I think both have value. One is an attempt to standardize and grade a single position using what are undoubtedly team stats. The other attempts to isolate the individual's performance.
Rank Tannehill Among Young QB's?
- Thread starter So Be
- Start date
I think both have value. One is an attempt to standardize and grade a single position using what are undoubtedly team stats. The other attempts to isolate the individual's performance.
roy_miami
2020 cant get here soon enough
Yeah well you think buttfumble was good while passer rating said he was and predicted he would be horrible. I'll continue to trust passer rating over your eyes thank you very much. And in my interpretation passer rating is also predicting that Geno Smith will be horrible as well. It predicted Russell Wilson would win a SB. Its predictive that Foles and RGIII could be very good. Tannehill is indeterminate so far.
I don't think he was good, I KNOW he was good. I also know he stunk in 2012 but we was good in '09(for a rookie) and '11 and really good in 2010. I don't need blind #s to tell me what I can see. I have seen enough awful QB play to know the difference(including Mark in 2012). some guys play better than their #s, some play worse than their #s. I'll take lesser #s and QBs that make plays to win over greater #s that run and hide in big spots.
Sorry but no. It is a measure of the whole offense's effectiveness (including the QB). Any attempt to tie it to the QB and only the QB is bogus, IMO. All season long we read that Brady's passer rating was down because of the poor set of receivers that he had to throw to.
roy_miami
2020 cant get here soon enough
Tom Brady's passer rating was down relative to Tom Brady's norm and other great QB performances in 2013. Tom Brady's passer rating was not low, it was still very good. You have to play lights out to have a rating over 100+, its really hard. Its like shooting a round 6 under par at a major, just because you do it on Thursday and Friday doesn't mean you have to maintain that on Saturday and Sunday to be considered good even though its the same course and same conditions. Its just really hard to shoot six under par at a major, if you do it that probably means you played a great round, and shooting even par the next day doesn't take anything away from the six under. Tom Brady has been consistently great throughout his career and his 87 rating, which is still really good relative to the average NFL QB, was his lowest rating since 2003.
I promise you, if Tannehill maintained an 87 rating throughout the season we make the playoffs.
So Be
Active Roster
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
I view them differently because they are but, consider them all, and then some.
So Be
Active Roster
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
PFF, in their signature stats, puts out a QB rating along the same guidelines as NFL. However, they considered drops, throw aways, spikes, and total yards in the air. With those few changes, they have RT at #18 as opposed to the NFL at #21. This has nothing to do with their grading and ranks, which are totally separate.
So Be
Active Roster
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
Agreed. For the most part, as PFF has stated, they are pretty much the same as the NFL when you compare the two. I believe that Tannehill is the biggest difference in 15 spots in the rankings of the two.
Now most here have seen every snap Tannehill took last year. The difference is between blind stats including the team performance to watching RT's individual performance on every play. IYO, what caused the biggest disparity between the two in ranking all QB's in the NFL? It was not a typo. :)
For me, I don't care if rankings are official, unofficial or who is doing them from the NFL, PFF, ESPN, Jaws, the national media to a small site looking for some clicks. I either agree or do not agree.
Right. He had free agents that Bilicheat brought in because in his wizardry, he KNEW they were good enough. Its his team, his system, and who knows Brady better than hoodie? Save the, "he didn't have any receivers" crap for some other argument...doesn't wash. And oh, God forbid he was without the single best TE in the game for a while...there's probably 29-30 other teams that wish they could've had those few games with such a weapon. So is he only good when surrounded with pro-bowl receiving?
Says a lot.
What does any of that have to do with what I wrote. The real question is this - Was Brady's QB rating the lowest since 2003 because he isn't as good as he once was or was it because of his supporting cast? I think Brady is still a great QB DESPITE the subpar (for him) QB rating. IMO, it's not really worth debating. The QB rating is affected by the rest of the team's performance. If that is true for a great QB like Brady, then surely it can be true for Tannehill.
QB ratings fluctuate by a significant amount during their careers. Brady's jumped by 30 points in one season from 2006 to 2007. Did he magically become a much better QB in one season? No, the receiving corp went from Reche Caldwell and an old Troy Brown to Randy Moss and Wes Welker. Likewise, his rating dropped by more than 10 points from 2012 to 2013. His receiving corp went from Welker, Brandon Lloyd, Gronk, and Hernandez to Danny Amendola, Julian Edelman, and 4 fewer games with Gronk.
I don't know how to make it any clearer. QB rating is a whole team stat. Heavily influenced by the QB but still a whole team stat.
---------- Post added at 08:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:16 PM ----------
And I promise you that if he had even decent OL play, he would have had a rating of way over 87.
No, he was good with below average receiving talent and he had one of the greatest seasons of all time with excellent receiving talent.
Are you asking why was the gap between PFF's QB rating of Tannehill 11 spots lower than their individual grading and rank? IMO, it comes down to the play of the OL, the running game, and the horrid play calling. He was consistently put in bad situations and did about as well as could be expected under the circumstances.
I will argue until the day that I die that Tannehill was hampered by the situation. I will not guarantee how he will play when the OL can pass block and we have a running game and we don't "go/go go" the snap count. I can assume that he will perform better but nobody can guarantee it.
I can assume it because I have seen other QBs play well when they are protected and very poorly when they are not protected. I have seen HOF caliber QBs get beaten and play poorly because of repeated sacks and having to pass the ball with no deception to confuse the defense. I have seen many, many QBs struggle when there is no running game to take pressure off.
Let the Dolphins fix the other problems on the offense then we can judge Tannehill more fairly.
roy_miami
2020 cant get here soon enough
You are not getting it. The closer to perfection you get the more fluctuation you will see, fluctuation doesn't mean anything. If a golfer averages 7 under par you are going to see wild fluctuation from 59s to 72s. Peyton Manning's passer rating from his second season has flutuated close to 30 points, but he averages a 97 passer rating and in 15 years he only had one bad season with a rating of 84. Mark $anchez fluctuated very little, only 11 points but all of his seasons were bad and averaged 71 passer rating. Chad Henne fluctuated only 7 points but averaged 75 passer rating and never had a single good season in six years as a pro.
So Tom Brady fluctuated, that fluctuation is natural when you are posting excellent numbers. No excuses are required for him.
No. You are not getting it. The fluctuation is also caused by other factors. A jump in 30 points from one season to the next by Brady was directly attributable to the changes in the surrounding talent.
After his rookie year, Manning had only three seasons where his QB rating fluctuated significantly (2001, 2004 and 2013). In 2001 he had a slight increase in INTs and in 2004 and 2013 he had big years for TDs. All of the rest of the seasons his rating only fluctuated by
17 points and usually fewer than 10 points between two seasons. Why? Because the talent that surrounded him was remarkably consistent. While in his prime, Marvin Harrison only played fewer than 15 games once. Reggie Wayne played 11 consecutive years of 16 games per season. Edgerin James missed 16 games in 7 years. 10 of those were in 2001 (which just happens to coincide with the worst year for QB rating other than his rookie year.
In all of his seasons, the rest of Mannings stats were remarkably consistent. Yards, completion %, YPA all very consistent. Other than the blips mentioned above, even his TDs and INTs are very consistent. He also just happened to play 8 seasons with Dallas Clark, 11 seasons with Marvin Harrison, 12 seasons with Reggie Wayne, and 7 seasons with Edgerrin James.
Duplicate post