(05-28-2015, 03:22 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Ugh. Wasn't that the guy who started for the Eagles in the late 90's and started a season with 9 straight INT's without a TD?

I can't believe he's still playing. 


When you list numbers like 2.11, 1.88 and 1.77, it makes it seem like there's not a big difference, but you're leaving out the fact that all the numbers are small until they're added together, divided by 6, then multiplied by 100. Here's the entire formula:

(completion % minus 30) x 0.05
(yards per attempt minus 3) x 0.25 --- You were forgetting to subract 3 in your formula
Touchdown % x 0.2
2.375 minus (INT% x 0.25)

Here's the points Dalton was credited for the following stats, with actual passer rating points in parenthesis:

Completion %: 1.71 (28.5)
YPA: 1.02 (17.0)
TD%: 0.79 (13.2)
INT%: 1.49 (24.8)

Here's Aaron Rodgers' for comparison:

Completion %: 1.78 (29.7)
YPA: 1.36 (22.7)
TD%: 1.46 (24.3)
INT%: 2.13 (35.5)

So for Rodgers averaging 1.36 YPA more than Dalton on the season, he was awarded 5.7 more points to his passer rating. Pretty solid bump really.

I do have a lot of problems with the overall formula though. QB's should not be awarded points no matter how lousy their INT% is. Dalton had a bad INT% last year, yet he received his 2nd highest amount of points for that category. Also, rewarding points for both completion % and YPA is kind of redundant, as completion % plays so much into YPA. Instead, they should use yards per completion. I really can't believe that no one has improved on this formula through the years.

They have to be multiplied by 100 because once they're stripped down, you end up with things like 1.09 or .925

Aaron Rodgers earned every bit of that bump. It's not his fault another average QB cant to what he does. 

Every QB is judged by the same numbers. The ones that complete more passes, deeper down the field, throw more touchdowns and less interceptions are the ones that have a triple digit passer rating. Average QBs aren't hurt by the numbers that are used. They're hurt because they're average.

The standard QB rating system is not weighted. QBR is. That's why i don't like it. Subjective variables in a passer rating is no goot!

(05-28-2015, 07:03 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: One QB is statistically way better than the other and gets a lower rating is making your point?

Because it's how efficient a QB is. That's what QB rating is! How efficient you are. It's why they use averages because you can't judge who is better based on raw stats when you're dealing with completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns and interceptions. 

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I'm gonna beat the hell out of my desk with my head. 

(05-28-2015, 07:26 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Because it's how efficient a QB is. That's what QB rating is! How efficient you are. It's why they use averages because you can't judge who is better based on raw stats when you're dealing with completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns and interceptions. 

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I'm gonna beat the hell out of my desk with my head. 

How can't you judge who's better by raw stats? It's actually a pretty easy to, because it's an apples to apples comparison. Efficiency does not equal how good someone is either. Efficiency isn't always the best thing to point out when it's a race to see who can score more points.

(05-28-2015, 03:30 PM)djs7685 Wrote: You have a problem with it including YPA because it hurts QBs depending on their scheme.

I mentioned how TDs, yards, and every other stat possible is affected by scheme as well, but you don't seem to care much about that.

I wonder why?

I have nothing but anecdotes to back this up, but doesn't it seem like Peyton Manning takes 3 shots at the endzone every time they are even remotely close to scoring?  I mean, the guy is great but any time I see him play I tend to notice he looks like he's playing for stats.

(05-28-2015, 08:10 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: How can't you judge who's better by raw stats? It's actually a pretty easy to, because it's an apples to apples comparison. Efficiency does not equal how good someone is either. Efficiency isn't always the best thing to point out when it's a race to see who can score more points.

If you prefer to judge by raw stats, more power to ye. I'm about ready to bow out of this particular subject for this thread. Couple pages is more than enough discussion on the same topic.

(05-28-2015, 09:04 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I have nothing but anecdotes to back this up, but doesn't it seem like Peyton Manning takes 3 shots at the endzone every time they are even remotely close to scoring?  I mean, the guy is great but any time I see him play I tend to notice he looks like he's playing for stats.

Sounds a lot like the Colts with Luck. I think their run/pass ratio, inside the 10 yard line, is 1/1,000.