New Quarterback Rating

[WeVie]

Have you guys seen the new quarterback rating they are going to start using? I think this will be much better than the old passer rating.

Like body mass index, IQ and the gross national product, the NFL's passer rating roughly measures something important but yields deeply flawed results. It's always been a jury-rigged stat just waiting for the sabermetric revolution to kick out its struts and build something better in its place.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, the wrecking crew has arrived, and the extreme makeover has commenced. Welcome to Total Quarterback Rating (QBR), a new way of looking at QBs based on ESPN's analysis of nearly 60,000 NFL plays over the past three seasons. QBR looks at every facet of quarterback play, from passing and rushing to fumbling and taking sacks, and allocates credit or blame to QBs according to how each and every play they make contributes to their team's success.

Michael Vick led the NFL with 6.8 yards per rushing attempt last season, but the system the league uses to rate QBs gives him no credit for the 676 yards or nine TDs his legs generated.

Let's look at what's left out of the official passer rating formula. Michael Vick led the NFL with 6.8 yards per rushing attempt last season, but the system the league uses to rate QBs gives him no credit for the 676 yards or nine TDs his legs generated. Conversely, Jay Cutler lost 352 yards on sacks, but Osi Umenyiora could still be planting Cutler near Jimmy Hoffa and passer rating wouldn't notice. It counts the four categories it cares about, and only those four. Just as important, passer rating doesn't consider how or when a QB racks up passing yards, TDs or INTs. Throw for 300 yards and a couple of scores as you're trying to avoid getting shut out in a hopeless loss, and you'll inflate your rating; heave a Hail Mary jump-ball INT as the clock runs out in the first half, and you'll drag your rating down.

Check it here

 

[JoeFin]

It's better than the old rating, I agree. Of course it still can't account for a lot things, and some things it gives extra weight to (such as a 4th quarter play in a close game) may be given too much weight. For example, why was the game close in the fourth quarter to begin with? Was it because the QB hadn't really capitalized on situations in the first three quarters the way he should have? ... Maybe it does, I don't know. ... Still, overall, averaged over many games, it should be a better rating system than the one they have now.

Because this was an ESPN invention, however, I wouldn't be surprised if it has difficulty taking root. My guess is the other networks are certainly not going to want to use it (at first anyway). And the NFL itself will probably be reluctant to use something that a media outlet created because they wouldn't get the credit. (Yes, I think they're that petty.)

 

[WeVie]

Yeah at first I didn't realize that it came from ESPN and that could be a problem with it becoming an every day that shows up on the back of a football card. time will tell.