Come on. The offense remains the same. I would assume very rarely plays are designed ONLY for specific players, and if they are, then you have other receivers running routes to free up that one guy. So, everyone has to do their job for that play to be successful. Also, I would not blame the WR corp for individual players mistakes, but for the offense AS A WHOLE to be functional and effective, ALL players have to be working as a unit. You guys keep wanting to try to keep making things about individuals, and that's not correct. I think maybe if you'd played high school sports you'd understand more of what I'm talking about. For instance, I played on a soccer team that was horrible. There were a bunch of unathletic kids, with myself and like 4 other guys who were athletic. I can tell you, no matter how well the 4 or 5 of us played, there were 6 or 7 guys playing terribly, and that makes it almost impossible to win.
Right, but that's independent of what I'm saying. The passer rating formula itself only holds one thing constant: the QB. In some cases you can show something else is constant (e.g., Belichick + Brady) but often you can explicitly show there is variation in players, especially over seasons. So it's an empirical question as to how much you can remove the effects of the surroundings. That can't just be intuited. I think post #158 summarizes my argument: https://www.thephins.com/threads/thoughts-on-the-dolphins-cowboys-game.94643/page-4#post-3207430 The question is whether you disagree with anything in that post.
Actually this wasn't a bad idea. I never looked past the top 15 or so. LOTS of surprises. And lots of guys I never heard of lol. Anyway, I just posted the top 100 QB's with 2500+ career passing attempts. Keep in mind this is ONLY regular season. Also note that my database isn't complete, especially w.r.t. QB's before 1978, so think of this as the top 100 since 1978 unless there's a guy in there that happened to play before that. And this doesn't include 2019. As I said.. LOTS of surprises and I think some of that is due to passer rating not including QB running ability. 1. Steve_Young 2. Joe_Montana 3. Aaron_Rodgers 4. Roger_Staubach 5. Peyton_Manning 6. Kurt_Warner 7. Tom_Brady 8. Russell_Wilson 9. Drew_Brees 10. Tony_Romo 11. Ken_Anderson 12. Dan_Marino 13. Philip_Rivers 14. Dan_Fouts 15. Bob_Griese 16. Neil_Lomax 17. Jim_Kelly 18. Bert_Jones 19. Jeff_Garcia 20. Ben_Roethlisberger 21. Danny_White 22. Matt_Ryan 23. Rich_Gannon 24. Brett_Favre 25. Daunte_Culpepper 26. Bernie_Kosar 27. Mark_Brunell 28. Trent_Green 29. Dave_Krieg 30. Ken_OBrien 31. Joe_Theismann 32. Boomer_Esiason 33. Steve_Bartkowski 34. Randall_Cunningham 35. Troy_Aikman 36. Brian_Sipe 37. Ken_Stabler 38. Warren_Moon 39. Donovan_McNabb 40. Matt_Schaub 41. Brad_Johnson 42. Neil_ODonnell 43. John_Elway 44. Steve_McNair 45. Terry_Bradshaw 46. Phil_Simms 47. Carson_Palmer 48. Marc_Bulger 49. Jeff_George 50. Steve_Beuerlein 51. Jim_McMahon 52. Brian_Griese 53. Mark_Rypien 54. Bobby_Hebert 55. Chris_Chandler 56. Jim_Everett 57. Ron_Jaworski 58. Matthew_Stafford 59. Andy_Dalton 60. Alex_Smith 61. Jim_Harbaugh 62. Andrew_Luck 63. Jake_Delhomme 64. Steve_DeBerg 65. Lynn_Dickey 66. Matt_Hasselbeck 67. Archie_Manning 68. Jay_Cutler 69. Jeff_Blake 70. Tommy_Kramer 71. Steve_Grogan 72. Derek_Carr 73. Jim_Plunkett 74. Ryan_Tannehill 75. Drew_Bledsoe 76. Sam_Bradford 77. Cam_Newton 78. Stan_Humphries 79. Eli_Manning 80. Aaron_Brooks 81. Chris_Miller 82. Jim_Zorn 83. Joe_Ferguson 84. Jason_Campbell 85. Vinny_Testaverde 86. Michael_Vick 87. John_Kitna 88. Joe_Flacco 89. Kyle_Orton 90. Doug_Williams 91. Jay_Schroeder 92. Richard_Todd 93. Josh_McCown 94. Gus_Frerotte 95. Jake_Plummer 96. Ryan_Fitzpatrick 97. Matt_Cassel 98. Kerry_Collins 99. Trent_Dilfer 100. Blake_Bortles
Many thanks for that cbrad. I would encourage people to determine whether they believe the ordering of the vast majority of those quarterbacks is consistent with their perceptions of the quarterbacks’ individual ability. In other words, is career passer rating a fairly valid measure of quarterbacks’ individual ability for you specifically. I would suggest you start with the easily made observation that the Hall of Famers on the list are far closer to the top than to the bottom.
I also think it's equally important to point out that Duante Culpepper was just barely edged out by Brett Favre in the top 25 OF THE PAST 40 YEARS. Please raise your hand if Culpepper was in your personal top 25....
The issue there is that Culpepper was very good pre-injury, and Favre was a gunslinger who threw a relatively high percentage of interceptions, thus lowering his passer rating.
How many HoFers played on bad teams? Again that list does not address my issue. We're just going in a circle.
Yeah there's nothing to really dispute there because that's by definition true. Passer rating for a QB only requires that you track the QB and nothing else. The formula itself never requires you to keep the coach the same, the WR corps the same or anything else constant. It's by definition the case that passer rating ONLY requires keeping who the QB is constant. And remember, "constant" = "NEVER changes". Like I said in the post you quoted.. there may be cases where other things are also constant but that's generally not the case, and often it applies only to a coach + QB combo. I don't know of a case where it's true for OL or WR or "WR corps" for a longer career.
Doesn’t surprise me. Culpepper”s good pre-injury stats make up the vast volume of his passing attempts. Favre had more down years on his resume because of the length of his career. If you wanted argue that Favre was better at his peak than Culpepper I believe the stats would back that up. Bob Griese at #15 is the one that surprised me the most. Also since this is regular season stats the post season heroics of some QBs such as Terry Bradshaw or Eli Manning aren’t included in the assessment.
Once you realize league average ratings were in the mid-60's for most of Bob Griese's career it makes sense: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GrieBo00.htm https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/NFL/passing.htm
That’s why I’m asking you to determine whether there is a correlation between the ordering of the vast majority of the quarterbacks on that list and your perceptions of their individual ability.
Of the ones you’ve seen play, do you see a relationship between where they are in the list and your perceptions of their individual ability?
I was glad to see Ken Anderson at 11. There is no question in my mind he belongs there. The fact he isn't in the hall of fame shows inconsistency on how HOF's are selected.
He had it extra tough because he was a QB and didn't win a SB. Actually, one utility of statistics we've seen from baseball is that their increasing respect for statistical analysis has made it LESS likely that awards like MVP go only to players on strong teams. It used to be the norm that the MVP had to be on a strong team, but with metrics like Wins Above Replacement (WAR) becoming widely respected you see guys like Mike Trout regularly win or come close to winning MVP. Ken Anderson might never make it, having come too early for that kind of adjustment in thinking, but I think we'll see a tipping point not too far in the future where stats start to influence the HoF voting process more, and I think the first real test case will be Eli Manning. Eli has tons of passing attempts and 2 SB's but he has lousy efficiency stats as you can see in that list. I'm really hoping Eli doesn't make it because that to me is a sign that z-score efficiency stats are becoming more influential.
Eli Manning is the John Stallworth of QBs. Very average regular season stats, but is best remembered for some key plays in Superbowls. I think he makes it in even if just for the helmet catch.
If Eli Manning’s name were Eli Smith, I don’t think he would even be in the conversation. The problem with him in terms of Hall of Fame induction is that he’s going to get some additional consideration, perhaps if only on an unconscious level, simply because of his bloodline.
Also, we're talking about the rating system being flawed. So using that system to determine the constants seems silly at best. I don't care of the rating system only considers the QB to be a constant, I think that's a big problem with the rating system. QBs should not get the credit for YAC and TDS that are a result of YAC. Once the receiver catches the ball, he should now be considered a runner, and yards or TDS accrued after the catch should only be attributed to the receiver.
The nature of the game makes the quarterback the constant. For any metric you developed to measure quarterback play, the quarterback would be the constant. Even if you apportioned yards after catch to receivers, for example, those would presumably be different receivers over time, not the same ones, and again the quarterback would be the constant. What you really need to settle on is the idea that for small sample sizes (single games for example), the metric we’re talking about can often have lots of error associated with it, but for large sample sizes (careers for example), it doesn’t. Nobody looks at the career passer rating of Dan Marino and concludes that he was the beneficiary of his surrounding cast, and without them he would’ve floundered. They attribute that statistic to his individual ability, as they should.
I'm not arguing that bad QBs would look great. Lol. I think many QBs would have lower ratings, if we changed it up, but they would be more honest ratings. The good QBs would still have better ratings, but it would certainly be a more complete picture of the QB and his ability than we currently have.
Yeah, this whole conversation didn't start over "let's figure out who's the best of all time". In my mind, this is a conversation to figure out, do we start Tannehill this week after he had 3 picks and a strip sack...or do we move to the backup because he's a hopeless cause? We just went six freaking years saying he's great, he sucks, he's a perennial top 10 QB if he had a line, a RB, or whatever. Six years and many would argue that he should still be a starter.....because QB Rating lies. I mean heck, he's the 76th best QB of all time based on CBrad's metrics earlier...surely to God he's one of the top 32 today. That must be true unless the ratings are lying to us (which they clearly are). For instance, one of RT's best games ever was four passes within 3 yards of the LOS that went for TD's against the Browns. The stats said a perfect QBR with 300+ yards and 4 TD's...did that tell us the truth though? There's lies on both sides of the equation. The raw data could be gathered for us to answer these question on a week to week basis and have accurate representations of what QB's are doing in college and in the pros. Because we QUICKLY need these answers on Herbert, Tua, Rosen, etc. and there's no way to currently generate that without watching weeks of film. I mean, take last week alone- I said Rosen played a solid 1st game....Cbrad says he sucked. And the stats ignore 100% of my argument (dropped TD passes) and about 50% of his (accuracy on throws, reads, release levels, etc).
If Flores starts Rosen the rest of this season I think we'll have a large enough sample size to determine whether we need to draft a QB with our #1 pick. And Rosen's ratings can be adjusted for defense. No need to adjust for coaching as long as we have the same coach. One can't adjust for OL or so.. but no adjustment for OL is giving you a full standard deviation higher rating than pre-adjustment. So we can debate along the way.. but as the sample size gets larger I think the stats will show what we want.
Sure, and I'm by no means sold on Rosen...there's just no buyer's remorse yet and I think he's off to a good start. I'd just like some more accurate data to tell us about the game behind the game.
Bert Jones, Danny White, Dave Krieg, Steve Bartkowski, Brian Sipe, Bobby Hebert, Steve DeBerg, Lynn Dickey, Tommy Kramer, Steve Grogan, Stan Humphries, Chris Miller, Jim Zorn, Joe Ferguson, Jason Campbell, Jay Schroeder, Richard Todd. So 17 of them I basically knew nothing about. And a lot of others that I've heard of I never watched. And of course most QB's I know of and have watched play I've only watched play occasionally. That's probably true for everyone, including you. So it doesn't really mean much to say you "watched every one of them". It's not like you watched every game they played nor is your memory perfect or unbiased. When it comes to longer careers I think it's MUCH better to rely on stats than people's imperfect memories about the player.
Don't we have three #1 round picks? We could use any one of them for a QB if the GM thinks they can improve the teams performance and the chances for success are about the same. I remember an article I read some years ago that pointed out statistically that the quality of players, that is the measurement of their success in the NFL, drops off significantly after the first 20 picks. If that article was correct, and I believe it was, then focusing on the first 3 or 5 or even 10 picks for a specific player is typically a fools errand. The opportunity to pick a good player is better in the earliest picks because their is a larger selection to pick from. The ability to determine who that player should be is the hard part and it is not fool-proof. This can be observed in action as fans pre-select their future hero's, while those players are still in their sophomore year. Fans don't know which draft these guys will be in, much less how they will progress in their last two years of play. The fans don't have nearly as much information or know as much as the Front Office does; but when you read their posts, it's clear that they are convinced they do. We are better off scrutinizing all the players likely to be available to us and then decide: 1) Which players are the best fit for our most serious positions of need. 2) The next step is to determine how will any given pick effect our following picks, in terms of improving our team. 3) Based on the results of the first two steps, find if their is an opportunity to trade down to increase our draft picks without decreasing the general desirability of any following picks? ex. There is a strong CB class and we need better CB's. Can we turn one pick into two and get 2 CB's of the same general capability of the one we are looking at with a given pick? This type of analysis continues throughout the draft and into the post draft period picking UDFA's. This approach offers the simplicity of showing exactly what we should do while avoiding the complexity of how to do it. That should make a lot of sense, because I'm only just a fan!
I saw all of them play except for Lynn Dickey and Archie Manning, and I agree that their career passer ratings are a much better way than memory to evaluate them.
You're right about there being a relative drop-off in quality from the bottom 1/3 of the 1st round but that's only because teams aren't all picking the same position. All kinds of positions are picked, from QB to WR to DE to DT, etc... So that kind of makes sense. I think it's pretty clear you'd want your first choice rather than your second or third, and while for many positions you can get that player after the top 5 picks it's often the case you can't with QB's because there's a run on QB's. So with QB's I think you want to pick #1. Having said that, it's still more likely our pick is no better than average. Here are all QB's taken 1st overall since 1970: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_overall_National_Football_League_draft_picks Bradshaw, Plunkett, Bartkowski, Elway, Testaverde, Aikman, George, Bledsoe, Peyton, Couch, Vick, Carr, Palmer, Eli, Smith, Russell, Stafford, Bradford, Newton, Luck, Winston, Goff, Mayfield, Murray. Lots of "busts" relative to expectation in there.
Ok? I mean, I wasn't around when he was playing, so I have no idea how accurate your statement. Also, saying one QB is kind of my point. I think it's probably pretty rare.
Honestly, I think we have six first round picks....because we're going to pass on Tua to rake in the motherlode. The more I watch this front office, the more I think they'll trade that #1 pick unless they see a clear vision of filling in most pieces in FA and the first few rounds of the draft.
Without looking anything up online and going from the best of my recollection... Bert Jones, Baltimore Colts, late 70's early 80's Danny White, heir to Roger Staubach in Dallas....also the team's punter Dave Krieg, Seattle Seahawks in the 70's Steve Bartkowski, Atlanta Falcons in the 70's Brian Sipe, Cleveland Browns and Jacksonville Bulls during the days of the USFL Bobby Hebert, New Orleans Saints Steve DeBerg, Journeyman QB, mostly in KC. The BEST play action pass QB I've EVER seen. His hands were so large that he could hold that ball WAY out there and tuck it away at the last second. Played for Miami the year Marino went down Lynn Dickey, Green Bay Packers back in the 70's Tommy Kramer, heir to Fran Tarkington in Minnesota Steve Grogan, New England Patriots late 70's early 80s Stan Humphries, San Diego Chargers in the 80's Chris Miller, Atltana Falcons in the late 80's Jim Zorn, Seattle Seahawks back in the 70's as I recall Joe Ferguson, Buffalo Bills as I recall....back in the early 70's Jason Campbell, journeyman QB...Washington Redskins during the 80's 90's Jay Schroeder, Another journeyman QB but made his mark with the Raiders Richard Todd, Awww, Richard Todd..QB of our nemesis...the Jests. God I'm old! LMAO
I caught the tail end of that conversation...and still haven't looked at the topic that deeply. I was merely responding to the question of HoF QBs that played on losing teams.
There are 26 quarterbacks from what the Hall of Fame labels the Modern Era in the Hall of Fame. This apparently dates back to 1946. Some of these quarterbacks I only have vague memories of insomuch as remembering my grandparents speak of them...Blanda, graham, jurgenson just to name a few but there are quarterbacks on that list whom I vividly remember and even though some had flashes of light, the team they were on were like one hit wonders... Joe Namath and the Jets. After their Super Bowl victory over the Colts, they never were anything after that Same with Kenny Stabler and the Raiders Warren Moon and the Oilers Now even though i included some Super Bowl champions on that list of bad teams, I don’t include quarterbacks such as Fran Tarkington nor Jim Kelly just due to the fact that if you are on a team that goes to multiple Super Bowls, you’re not on a bad team. So are there HoFers who played on bad teams...yes, there are multiple examples
I believe it’s five first-rounders. The two we normally would’ve had in 2020 and 2021, the two from Houston, and the one from Pittsburgh.
Was looking at which team had the most 1st round picks in a single draft and it looks like it's the Jets in 2000 with 4. Here's what's depressing about that. That was a very good draft by the Jets, taking Shaun Ellis, John Abraham, Chad Pennington and Anthony Becht (first two made the Pro Bowl). They even followed that up with Laveranues Coles in the 3rd (another Pro Bowler). The effect of that draft on win%? Zero lol. Jets were a 9, 12 and 8-win team from 1997-1999 and then a 9, 10, 9-win team from 2000-2002. There was a coaching change in 2000, from Parcells to Groh and then in 2001 to Edwards, but still.. very surprising IMO. Just goes to show how many different things have to go right to make a sustained change in win%. Speaking of coaching changes.. Gase's offense is currently ranked #31 in points scored LOLOLOL. Jets play Eagles, Cowboys, Patriots and Jaguars before playing the Dolphins. There's a decent chance that Jets vs. Dolphins game is a game between two 0-7 teams.