Breakdown of Weeden's 108.8 season rating

[jnday]

He could very easily be 2 and 0 with that passer rating but the question is how he got there. He dink and dunked his way there. There is a difference. He never challenged downfield against Atlanta which made the offense completely sputter in the seond half so that rating means very little as opposed to how you got it.

If a QB is 10 for 10 with 10 total yards and 1 TD, his passer rating is 112.5. That's just not acceptable but you'd never know it by just the passer rating.

This was the point that I was making. Stats don't tell the whole story. That 108 QBR does not reflect Weedan as a QB, but I am tired of arguing the point:

 

[KJJ]

Awesome.

QB rating still has an 85 percent correlation to winning.

Depends on the QB Weeden has had two 100.0+ passer rating games as a starter and lost both of them.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Depends on the QB Weeden has had two 100.0+ passer rating games as a starter and lost both of them.

Once again, that's not how this works. The opponent QB had a higher rating than Weeden in both outings.

 

[DFWJC]

Depends on the QB Weeden has had two 100.0+ passer rating games as a starter and lost both of them.

Weeden had a 87.8 rating vs Atlanta.

You might be in another year though, not sure.
His rating in the Zona loss was in the 50s

 

[KJJ]

Once again, that's not how this works. The opponent QB had a higher rating than Weeden in both outings.

It's a flawed stat go through Romo's career and see how many games he lost when he had the higher passer rating. He's lost at least 3 games where he's had 140.0+ passer ratings.

 

[Dodger12]

There were just so many open receivers down the field. They have just had no trouble getting down field without that overrated bum Dez Bryant. Terrance is so good catching with his hands, in traffic, and such a precise route runner. Brice Butler has looked like Randy Moss out there taking the tops off a defensive and that bum Weeden can't get him the football. Then you have our awesome backs who have made all forget about DeMarco Murray. There is our offensive line making the 90's great Wall of Dallas look like a bunch of scrubs.

So you're basically saying that we've failed at every facet of our O, from receivers, to RB's to the OL? Well done.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

It's a flawed stat go through Romo's career and see how many games he lost when he had the higher passer rating. He's lost at least 3 games where he's had 140.0+ passer ratings.

That may be true. It still doesn't change the fact of the matter: Passer efficiency rating has an 85% correlation to winning.

 

[KJJ]

That may be true. It still doesn't change the fact of the matter: Passer efficiency rating has an 85% correlation to winning.

Obviously it's going to have a high correlation to winning because a QB has to play efficiently to win games but a QBs TD to turnover ratio is the better barometer of wins vs losses especially in the playoffs. A QBs lost fumbles don't count against their passer rating.

 

[percyhoward]

This was the point that I was making. Stats don't tell the whole story. That 108 QBR does not reflect Weedan as a QB, but I am tired of arguing the point:

I would agree that the 108.8 rating doesn't necessarily reflect Weeden as a QB, but that's not because passer rating is a flawed stat. It's obviously one of the best individual stats.

Weeden's 108.8 rating is built on a lot of short passes and many 3rd-down completions short of the first down. The OP made that point -- it wasn't a Weeden puff piece, as some seem to be under the impression that it was. When teams begin to take away the shorter passes on more of a regular basis, either his rating will suffer, or he will show that he has another dimension to his game. (We've seen hints of it, I hope). Also, quarterbacks whose 3rd-down completions lead to 4th down more than 50% of the time usually don't play enough games to get a meaningful sample size. You won't see a QB go through an entire season with a high rating that's based in great part on 3rd-down completions short of the sticks.

In short, consider that the sample size is 2+ games.

 

[percyhoward]

A QBs lost fumbles don't count against their passer rating.

Lost fumbles are a small percentage of QB plays. So small, that, when you include lost fumbles and treat them as INT, it makes very little difference in the rankings. A couple of years ago, I took the top 10 QB with at least 1800 attempts at the time, and compared their ratings late in close losses from 2010-13.

First, here they are ranked by pass rating. That's just TD, INT, completions, and yards.

Player...Att/TD%/Int%/YPA/Rtg
Romo ..... 222 / 5.0 / 4.5 / 7.8 / 83.1
Rodgers...136 / 2.2 / 1.5 / 7.0 / 83.1
Roethbgr..136 / 4.4 / 2.9 / 7.0 / 77.9
Brees ......142 / 3.5 / 4.9 / 6.9 / 66.7
Stafford....201 / 3.0 / 3.0 / 5.9 / 63.2
Ryan........196 / 0.5 / 3.6 / 6.1 / 58.8
PManning.. 94 / 3.2 / 7.4 / 6.4 / 57.3
Brady........162 / 3.1 / 4.3 / 5.7 / 56.6
EManning. 116 / 5.2 / 7.8 / 6.8 / 53.2
Rivers...... 232 / 0.4 / 6.5 / 5.9 / 44.7

This adjusted rating that follows uses dropbacks instead of attempts, and includes all QB turnovers -- treating lost fumbles as INT. Note that there is no change in the order of the rankings.

Player...Dpbk/TD%/TO%/Sk%/YPD/Rtg
Romo ..... 230 / 4.8 / 5.2 / 3.5 / 7.6 / 76.7
Rodgers...151 / 2.0 / 1.3 /10.1/ 6.3 / 75.1
Roethbgr..152 / 3.9 / 3.3 /10.5/ 6.3 / 67.2
Brees ......150 / 3.3 / 4.7 / 5.3 / 6.5 / 63.2
Stafford....215 / 2.8 / 3.3 / 6.5 / 5.5 / 57.2
Ryan........204 / 0.5 / 4.4 / 3.9 / 5.8 / 52.5
PManning.. 96 / 3.2 / 7.3 / 2.1 / 6.3 / 56.2
Brady........170 / 2.9 / 4.1 / 4.7 / 5.4 / 54.0
EManning 123 / 4.9 / 7.3 / 5.7 / 6.4 / 50.3
Rivers...... 252 / 0.4 / 7.5 / 7.9 / 5.4 / 34.7

 

[KJJ]

Lost fumbles are a small percentage of QB plays. So small, that, when you include lost fumbles and treat them as INT, it makes very little difference in the rankings. A couple of years ago, I took the top 10 QB with at least 1800 attempts at the time, and compared their ratings in close losses from 2010-13.

First, here they are ranked by pass rating. That's just TD, INT, completions, and yards.

Player...Att/TD%/Int%/YPA/Rtg
Romo ..... 222 / 5.0 / 4.5 / 7.8 / 83.1
Rodgers...136 / 2.2 / 1.5 / 7.0 / 83.1
Roethbgr..136 / 4.4 / 2.9 / 7.0 / 77.9
Brees ......142 / 3.5 / 4.9 / 6.9 / 66.7
Stafford....201 / 3.0 / 3.0 / 5.9 / 63.2
Ryan........196 / 0.5 / 3.6 / 6.1 / 58.8
PManning.. 94 / 3.2 / 7.4 / 6.4 / 57.3
Brady........162 / 3.1 / 4.3 / 5.7 / 56.6
EManning. 116 / 5.2 / 7.8 / 6.8 / 53.2
Rivers...... 232 / 0.4 / 6.5 / 5.9 / 44.7

This adjusted rating that follows uses dropbacks instead of attempts, and includes all QB turnovers -- treating lost fumbles as INT. Note that there is no change in the order of the rankings.

Player...Dpbk/TD%/TO%/Sk%/YPD/Rtg
Romo ..... 230 / 4.8 / 5.2 / 3.5 / 7.6 / 76.7
Rodgers...151 / 2.0 / 1.3 /10.1/ 6.3 / 75.1
Roethbgr..152 / 3.9 / 3.3 /10.5/ 6.3 / 67.2
Brees ......150 / 3.3 / 4.7 / 5.3 / 6.5 / 63.2
Stafford....215 / 2.8 / 3.3 / 6.5 / 5.5 / 57.2
Ryan........204 / 0.5 / 4.4 / 3.9 / 5.8 / 52.5
PManning.. 96 / 3.2 / 7.3 / 2.1 / 6.3 / 56.2
Brady........170 / 2.9 / 4.1 / 4.7 / 5.4 / 54.0
EManning 123 / 4.9 / 7.3 / 5.7 / 6.4 / 50.3
Rivers...... 252 / 0.4 / 7.5 / 7.9 / 5.4 / 34.7

We've covered this more than a few times not going to waste anymore time with it.

 

[DFWJC]

If someone plays 16 games and has a passer rating of 108, I'd say that says a lot about how good he is.
But after 2 games? Not so much.

Again, I'm not one that has big issues with Weeds. He's doing what he's asked to do for the most part.

 

[percyhoward]

It is a pretty well-known fact outside of the circle that Percy runs in.

Shhhh. He thinks I invented it.

 

[burmafrd]

Yeah that so called correlation does not work with Tony Romo. So it really is seriously flawed.

My problem with the rating formula is that it rewards dink and dunk passers instead of penalizing them.

 

[KJJ]

Weeden had a 87.8 rating vs Atlanta.

You might be in another year though, not sure.
His rating in the Zona loss was in the 50s

I'm referring to the loss he had last week and a loss he had in Cleveland As a starter where his passer rating was over 100.0.

 

[Rogerthat12]

I would agree that the 108.8 rating doesn't necessarily reflect Weeden as a QB, but that's not because passer rating is a flawed stat. It's obviously one of the best individual stats.

Weeden's 108.8 rating is built on a lot of short passes and many 3rd-down completions short of the first down. The OP made that point -- it wasn't a Weeden puff piece, as some seem to be under the impression that it was. When teams begin to take away the shorter passes on more of a regular basis, either his rating will suffer, or he will show that he has another dimension to his game. (We've seen hints of it, I hope). Also, quarterbacks whose 3rd-down completions lead to 4th down more than 50% of the time usually don't play enough games to get a meaningful sample size. You won't see a QB go through an entire season with a high rating that's based in great part on 3rd-down completions short of the sticks.

In short, consider that the sample size is 2+ games.

Thank you for the honesty, very true!

 

[RunDMC]

Yeah that so called correlation does not work with Tony Romo. So it really is seriously flawed.

My problem with the rating formula is that it rewards dink and dunk passers instead of penalizing them.

Yeah gotta punish a quarterback for having trash around him on the outside.

 

[percyhoward]

Weeden 2015 vs. Top 5 rated passers from 2014

% of attempts @ target distance <10 yards
Romo 60.4
Rodgers 60.1
Rthlsbgr 58.6
Manning 59.4
Brady 63.0
Weeden 70.7

% of attempts @ direction middle
Romo 52.4
Rodgers 48.0
Rthlsbgr 55.1
Manning 52.4
Brady 51.2
Weeden 62.1

conversion % passing on 3rd down
Romo 48.1
Rodgers 46.1
Rthlsbgr 44.4
Manning 41.6
Brady 47.0
Weeden 27.8

% of 3rd-down completions resulting in 1st down
Romo 81.9
Rodgers 81.7
Rthlsbrgr 75.2
Manning 71.2
Brady 82.1
Weeden 41.7

 

[windward]

A QBs TD to turnover ratio has a higher correlation to winning.

What's the correlation? Please post it.

 

[windward]

He could very easily be 2 and 0 with that passer rating but the question is how he got there. He dink and dunked his way there. There is a difference. He never challenged downfield against Atlanta which made the offense completely sputter in the seond half so that rating means very little as opposed to how you got it.

If a QB is 10 for 10 with 10 total yards and 1 TD, his passer rating is 112.5. That's just not acceptable but you'd never know it by just the passer rating.

That example is nothing close to what Weeden did and is an extreme example. Weeden isn't averaging 1 yard per attempt. If the defense had managed to play better, he is at least 1-1.