions as hes too busy or scared of getting hit or making a mistake. I've said this the minute Romo
went down that if Weeden starts 7 games we will be damn lucky to win 1 or 2.