throwback week



Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    RamTime Guest

    The more gutless the higher ranking

    M.Bulger
    AT CP YDS T LG I RAT
    53 35 448 2 56 1 97.1

    B.Favre
    AT CP YDS T LG I RAT
    27 18 215 3 29 0 127.9

    Your opinion:
    Remember the QB rating is what is used as the “end all be all” in figuring how talented a QB is. Furthermore it is used to list a QB's greatness over history. Obviously you would agree that It doesn't take a whole hell of a lot of talent to throw passes that travel less then 10 yards at least not as much as a QB that is constantly throwing downfield 15, 20, 25 yards thus staying in the pocket longer taking more hits resulting in more interceptions and playing with more pain. As it is now, the dink passers are rating higher then players like Unitas, Starr Otto Graham, Van Brocklin, Stabauch, Bradshaw and others. Was Steve Bono really Better then these guys? Was Boomer? If you go by the QB rating system (which is what the NFL points to as a measurement of a quarterbacks greatness) then the answer is a resounding yes, Bono was better then those QB’s listed. Or is the QB rating system the single Biggest farce in the measure of a QB's talent there is. Why should the system so heavily favor the cowardly offensive system? If it were to favor any system (and I’m not saying it should) shouldn’t it favor the braver system?

    I'd like to know who devised this system however nobody seems to know.
    (read: rating without representation)

    Your opinion:
    Should the QB rating system be reformulated such as:

    1. Stop giving QB's credit for the RAC (run after catch) and give them the yards the ball travels in the air? In other words do not credit a quarterback for yards he has nothing to do with? At least when rating their overall talent in the QB rating system?

    2. Add into the formula how well QB's recognize blitzes?

    3. before the formula spits out the results should it take into account the risk of the pass? In other words should a Hail Mary interception at the end of a half or end of a game have the same effect on the QB rating system as a pass thrown 5 yards downfield and is returned for a TD?

    4. Should a minus two yard completion be positive points in the rating?

    5. Noting that we are in the computer age and keep stats seemingly for everything do you believe it would be a logistical nightmare to take into account the “Run After Catch” (that is length of completion without the run) and perhaps putting less emphasis on completion percentage since any monkey can play catch standing 5 yards apart?





    Here is a snippet from an article on the rating system

    But what gives with the *****? Sure, Young and Montana were studs -- but come on. Here's what gives. It started in the late 1970s, when the NFL began bending the rules to favor passers.
    The "illegal chuck" rule forced defenders to back off receivers, and refs lightened up on holding calls against offensive linemen. By 1979 the league completion average hit 54.1 percent, and it has never been below that since. Then came the "clearly in the grasp rule" to protect quarterbacks from brutality by would-be sackers. And receivers started wearing sticky gloves. And wind-free indoor stadiums with fast fake turf turned teams like the St. Louis Rams into passing factories. There's much more pass offense today, and that explains why the all-time top five looks like a list made by somebody born after John Belushi died.

    But most influential of all was Bill Walsh, the QB-nurturing ***** coach. The West Coast Offense he pioneered in the 1980s turned precisely timed, high-percentage short passes into catch-and-run long gains. You couldn't invent a better scheme to juice QB rating numbers. Because, it turns out, the formula mathematically whacks guys who try to throw long.

    Imagine two quarterbacks -- Super Joe and Broadway Joe -- who both drive their teams 30 yards to a touchdown in three plays. Super Joe does it with three 10-yard passes. His completion percentage is 100, and for the drive his rating is 147.9. Broadway Joe throws two incomplete passes, then on a clutch third and long he finds a receiver in the end zone -- touchdown! For the exact same result, his rating is 111.1.

    Young and Montana -- and Griese last year -- surely benefited from quarterbacking in West Coast schemes. The authors of The Hidden Game of Football calculate that even complete passes that lose yardage can, in some weirdball situations, boost a quarterback's rating. "There's something wrong with that," says co-author and football historian Bob Carroll. His book proposes a New Improved Rating System, which ignores completion percentage but counts sacks. (Still, when the book applies this even more complicated formula to 1997 data, Young comes out number one anyway.)

    "I guess I'm a little defensive when people talk that way about the West Coast offense," says Young, who, just for the record, happened to run the ball like hell too. "Because in the end the West Coast works. It wins games. The truth is, if you're playing decent football, your rating's high. I never got the sense that I could take a game and manipulate my ratings. I don't think you can go out and dink and dunk and beat the system."

    Is there a perfect way to enumerate the performance of one man on the field with 21 others? What about perfectly thrown, dropped passes? What about John Elway, who ended his career with a saggy rating of 79.9, even though he had the most career wins by a quarterback and a record 41 fourth-quarter game-saving drives. What about Troy Aikman (81.6), who had Emmitt Smith running behind him, so he didn't throw a lot of four-yard touchdown passes, "even if he made the pass that got the ball to the four," says his agent, Leigh Steinberg.

    Sonny Jurgensen said the real measure of a quarterback's greatness is how he does on third and long, when everybody and his bookie knows a pass is coming. Many consider Jurgensen the best pure passer of all time, but his rating of 82.6 would embarrass Jeff Garcia. What about Donovan McNabb and Michael Vick and the new generation of quarterbacks who use the threat of a pass to open up rushing lanes for themselves?

    Football is a team game, a game of drives and momentum. Individual numbers struggle to describe it. Still, numbers are all we have. Statistics are what separate sports from just playing around in the yard. Coach Lombardi said it: if you're not keeping score, you're just practicing. So you calculate what you can. If you wanted to keep it really simple, you could just do what golf does and list who gets the most money (Warner, $11.8 million, Manning $11 million, Vick $10.3 million). Or you could be like boxing and figure skating, where unless somebody gets knocked out it's two guys in bow-ties and a lady from the New Jersey State Athletic Commission making up numbers for how you did.
    Last edited by RamTime; -11-30-2004 at 08:00 AM. Reason: added article


  2. #2
    moklerman Guest

    Re: The more gutless the higher ranking

    I understand what you're saying about the rating system being imperfect Ramtime but are you also saying that Favre is just a dink and dunk passer? I don't see that, myself. I think he's a smart qb who takes what is there. Driver and Walker are two of the top statistical wr's in the league and Favre consistantly makes a living outside the hash marks. I don't think this really compares to what Montana, Young and Bono did in SF.

  3. #3
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: The more gutless the higher ranking

    Actually, Michael Irvin said it best last night. If you have a slow safety one on one on a WR, the S will get burned every time.

    What WR in the NFL is scared of these guys in coverage?

    Archuleta, Coady, and yes, Aeneas? No one.

  4. #4
    RamTime Guest

    Re: The more gutless the higher ranking

    Favre has been sheltered in the cozy west coast offense for so long now that who really knows? Has he shown you that he could go out game after game in a real offense like the rams run and be as effective. You don't but that doesn't stop the masses from crafting the mad bomber image. However this isn't about the gutless WCO in Green Bay it's about all the gutless WCO across the league and how history shows a phony image of the best QB’s in history. The above numbers are very telling of a system that is thoroughly flawed and favors the more gutless system.

  5. #5
    moklerman Guest

    Re: The more gutless the higher ranking

    C'mon, you're being a bit of a homer now. I think the Rams offense, although complex, is qb friendly enough. I don't, and have never, knocked a qb for taking what was given. I wish the Rams would do it more. Favre isn't a dink and dunk passer and constantly utililizes everyone on the offense. RB's, FB's, WR's, TE's, they all get the ball every game. He spreads it around and he isn't running an offense that the league is unfamiliar with.

    What would Favre do in the Rams offense? I would LOVE to find out. I'll give you any qb the Rams have ever had for Favre. I'll give you all of them for Favre. He is by far, better than anything the Rams have ever seen. Can you substitute any Rams qb in the Packer offense and think they'll succeed?

    Okay, on a personal level I wouldn't ever give up Warner or Gabriel, etc. for Favre but logically? C'mon, now. Let's get real.

  6. #6
    RamTime Guest

    Re: The more gutless the higher ranking

    C'mon, you're being a bit of a homer now. I think the Rams offense, although complex, is qb friendly enough. I don't, and have never, knocked a qb for taking what was given. I wish the Rams would do it more. Favre isn't a dink and dunk passer and constantly utililizes everyone on the offense. RB's, FB's, WR's, TE's, they all get the ball every game. He spreads it around and he isn't running an offense that the league is unfamiliar with.

    What would Favre do in the Rams offense? I would LOVE to find out. I'll give you any qb the Rams have ever had for Favre. I'll give you all of them for Favre. He is by far, better than anything the Rams have ever seen. Can you substitute any Rams qb in the Packer offense and think they'll succeed?

    Okay, on a personal level I wouldn't ever give up Warner or Gabriel, etc. for Favre but logically? C'mon, now. Let's get real.
    AND ther you have it. Live for everyone to gaze at. (Don't stick your finger in the cage because its highly contagious.) a fan so punch drunk from media propaganda that he is hopelessly lost in propaganda land. Indeed if one were to take a mental image of this fans propaganda laden thoughts you would see Favre standing there with an "S" on his jersey. Ready to fly out the window and save the footall world. The next time a QB reaches a milestone and the media goes bananas over meaningless trivial stats watch the cage start rattling again.

    Sorry Mockleman I really do value your opinions. Really I do but I just could not help my sick sense of humor. Forgive me for I am hopelessly pissed off at the rams right now.

Similar Threads

  1. Ranking the coaches - Big Ten
    By RamsFan16 in forum Under 18s
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: -08-11-2006, 07:00 PM
  2. Fox sports Ranking linebackers, team-by-team
    By Return To Glory in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -08-06-2006, 12:30 PM
  3. NFL is gutless
    By RamTime in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: -08-10-2005, 11:58 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: -12-18-2004, 05:45 PM
  5. Can we get ranking back?
    By Marshall1 in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -05-29-2004, 04:30 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •