The NFL QB Rating

[jblaze2004]

This is probably a better ranking metric system:
NFL Total QBR - 2021 Season Leaders

 

[DandyDon52]

all stats are flawed, including qbr and passing ratings.

 

[JoeKing]

QB rating is a dinosaur of a stat. People should stop using it to measure how good a QB performs. Okay, put a pin in that thought.

ESPN sucks. IMO, it contributes very little to the world of sports entertainment. I hate just about everything about it. I don't even call it by its real name, I call it BSPN for obvious reasons. So trust me when I say the people at BSPN have given us one thing in this world that's not totally bad... QBR. That's right, QBR. It replaces the old QB rating system to give us a more accurate all telling picture of a QB's performance in a game. It's not perfect but it's an improvement IMO over the old QB rating stat.

Pull pin in the original paragraph and let's get back to it... QB rating is not a good stat. So I give you a reading assignment, you're welcome.

Explanation of the New QBR Total Quarterback Rating for the NFL | Bleacher Report | Latest News, Videos and Highlights

 

[JoeKing]

This is probably a better ranking metric system:
NFL Total QBR - 2021 Season Leaders

Thank you for posting this.

 

[plasticman]

That’s a difficult assumption to prove, especially because the Bucs didn’t have a particularly good pass D last year. They were 21st in the league. Their D is about preventing the run and then Brady out dueling the opponent’s QB while they have a strong pass rush.

Their pass rush took advantage of KC’s Oline problems in the super bowl and suddenly people pretend like TB wasn’t the 21st best pass D last year. And they were allowing 70% completion to boot. TB got blown out a couple of times because they couldn’t stop people.

The Bucs had an excellent pass defense last season.

The numbers for attempts and yardage are the results of not being able to run against that defense which ranked #1 in that category across the board.

However, the Buc defense were in the top ten in both INT's and average yards per reception. Opponents passed because they had no choice

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

The Bucs had an excellent pass defense last season.

The numbers for attempts and yardage are the results of not being able to run against that defense which ranked #1 in that category across the board.

However, the Buc defense were in the top ten in both INT's and average yards per reception. Opponents passed because they had no choice

is this not what happened Thursday? Dak was 25th this weekend in YPA, and 22nd in YPC

 

[Ranched]

MEANWHILE....

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Is everybody really going to just accept this dude's brain dead interpretation of the data?

Let's unravel the lies one by one..

Dak and Brady were among the 5 lowest rated QBs.

That's odd since on the very link he provided the 5 lowest rated QBs are:

Aaron Rodgers 36.6
Ryan Fitzpatrick 56.3
Trevor Lawrence 70.1
Matt Ryan - 71.6
Andy Dalton - 72.9

This list also disproves the other lie "there were no QB's below 90."

In fact there were a total of 14 QBs with a passer rating below 90.. And none of them had to face the Super Bowl champion defense which last time we saw was playing at a higher level than any defense in the land..

Look if you wanna be critical of Dak fine.. but making up stupid crap to seem like you know what you're talking about? That's pure garbage.. And let's not leave out that if not for a ball that went right through Lamb's hands into an INT Dak would ALSO have had a passer rating above 120..

The bottom of my OP says I missed the second page of results and that Rodgers was at the bottom.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Dude must have seen my scathing critique and edited his post.. Your honor I withdraw the question..

I edited it a minute after I posted it. You just don’t know how to read into the end.

 

[BigD_95]

After opening night, sports fans were blown away by the epic QB battle. Brady showed why he was the GOAT. And Dak silenced critics and earned everyone's respect. Nobody had a bad thing to say about the two QBs.

Fast forward a few nights, what we witnessed on Thursday was the most pathetic QB battle of opening week, according to the NFL passer rating metric.

https://www.nfl.com/stats/player-stats/category/passing/2021/REG/all/passingpasserrating/DESC

Stafford and Wilson topped the week with 150+ ratings. Another 7 QBs had a 120+ rating.

The 5 lowest rated QBs were:
Dak
Baker
Brady
Goff
D. Jones

Dak is the only one in that group above 100. Nobody is below 90.

Some of the all-time greats barely had a season with a 90+ rating. Either modern QBs are that good, this metric is that meaningless, or evaluating a QB is more than just looking at stats.

Edit: My bad. Didn't realize there was a second page of results. Looks like Rodgers was actually the worst with a 36 rating. That being said, Dak and Brady were still in the bottom third according to the metric.

I was all excited about Dak after the game - then you pretty much every QB in the league putting up crazy numbers

 

[Fastpitch Dad]

Is everybody really going to just accept this dude's brain dead interpretation of the data?

Let's unravel the lies one by one..

Dak and Brady were among the 5 lowest rated QBs.

That's odd since on the very link he provided the 5 lowest rated QBs are:

Aaron Rodgers 36.6
Ryan Fitzpatrick 56.3
Trevor Lawrence 70.1
Matt Ryan - 71.6
Andy Dalton - 72.9

This list also disproves the other lie "there were no QB's below 90."

In fact there were a total of 14 QBs with a passer rating below 90.. And none of them had to face the Super Bowl champion defense which last time we saw was playing at a higher level than any defense in the land..

Look if you wanna be critical of Dak fine.. but making up stupid crap to seem like you know what you're talking about? That's pure garbage.. And let's not leave out that if not for a ball that went right through Lamb's hands into an INT Dak would ALSO have had a passer rating above 120..

Very good post except for your "brain dead" comment and your reference to the Lamb int.

The Lamb int. happens to every team in every game, in some sort of fashion. There are plays all the time that could be game-changing.

I remember the Washington Post wrote an article several years ago when the Commanders went 3-13. In this article they went through every game and said if you just changed 3 plays in every game they would have been 13-3.

It was so ridiculous that they would even print it, but if you have ever read the Post you would not be surprised. Wanting to take back a single play and say woulda, shoulda, coulda, it doesn't hold much water imho. Like I said, can be done with every team in every single game.

 

[USArmyVet]

Today's NFL is geared to help QBs. Throwing for 300 is average. Most good QBs nowadays throw for 300+ yards on average, but how many pass for 400+?

That should answer your question.

Derek Carr just threw for 435 yards against the Ravens.....and unlike Dak, Carr won the game....so Carr is better than Dak I guess.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Derek Carr just threw for 435 yards against the Ravens.....and unlike Dak, Carr won the game....so Carr is better than Dak I guess.

Did he do it in only 4 quarters? Was he going against the defending SB champions D?

I didn't think so.

Try again.

 

[USArmyVet]

Did he do it in only 4 quarters? Was he going against the defending SB champions D?

I didn't think so.

Try again.

You are the one that touted the 400+ yards passing as if that made Dak special....but clearly it doesn't.

 

[America's Cowboy]

You are the one that touted the 400+ yards passing as if that made Dak special....but clearly it doesn't.

You truly disappoint me. I thought you were smarter than that?

Did you even look at the game stats?

Derek Carr passed for 101 yards in Overtime by itself! That means...in 4 regular quarters of play, he actually passed for 334 yards AND against another team, not the Bucs. It took him an extra period to reach 400+ passing yards what Dak accomplished in 4 quarters.

Try again.

 

[USArmyVet]

You truly disappoint me. I thought you were smarter than that?

Did you even look at the game stats?

Derek Carr passed for 101 yards in Overtime by itself! That means...in 4 regular quarters of play, he actually passed for 334 yards AND against another team, not the Bucs. It took him an extra period to reach 400+ passing yards what Dak accomplished in 4 quarters.

Try again.

Derek Carr accomplished what Dak couldn't: leading his team to a victory against a tough defense.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Derek Carr accomplished what Dak couldn't: leading his team to a victory against a tough defense.

Derek Carr did his part. It took him 5 quarters. His team won the game.

Derek Carr had a 89.5 passer rating and a 52.8 QBR.

Dak Prescott had a 101.4 passer rating and a 74.3 QBR.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/player

Easily, we can see who is the better QB after Week 1.

 

[USArmyVet]

Derek Carr did his part. It took him 5 quarters. His team won the game.

Derek Carr had a 89.5 passer rating and a 52.8 QBR.

Dak Prescott had a 101.4 passer rating and a 74.3 QBR.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/player

Easily, we can see who is the better QB after Week 1.

Easily we can see who led the team to victory....and who didn't.....as wins/losses matter more than personal stats....unless you play fantasy football.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Easily we can see who led the team to victory....and who didn't.....as wins/losses matter more than personal stats....unless you play fantasy football.

We're talking about the player, not the team.

QBs do not win games by themselves, nor are wins solely attributed to QBs. That goes to the team.

Someone doesn't know football.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Well, that 'bus driver' won 3 Super Bowls so I would rather have a 'bus driver' than a passing stats guy any day of the week.

Aikman didnt win anything. The Cowboys team did. Aikman had that opportunity because of the team and players around him.

This is the simple concept that QB challenged laymans like you dont understand and never will.

Aikman couldnt win a game with Emmitt. When Aikman didnt have great talent he was terrible.