09-28-2015, 04:06 PM
(09-28-2015, 03:40 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Passer rating is still just efficiency. There can be scrubs with high passer rating (like there is almost EVERY year). How often do you see average QBs with high yards/TDs and low INTs? Very rarely. Passer rating is alright to look at, but it rewards QBs that have low attempts, and punishes QBs with higher attempts (You can still have a good passer rating with high attempts, it's just MUCH harder).
And I do understand passer rating. Stop acting like I don't. Just because it uses all the stats doesn't mean anything. If someone rarely throws the ball and has high YPA it screws the whole thing up, because it rewards more points for TDs and yards than it would with people with lower YPA.
"Just" efficiency? How many inefficient QBs are considered to be good/great? It's sad how you write it off as "just" efficiency whenever that tells us quite a bit about a QB. Efficiency is a big deal whether you admit that or not.
You're completely missing the point because of your crusade against the passer rating formula. It doesn't "reward QBs that have low attempts", it rewards QBs that are efficient with their passes regardless of their attempts. You aren't magically awarded with a higher passer rating just because you don't throw as much as somebody else.
Over the course of a full season, how many times have you seen a guy with an 80 passer rating that you would say "man, that QB looked great this season!" and how many times do you see a guy with a 100+ passer rating over 16 games that played like shit?
