07-07-2015, 11:52 AM
(07-07-2015, 11:19 AM)spazz70 Wrote: So, my apologies to both of you...Here was my confusion...I did not go and confirm the statistics that he laid out
When you mention ESPN and QBR as it was quoted..."Game by game QBR as per ESPN for 2013 & 2014"
"QBR" is a made up statistical line from ESPN.... "Passer Rating" is the official stat of the NFL...Does that make sense?
No, my theory is that any gimmick type of QB play will eventually be stopped outside of passing the ball as a QB is required to do...I am 44 years old and have seen a lot of football in my life...If a running QB was the wave of the future or would have ever been a no brainer scheme over an extended period of time then QBs like Tommy Frazier, Kordell Stewart, Randle El, Tebow, Crouch, RG3, Troy Smith, Charlie Ward, Andre Ware and many, many others would have been superstars in the NFL....I almost bet that if you look at the introduction of the read option in the NFL it would coincide with the ESPN QBR in the timeline...
I am not arguing that running the ball is part of the game but to compare a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning to a Colin Kaepernick or Russell Wilson because they are better athletes makes no sense.....Let me put it this way...If several teams decided to start tossing the ball back to a WR or a RB 20 times a game and have them pass the ball would you think of this as a gimmick or a trend of the future? Would you make a stat line for the WR or RB to enhance their "overall" rating?
You are 100% right. ESPN lists QBR as their Total QBR and RAT as a passer rating. I always took Passer Rating as QBR. Totally my fault. I will amend the posts.
