There are plenty of numbers bandied about at NFL draft time -- 40-yard dash times, bench press reps, vertical jump heights and even Wonderlic test results. All are familiar to most NFL fans. And yet, we rarely hear experts mention a player's college statistics. Most fans assume college stats are not accurate predictors of NFL performance. That's not always the case. My research of highly drafted quarterbacks since 1996 found that two college statistics adequately predict future NFL performance: games started and completion percentage. In fact, where a quarterback is selected in the draft has virtually no bearing on his NFL success. Games started and completion percentage are far better than the scouts at determining how good a player will be. Over the past 12 years, teams have repeatedly drafted players who haven't shown the ability to consistently complete passes at the college level, and these players have consistently failed. For some reason, scouts expected players such as Kyle Boller (48 percent), Jim Druckenmiller (54 percent) and Ryan Leaf (54 percent) to suddenly figure out how to complete passes once they hit the NFL. Having a high completion percentage (60 percent or higher) is no guarantee of success, especially if it was done in a small number of games in a fluky system (Tim Couch being a strong example), but it is a prerequisite for it. As to why games started should be an indicator of NFL success, there is a fairly obvious explanation -- good players start games. No one knows a player better than his coach, and if a coach decides he's good enough to start as a freshman, that's a good sign. Playing time also provides experience, which is crucial to the development of a young quarterback. However, there is a more complex reason why games started is an important indicator. In general, NFL scouts do an excellent job of talent evaluation when they have enough information. The more film that exists of a player, the easier it is to find weaknesses. When scouts don't get sufficient information, they place too much weight on "measurables" and off-field workouts, and make mistakes like Couch, Leaf or Akili Smith. Sometimes, when a player starts a lot of games, scouts have enough film to figure out that he is truly a "system quarterback," and not an NFL prospect. That's why Kliff Kingsbury and Chris Leak were not drafted high despite strong college numbers. Because of the assumption that scouts can do their job with the right information, these projections apply only to quarterbacks chosen in the first two rounds. What does this analysis tell us about this year's crop of young quarterbacks? Let's look at the four passers likely to be chosen on the first day of the draft. Matt Ryan (32 starts, 59.9 percent completion rate) Ryan, likely to be the only quarterback selected in the top 10, and perhaps the whole of the first round, has great physical tools and looks the part. He stands tall in the pocket and delivers the ball with authority. However, his collegiate stats are average. The completion rate is a little less disappointing when we consider Ryan played in a downfield passing NFL-style offense for a coach who completely abandoned the running game and let Ryan throw an absurd 654 pass attempts (second-most in the nation). I'm sure facing defenses that knew Boston College was a pass-first team hurt Ryan's senior numbers. His senior completion percentage was 59 percent, but he completed 62 percent of passes the previous two years when the team was more balanced. Nonetheless, I would be wary of guaranteeing $20 million to a guy who was not stellar in college. Statistically, the most similar recent college quarterbacks were Patrick Ramsey and Rex Grossman, who were a little worse, and Eli Manning, who was a little better. That's not a great group of comparable players, and taking Ryan in the top five is a significant risk. Brian Brohm (33 starts, 65.8 percent completion rate) A year ago, Brohm topped Mel Kiper's first 2008 draft board. Now it is a question whether he will even go in the first round. What changed over the last year? The answer is nothing. Brohm's weaknesses -- arm strength and mobility -- are the same as they were a year ago. So are his strengths: touch, decision-making, pocket presence and a strong work ethic. You can question his durability, but he had the same injuries in his past when he was a projected No. 1 overall pick a year ago. However, Louisville struggled this past season, finishing with a 6-6 record. So if we punished quarterback prospects because they played on bad teams, nobody in Denver would own a Jay Cutler replica jersey. Statistically, Brohm has a profile that points to success. His 33 starts are less than stellar, and the injuries that kept him from starting more should be cause for concern, but his career completion percentage is the stuff NFL stars are made of. It is possible Brohm could fail -- maybe he'll get injured again, perhaps the completion percentage will prove to be the product of a gimmicky college offense -- but if I could pick him in the second half of the first round, I would be awfully excited about it. Joe Flacco (26 starts, 63.4 percent completion rate) The numbers that Flacco put up at Division I-AA Delaware are quite good. Completing 63.4 percent of passes is impressive, even against lesser competition. The problem is that Flacco ended up at Delaware in the first place, which is the same reason why he started only 26 games. Flacco initially went to Pittsburgh. He redshirted his freshman year, and was unable to beat out Tyler Palko for the starting job after Dave Wannstedt arrived as head coach the following year. Palko went undrafted last year. If Flacco is as good as scouts believe he is, why didn't Wannstedt see that he was better than Palko? Wannstedt may not be the best coach in college football, but it is hard to believe he was that wrong. Flacco is not a bad prospect, but seems like the kind of guy you take a flier on the second day, not someone who should be getting a multimillion-dollar signing bonus. Chad Henne (47 starts, 59.7 percent completion rate) GOOD READ LINK to rest of story http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3350135
Interesting article. It does support a lot of rumors floating around that Ryan may be over-rated, and maybe not even the best qb in this draft class. I don't know what sample size Lewin used in his research, but I have heard of these two indicators being the most important in predicting a qb's success, so either it's more or less true, or the rumors I've heard in the past are based on Lewin's research too. Thanks!
Lewin's research has given us a real measuring stick on QB's ; I believe. The one thing that I would add to that is a QB's TD to INT ratio as an indicator of judgement. For all of Matt Ryan's glowing intangables his 1.5 to 1 ratio is a real question mark as to his judgement and how he sees the field.
Odd, I read the original article this past winter, and it used to list Lewin's top 15 qbs with a little write-up of the top 10, now the link doesn't show this year's qb write-up. Anyway, I copied the article, but I believe it's against the rules to paste all of it, so here's Lewin's ranking of this year's qbs. 1. Brian Brohm 2. Andre Woodson 3. Matt Ryan 4. Chad Henne 5. Josh Johnson 6. John David Booty 7. Erick Ainge 8. Colt Brennan 9. Joe Flacco 10. Kevin O'Connell 11. Dennis Dixon 12. Paul Smith 13. Matt Flynn 14. Nick Hill 15. Ricky Santos
Wow, Flacco below such qb studs as Booty and Ainge? And Ryan third? Who would thunk it? Using his two stats really changes the list from the mainstream media doesn't it...
Don't judge Flacco because Wannestache didn't play him, wannestache wouldn't recognize a good QB if they were standing on top of his chest.
I agree with you no to flacco if the phins do draft a qb in the 2nd rd i think henne will be the pick if he is there. i rather see the phins go after a de or lb imo.
John Beck from his freshman season on had a 60.0 completion% avg over 4 years. From his sophomore season on, had and completion % avg of 63.2, just a little FYI.
Im still kinda shocked at Brohms fall. One simple reason? Overanalysis. Still, I think some GM will be smart enough to take him in the first. I wouldnt be shocked to see him fairly early as well. Baltimore at 8, Carolina at 13, Chicago at 15. Toward the backend, Tampa, GreenBay and JVille would be good spots for him. If he is there at 32? He might be the one guy id take instead of a defensive player, maybe. No to Flacco and Henne.
i believe beck will come along this season and develop nicely. i like ryan, just not at number one overall which now seems to be a moot point. brohm i like more than flacco, and flacco more than henne but i think we have needs to address and probably would not take a qb til 5th/6th round, of course many things could happen to change that assessment. i like our staff and reports of beck working hard are encouraging, if lee likes him he's got a good shot at success
I agree with you aside from the Flacco over Henne. I like Henne more. Nice first post. Welcome to the boards.
by the way i like henne, and honestly he and flacco to me are about even, just like flacco's arm, kid can wing it
just saw henne on the nfl channel and there is something i like about the kid. he has some toughness and throws a nice ball. i'd be fine if we picked him up ahead of flacco