ROMO #2 Passer 98.4 as of now...

[rags747]

Need C Palmer to stink it up tonight as he leads with 98.7.

 

[Doomsday]

Considering hes playing the Colts defense I wouldnt hold my breath on that one.

 

[aikemirv]

Other than the tip ball he had a great game.

His completion percenatge and yards per attempt are out of this world. I know he has great receivers, but I really believe he could be succesful without T.O and I think we will se next year because I don't think Jerry brings him back unless we win the Superbowl.

If we do that Jerry might feel the pressure to keep the status quo.

 

[superpunk]

Go Carson!!!!!

And Shayne Graham!

 

[aikemirv]

Go Carson!!!!!

And Shayne Graham!

Fantasy football no doubt.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

ROMO is doing great!

Unreal.....

 

[SkinsandTerps]

Garcia was over 100 for his starts until yesterday.

QB rating is not really as accurate as many make it out to be. IMO.

 

[aikemirv]

Garcia was over 100 for his starts until yesterday.

QB rating is not really as accurate as many make it out to be. IMO.

I disagree, I think it is one of the few "stats" that are reflective of a players play on the field. It is a complex formula that takes into account a lot of facets of the QB's game.

Right now Romo is playing complete football. Completion percentage, not just dunkoffs either, which is shown by his yards per attempt and throwing TD's. Not only that, but the biggest factor is that he is doing it at crunchtime. Apart from the Qb rating, what a QB does at crunchtime is what the greats are measured by.

So, overall, QB rating, especially when it is the same or better at crunchtime it a great barometer of how a QB is playing.

 

[aikemirv]

Garcia was over 100 for his starts until yesterday.

QB rating is not really as accurate as many make it out to be. IMO.

And, only Jimmy Johnson is denying that Garcia IS playing excellent football at this point. I won't deny it, he has played MUCH better than I ever expected he would.

 

[burmafrd]

Problem with the rating is that it emphasizes TD's WAY too much; and does not penalize you as much for INT's as it awards you for TD's. Also does not take into account sacks, fumbles, etc.

 

[ravidubey]

I disagree, I think it is one of the few "stats" that are reflective of a players play on the field. It is a complex formula that takes into account a lot of facets of the QB's game.

QB rating stinks just like most stats. It tells you some of what a QB does but does not give you the entire picture, nor can it. To evaluate a player, you must see him play, it's that simple.

Ken O'Brien used to take sacks instead of throwing the ball away to keep his QB rating high because his QB rating was what his contract incentives were based on. Can you believe that crap?

Who in history would you rather have playing QB for you? Whomever you choose, don't go by the passer rating because it says only QB's who played WCO or pass-happy ssytems are good ones. Would you rather have Mark Brunell or Roger Staubach? Brunell is ranked higher than Roger. John Elway is the 2nd or 3rd best QB I've ever seen. He's 43rd on the all time passer ratings, sandwiched between Dan Fouts and Tony Eason. Matt Hasselbeck is 9th, Mark Bulger is 6th, and Daunte Culpepper is 5th.

It's a stupid rating that's just stuck around.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

QB Ratings are so meaningless and irrelevant imo.

6-2 as a starter, now that is a stat worth talking about.

- Mike G.

 

[aikemirv]

Tell me a modern day QB that has a terrible rating but was/is a great QB.

 

[Dale]

QB rating stinks just like most stats. It tells you some of what a QB does but does not give you the entire picture, nor can it. To evaluate a player, you must see him play, it's that simple.

Ken O'Brien used to take sacks instead of throwing the ball away to keep his QB rating high because his QB rating was what his contract incentives were based on. Can you believe that crap?

Who in history would you rather have playing QB for you? Whomever you choose, don't go by the passer rating because it says only QB's who played WCO or pass-happy ssytems are good ones. Would you rather have Mark Brunell or Roger Staubach? Brunell is ranked higher than Roger. John Elway is the 2nd or 3rd best QB I've ever seen. He's 43rd on the all time passer ratings, sandwiched between Dan Fouts and Tony Eason. Matt Hasselbeck is 9th, Mark Bulger is 6th, and Daunte Culpepper is 5th.

It's a stupid rating that's just stuck around.

I don't think the rating has much relevance in terms of comparing today's players to yesteryear's.

I do, however, think it has some relevance in comparing today's players to today's.

I haven't seen what the top 10 looks like, but I'd be shocked if a lot of the Mannings (Peyton, not the imposter brother), Palmers, Bradys and Brees aren't somewhere up there.

You don't typically see QBs who are playing great at the time wandering along with a 77 QB rating in today's game.

But I absolutely agree that you'll see some quarterbacks who are playing poorly have a high QB rating -- David Carr earlier this season comes to mind. He'd rack up yards late in blowout losses and convert a high percentage of passes with little dumpoffs.

 

[percyhoward]

Would you rather have Mark Brunell or Roger Staubach? Brunell is ranked higher than Roger.

Comparing his rating with his contemporaries, Roger retired as the all-time highest rated passer in NFL history. Brunell's rating is higher because short passes and YAC are a much bigger part of the game now than they were 30 years ago.

So it's more a difference in eras than a problem with the rating system.

 

[ravidubey]

I don't think the rating has much relevance in terms of comparing today's players to yesteryear's.

I do, however, think it has some relevance in comparing today's players to today's.

I haven't seen what the top 10 looks like, but I'd be shocked if a lot of the Mannings (Peyton, not the imposter brother), Palmers, Bradys and Brees aren't somewhere up there.

You don't typically see QBs who are playing great at the time wandering along with a 77 QB rating in today's game.

But I absolutely agree that you'll see some quarterbacks who are playing poorly have a high QB rating -- David Carr earlier this season comes to mind. He'd rack up yards late in blowout losses and convert a high percentage of passes with little dumpoffs.

It's your latter point that I'm trying to point out. A good rating does not mean you're a good QB, and the best QB's don't always have the highest ratings.

Kurt Warner, Peyton Manning, Culpepper, Bulger, Brady, Trent Green, and Hasselbeck lead active players. I wouldn't trust Daunte Culpepper or Mark Bulger with my playoff team, and only Brady among them is a proven winner. Kurt Warner has really fallen back in recent years.

http://www.profootballhof.com/history/release.jsp?release_id=1990

 

[ravidubey]

Comparing his rating with his contemporaries, Roger retired as the all-time highest rated passer in NFL history. Brunell's rating is higher because short passes and YAC are a much bigger part of the game now than they were 30 years ago.

So it's more a difference in eras than a problem with the rating system.

Which is the point-- the stats mean little. The QB rating greatly favors the West Coast or otherwise pass-happy offense. It is not a measure of how good a QB is.

Granted, a rating below the 80's indicates something foul, but you wouldn't need the QB rating to tell you that.

 

[aikemirv]

It's your latter point that I'm trying to point out. A good rating does not mean you're a good QB, and the best QB's don't always have the highest ratings.

Kurt Warner, Peyton Manning, Culpepper, Bulger, Brady, Trent Green, and Hasselbeck lead active players. I wouldn't trust Daunte Culpepper or Mark Bulger with my playoff team, and only Brady among them is a proven winner. Kurt Warner has really fallen back in recent years.

http://www.profootballhof.com/history/release.jsp?release_id=1990

Sorry, but Warner was not a proven winner. Something happened with his hand many years ago and it affected his play. Sure, you would not trust him now, but when he earned that QB rating he was one of the best in the business.

Bulger is a fine QB.

Trent Green is a fine QB.

Culpeper has proven that he cannot do it without having Moss as his safety valve.

Peyton is not a proven winner?

Hasselbeck?

These guys are among the best in the league!

 

[Dale]

It's your latter point that I'm trying to point out. A good rating does not mean you're a good QB, and the best QB's don't always have the highest ratings.

Kurt Warner, Peyton Manning, Culpepper, Bulger, Brady, Trent Green, and Hasselbeck lead active players. I wouldn't trust Daunte Culpepper or Mark Bulger with my playoff team, and only Brady among them is a proven winner. Kurt Warner has really fallen back in recent years.

http://www.profootballhof.com/history/release.jsp?release_id=1990

Well, I think that list says it all.

Warner, Manning, Brady and Hasselbeck have been some of the best passers over the last few years (Warner when he was good, obviously).

Culpepper even was, at one time, a good system player. Clearly, he's declined and really isn't serviceable anymore.

Green and Bulger are both effective. I'm not sure I'd take either in a league-wide draft, but they've both been Pro Bowlers in this league.

I guess my point being that, unless I'm mistaken, every player in that list you provided has been to the Pro Bowl -- in most cases, on several occasions.

I think average players can sneak up and compile good ratings for a stretch. But over time, the cream typically rises to the top.

And while they're not on the list, I bet guys like Carson Palmer have had real high ratings, too, over the last few years.

It's difficult to find a modern-day great quarterback that has an average rating.

 

[burmafrd]

When Roger retired only Otto Graham had a rating higher. But the rating at that time was based on the game as it was in the 70's. THE WCO had yet to be brought forth. Dump offs to backs were the last resort. Short passing game was non existent. The rating needs to be changed. There is no way that 20+ QB's should have a higher passer rating then Roger.