QBR is NOT a better indication of play than Passer Rating

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by Henry Burris, Sep 11, 2013.

  1. Henry Burris

    Henry Burris

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    18,738
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings:
    +1,951 / 8 / -2
    [​IMG]

    Peyton Manning just tied the all time mark for QB's, Andrew Luck played against the worst secondary in the NFL, and Jay and Andy each had a good game, but better than Manning's performance? LOL
    • Like Like x 1
  2. The Benjamin

    The Benjamin Bear Down Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    44,724
    Likes Received:
    1,213
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings:
    +1,277 / 3 / -6
    When the formula is too hard to understand, it is not worth using :D
  3. MikeGolf97

    MikeGolf97

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +10 / 2 / -2
    Some crap ESPN put together and tries to push down peoples throat, everyone else uses old system.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. MarkBear

    MarkBear

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    That is very sexy....
  5. soulman

    soulman

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,998
    Likes Received:
    786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings:
    +848 / 0 / -0
    The only rating that really counts is games won vs games lost. Most of the rest is just fluff the stats nerds love to compile.
  6. riczaj01

    riczaj01

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    19,128
    Likes Received:
    1,683
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings:
    +1,852 / 5 / -4
    I liked the idea behind QBR, but it just doesn't work. What really needs to be done is a recalculation of the passer rating.

    wins and losses are a "team" stat and give no indication of how well the qb played or anyone else. You have to use individual stats to look into how well they played in those wins and losses.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. shark86x

    shark86x SuperFan

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    370
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +392 / 0 / -0
    Yup. When the ball hits the receiver in the hands, why should the QB rating suffer? Problem is, somebody has to sit down and manually review every play to assign +/- to the QB vs. his receivers etc. and that can become very subjective.
  8. riczaj01

    riczaj01

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    19,128
    Likes Received:
    1,683
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings:
    +1,852 / 5 / -4
    But if that is all that the QBR did, and not try to assign importance of qtr and being up or down on the scoreboard then the qbr would actually be better b/c that's what they do anyways.

    Problem w/QBR is they went to far and it's very subjective. If the QB throws the ball out of bounds to avoid the sack, or to kill the play, then it's really not a pass attempt. Simple, take the subjectivity out of it, if the WR has it in his hands, not just fingertips, then it's on him to catch it.

    Same w/Int's, if the pass gets bobbled by the WR and is int'd, it shouldn't go against the qb.

    On Sun-Tues have the unadjusted passer rating, and then by thurs have the adjusted PR, and it would be awesome.

    QBR just blows. Reality is, if the QB threw for 3 TD's in the 1st, then he still killed the other team or their ability to come back, and if in the 3rd or 4th that same qb throws another 2, then those TD's shouldn't count as less b/c they came in a blow out. 3 td's in the 1st are just as imporant as 3 in the 4th is all I'm saying.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Henry Burris

    Henry Burris

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    18,738
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings:
    +1,951 / 8 / -2
    To a certain degree, yes. However, it would be unwise to disregard everything because it's not strictly win/loss, at least in relation to the QB ratings.
    ^^^^^This. I also think agree with MG97 that ESPN's using this as a lot of "cross-self promotion". While neither system is perfect, I've always been a fan of the original rating, and, repeating what I said earlier, that Luck (played against possibly the worst secondary), Dalton and Cutler (2 players that played amazing against good defenses, but not flawless) and Kaepernick (Horrible Pack defense, hell, I think Aaron Rodgers was more impressive, TBH) are ahead of Manning is my "breaking point" with treating it as an equal to the old system(which I do believe is also flawed). Now, if someone or a group that isn't doing so for self-promotion tries to figure out a better sabermetric of total QB play, I'm open to listen to it.
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page