QB garbage time passing yardage 2025

[Hadenough]

Or in Dak's case - he goes 6 straight 3 and outs to start a game. In the meantime the defense gets worn down by half and is getting their butts kicked and Dallas trails 28-0. The opposing team takes their foot off the gas and Dak is only then able to start moving the ball at will and his homers are fooled into thinking he is leading a massive come back. In reality, the opposing defense is letting them start piling up yards.

Any yards gained in this example are 'garbage time'.

I understand why some want to defend Dak, but there are far too many instances where the defense started getting their rear ends handed to them because the offense stunk and kept their own defense on the field too long. The offense has to do their part too.

Bingo! ^^^^^ this is exactly Daks MO
Well said!

 

[Hadenough]

Some people are always trying to defend Dak and It just doesn't make sense. Why would you defend a player that is just not that good but thinks he is. One that rarely accepts blame and thinks it's the teams fault when he says "we need to play better".
Ive watched so many NFL games and all the really good leader QBs fall on the sword in press conferences accepting blame EVEN when it's not thier fault. Only one game has Dak ever said anything about him needing to play better and that was GB. Im sure other players in the locker room notice that and it's only human for them to develop animosity towards him.
Even the media isn't fooled by Dak. If the NFL wasn't such a tight lipped money making machine there would be a whole lot of GMs and coaches that would say they wouldn't want Dak.

 

[Vtwin]

Analogy is:

So, if a team goes up 6-0 the first drive from a 75 TD run by the RB. And never gives up that lead for rest of the game.

The QB then throws for 400 yards the rest of the game.
Those are all garbage stats.

Jazz, the post clearly states garbage time is defined by the point in the game where the probability of winning is greater than 95% or less than 5%.

Clearly, a 6 point lead in the first few minutes of the game doesn't not enter garbage time, and a six point lead would never enter garbage time at any point in the game.

 

[Vtwin]

They consider it garbage time if you have a 95 percent chance of winning which is nuts. They were 15-2…..

Why is it nuts? If a game turns into a rout and enters garbage time both teams are in garbage time, not just the losing team.

Look at Burrow's numbers. Very mediocre team record but he has the lowest garbage time stats.

Record has nothing to do with it.

 

[Loso86]

Keep in mind the Cowboys starting QB missed 9 games last year.

Thisbone of if not the dumbest stat that I keep seeing.

 

[88sAndHeartbreak]

Some people are always trying to defend Dak and It just doesn't make sense. Why would you defend a player that is just not that good but thinks he is. One that rarely accepts blame and thinks it's the teams fault when he says "we need to play better".
Ive watched so many NFL games and all the really good leader QBs fall on the sword in press conferences accepting blame EVEN when it's not thier fault. Only one game has Dak ever said anything about him needing to play better and that was GB. Im sure other players in the locker room notice that and it's only human for them to develop animosity towards him.
Even the media isn't fooled by Dak. If the NFL wasn't such a tight lipped money making machine there would be a whole lot of GMs and coaches that would say they wouldn't want Dak.

On the opposite end of the spectrum people blame Dak for literally everything... The coaching time management sucks, blame Dak. Defense gives up 300yds rushing, blame Dak. WR slips on route, blame Dak... Teams win and teams lose. A loss isn't always just on one player.

This isn't about defending or taking the blame off Dak. Yall have to wake up and look at the entire team JJ puts out there every year, including this year... we have no WR core or RB. Can't expect anyone to win like that.

 

[Vtwin]

There was still plenty of time left. They had to pass to try to mount a comeback, as all teams that are behind do.
Mythical stat.

Right Jazz, Because Dak, the Cowboys, and the entire NFL throughout it's history is littered with examples of teams coming back from 25 point deficits in the fourth quarter.

Happens all the time, right?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Why is it nuts? If a game turns into a rout and enters garbage time both teams are in garbage time, not just the losing team.

Look at Burrow's numbers. Very mediocre team record but he has the lowest garbage time stats.

Record has nothing to do with it.

Because it insinuates Goff success last season was garbage time….well maybe not I guess. 20 percent of your yards being garbage time actually isn’t that bad when you are beating everyone…..

 

[Vtwin]

Because it insinuates Goff success last season was garbage time….well maybe not I guess. 20 percent of your yards being garbage time actually isn’t that bad when you are beating everyone…..

It doesn't insinuate anything. It tells you how many yards Goff passed for when his team had either a 95% chance of winning, or a 95% chance of losing. Since we know that the Lions were a very good team who often played on the good side of garbage time, if it insinuates anything it insinuates that Goff played well to get his team into the realm of good garbage time.

Agree or disagree with the entire garbage time concept as you wish, but the stats given are factual, based on clearly defined parameters.

The author should have just used the bad garbage time side to give a clearer picture, but he left it up to us to do the math on that.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

It doesn't insinuate anything. It tells you how many yards Goff passed for when his team had either a 95% chance of winning, or a 95% chance of losing. Since we know that the Lions were a very good team who often played on the good side of garbage time, if it insinuates anything it insinuates that Goff played well to get his team into the realm of good garbage time.

Agree or disagree with the entire garbage time concept as you wish, but the stats given are factual, based on clearly defined parameters.

The author should have just used the bad garbage time side to give a clearer picture, but he left it up to us to do the math on that.

Like I said above I just don’t think I should penalize Goff because his team is good because that’s what’s happening here is it? If his team is beating an inferior team by let’s say 10 points going into the 4th they are considering that garbage time correct? But let’s say Burrows team is in the same scenario but since they are a worse team their chances of winning in the same scenario are less than 95 percent. But one is garbage time and one isn’t?

 

[Vtwin]

Like I said above I just don’t think I should penalize Goff because his team is good because that’s what’s happening here is it?

No. That is not what is happening there. You seem to forget that there are two sides to garbage time. You're not reading between the lines and understanding that Goff's numbers came in good garbage time and he is not being "penalized".

If his team is beating an inferior team by let’s say 10 points going into the 4th they are considering that garbage time correct?

No, that is not correct. I am certain that a ten point lead going into the fourth does not meet the criteria the author used for garbage time. i.e. the 95% win/lose criteria.

But let’s say Burrows team is in the same scenario but since they are a worse team their chances of winning in the same scenario are less than 95 percent. But one is garbage time and one isn’t?

No. That's not the way it works. The criteria is the same for all teams. The probabilities are based on history and have nothing to do with individual characteristics of the teams on the field.

 

[Kingofholland]

Keep in mind the Cowboys starting QB missed 9 games last year.

I don't know exactly how they define garbage time based on win probability, but I presume most of these situations come about in the 4th quarter when there's 2 or more scores. The Cowboys got blown out by the Saints and Lions and blew out the Browns which is what 1/3 of the games Dak played in?

These data graphics are kind of pointless over a year though because most of these qbs were on winning or losing teams with a higher margin of victory or loss so of course more time is spent when the game is out of hand. Maybe there is more to the stats if it was stretched over a longer period and then weighted against the quality of the opponent?

 

[blueblood70]

How many times do I need to tell you I am not a Dak fan. But I do not hate him, and let it consume my life.
I disregard everything you post anyway, as obviously you cannot comprehend what I post.

 

[thunderpimp91]

Like I said above I just don’t think I should penalize Goff because his team is good because that’s what’s happening here is it? If his team is beating an inferior team by let’s say 10 points going into the 4th they are considering that garbage time correct? But let’s say Burrows team is in the same scenario but since they are a worse team their chances of winning in the same scenario are less than 95 percent. But one is garbage time and one isn’t?

No, neither scenario would be a 95% win/loss probability. A 10 point lead going into the 4th is going to be around 70-75% win probability, maybe close to 80% if the team with the lead is in the red zone. The whole point of this is that a 95% win probability means that games are well out of reach and it takes one of the bigger comebacks in history to change the outcome.

I really don't think this is a knock on Goff, but for gamblers and fantasy players this is significant information as its not likely to be replicated. Goff is a guy we should probably expect to see a regression in his numbers for 2025 for a variety of reasons. On the other hand I look at a guy like Purdy who played on a bad team but only racked up 11% of his yards under these parameters and would assume the law of averages may give him a slight bump for this year.

 

[Mr_437]

You are KILLING IT with that new profile pic. Lmbao.

Appreciate it

 

[blueblood70]

I don't know exactly how they define garbage time based on win probability, but I presume most of these situations come about in the 4th quarter when there's 2 or more scores. The Cowboys got blown out by the Saints and Lions and blew out the Browns which is what 1/3 of the games Dak played in?

These data graphics are kind of pointless over a year though because most of these qbs were on winning or losing teams with a higher margin of victory or loss so of course more time is spent when the game is out of hand. Maybe there is more to the stats if it was stretched over a longer period and then weighted against the quality of the opponent?

Exactly,

and to add to that...

here's the thing they're all putting this on Prescott oh he's building his stats only on garbage time but why were they down so big against the Saints oh that's right just like 2020 look at all those high scoring games it's called bad defense, you can't blame the quarterback for having to play from behind all the time and saying that this is the only way he can build stats because over 17 games..

all quarterbacks, running backs, receivers, hell even on the other side of the ball when you're in the blowout on the other direction you're getting what they call garbage sacks, interceptions, tackles for losses, it's being added to your resume all year long..

So what we call a mean average,

you just have to average it out over 17 games and expect the fact that all these quarterbacks are putting similar situations over that entire year..

so their stats are what they are nitpicking because you have a hate narrative for a player so and you're saying that Prescott has built this whole entire career on garbage time that he's going to own just about every passing record in Dallas cowboy history he's top four all time in Dallas Cowboys as a quarterback and people just can't stand him they have to hate on him so they're going to use one of these weird analytics to make their case..

Anybody with common sense knows the entire team is benefiting from that running backs getting the ball 14 more times in a game because of blow out so they can run the clock out it's getting more yardage and more opportunities then other running backs in different situations so that's why in 17 games whatever their yardage is, is what it is their stats are what they are over 17 games that is how it goes..

it's dumb trying to figure out how they got there it doesn't matter everyone is going to be judged on their total stats for the year and that's why they also end before the playoffs and restart the playoffs.

 

[jazzcat22]

Stats, stats and more stats….it was simple to watch the games and see Dak’s stat padding.

 

[jazzcat22]

Right Jazz, Because Dak, the Cowboys, and the entire NFL throughout it's history is littered with examples of teams coming back from 25 point deficits in the fourth quarter.

Happens all the time, right?

Come on, 25 points, Dak has a hard time at coming back from 6 points.

 

[thunderpimp91]

So what we call a mean average,

you just have to average it out over 17 games and expect the fact that all these quarterbacks are putting similar situations over that entire year..

The graphis literally has that information in there. Some are above 20% like Love at 24%, and some are significantly low like Purdy at 11% and Burrow at 8%. You're sort of right in that all QBs are going to be put into these situations at some point in the year, but its more about what they are doing in non garbage time.

For Jordan Love who is the most extreme example he had 24% garbage time passing yards and 3300 yards for the season. That means he really only had 2,500 passing yards (167 per game) while games were competitive.

Burrow on the other hand had 8% garbage time passing at 4900 yards. So in competitive games he threw for 4500 yards (265 per game).

These are the two extremes from the data we were given, and there will be other factors here, but that is a significant difference. Plus if you can find the average for the league as a whole it should give us a good idea of who is likely to see their numbers regress.

Now the measure they are using might be able to be improved upon, but the idea behind it is exactly what football needs to embrace more. Other sports are so far ahead of football in using advanced analytics and situational data to predict future success rates.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Ahh... there he is. The scared lil internet guy. You feel the need to post some weak **** to get some attention huh.

I've already exposed the cowardly behavior in you lil bro. So go somewhere and sit ya weak chinned *** down somewhere and play with your dolls.

Don't blame me for you growing up weak and lacking courage blame that uncle that you call "dad" for raising you that way. You spoke about "truth and shame"?

The TRUTH is that it's a SHAME that you're so weak in many areas of your life lil bro. Sad....

I'll leave you with this.... there are a couple other posters here that has said that the "garbage time yards" thing is mainly used when talking about Dak, not other quarterbacks.

So did you post the same weak garbage to them too? No... ya didn't.

Your bullying isn't really making a good impression....personal insults aren't allowed. And before you say it..no i did not personally insult you, just your comment.

A lot of assumptions in your personal attack. Do you realize you are showing everyone what a hypocrite you are....some sort of (blatantly false) idea that I attacked you...by multiple (REAL) personal attacks on me. Hmm...exposed yet again!

And I will politely and civilly answer your question. I didn't see any other comment about it. What...you think you are SO special I picked you instead of them? Didn't see them...just yours. I stand by what I said. It's a dumb comment...no matter who says it.

It's such a popular saying, I just answered it in a crossword puzzle. I suppose the author is a Dak Hater, eh?

Instead of just admitting it was a silly off hand comment, maybe even (get this!) explaining your position...you go on personal attack. THAT...is a PERFECT example of the weak.