NFL passing efficiency -

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(12-08-2020, 06:46 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I didn't compare Dalton's rookie year to Burrow's rookie year. I said Dalton's ENTIRE tenure with the Bengals (9 years), he only hit 65+ one year.
If you compare Burrow's 2020 to just a year ago in the NFL, he would have been tied for 12th. That's not a generation ago, just a year. So yes, I still consider 65 to be good.

Let's put this debate to rest because you're trying to nitpick something that is subjective.
I consider 65% to be highly accurate. It's a hard number for me. I don't really care how many others are hitting that number.
You consider highly accurate to be based on whether someone is Top 10 or top half of the league.
You are free to interpret how you want, but I am free to use my own grading scale.

And yet from 2012-2016, Dalton was above-average in completion %. Carson Palmer also only hit 65+ one year, but he was WELL above average in accuracy in 5 of his 7 years as a Bengal.

If you compare Burrow's 2020 to just a year ago, defenses had training camps and preseason, and at least 10 teams didn't have DL opt out of the season.

I am not nitpicking to point out a statistically undeniable fact that Burrow in 2020 was below average in accuracy. That's not an opinion, it's not subjective. It's just reality. You're free to choose to ignore reality, I am just pointing it out. 

At this rate, in just a few years your 65 number is going to be the new 55 unless they do something to change the path the NFL and it's rules currently are on.

Dan Marino, HoF QB, has a career 59.4% completion rate, which would be terrible now, and according to your static method not accurate... but he was above average in accuracy for the first 15 years of his 16 year career, most of the time well above. Yet Dan Marino never reached 65%, and only was above 60% 5 times in his 16 years. Static numbers make no sense. Compare them to their peers in their respective years, as that's the only way to actually gauge it.

:andy: