Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Guess Who Has the Highest Week 2 QB Rating?

HtownColt

By HtownColt
in Colts Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

HtownColt Walk On

HtownColt

Posted
Posted

you guessed right(i hope) not taking account the MNF game Andrew Luck has the highest Total QB Rating in week 2 at 95.7 out of possible 100 score

1) Andrew Luck 95.7

2)Ben Roethlisberger 93.4

3) Cam Newton 88.3

4)Ryan Fitzpatrick 88.3

5)Phillip Rivers 84.7

6) Alex Smith 79.4

7)Mike Vick 78.7

8) Andy Dalton 78.3

9) Russell Wilson 76.3

10) Ryan Tannehill 76.2

Notable rankings:

11) RGIII 72.3

15) Eli Manning 59.3

21) Drew Brees 41.9

23) Mathew Stafford 31.9

24) Tom Brady 30.6

25) Aaron Rodgers 29.3

30) Jay Cutler 4.7

http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/type/player-week/week/2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownColt Walk On

HtownColt

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Are you sure you're taking the correct number? There is a QBR and a rating. Seems like the QBR is too low for some of those QBs. Shouldn't it be the "rating" number?

total QBR is out of 100 which is what this is. I think your talking about passer rating which Andrew Luck rating was a 107.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cbear Active Roster

cbear

Posted
Posted

total QBR is out of 100 which is what this is. I think your talking about passer rating which Andrew Luck rating is a 107.5

Got it thanks. Is one better than the other? I know they always talk about passer rating. I don't think I ever heard about a QB ranking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownColt Walk On

HtownColt

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Got it thanks. Is one better than the other? I know they always talk about passer rating. I don't think I ever heard about a QB ranking.

total qbr takes everything into account whereas the passer rating just depends on aggregate statistics. here are some links that define qbr.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_quarterback_rating

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FireJimCaldwell Walk On

FireJimCaldwell

Posted
Posted

obv i disagree

That's fair.

It has far more flaws...

I applaud their effort to create a new standard, but it hasn't "caught on".

They have failed to release their formula, and I'm not 100% sure if there is a static formula for it, from what I remember when it was released personal opinion is involved, and if that is the case, then their is bias involved whether fair or not.

I've watched about 6 games from this weeks games so far and Luck wasn't the best QB I've seen for this week. Which is why I said it rarely passes the eyeball test...

If they would release their formula, I might pay more attention to it, but as it stands it's far too easy to simply dismiss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carlos Danger Practice Squad

Carlos Danger

Posted
Posted

QBR is vastly superior... I already went through this when ESPN first introduced it. I was on the side of "no more useless stats" but (without getting into a lengthy conversation statistics) QBR is a more accurate reflection of how efficient a QB was from more than just a td/int ratio... Then again, maybe I'm just biased because #18 had the best QBR (retroactively) in the NFL for like the last 10 years and lesser QBs has better passer ratings during that time. Perfect example is how many times Peyton threw it away instead of throwing to a well covered receiver, this play is good for his QBR and bad for his passer rating. Neither are perfect, but passer rating is just a bad stat... not as useful, like judging DEs solely on sacks or CBs solely on INTs... we all know that the game is much more complex than that. JMO

edit: all that being said (in the interest of full disclosure) I don't think even ESPN is quite sure how they come up with QBR in all its detail... it is a very complex stat model...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FireJimCaldwell Walk On

FireJimCaldwell

Posted
Posted

QBR is vastly superior... I already went through this when ESPN first introduced it. I was on the side of "no more useless stats" but (without getting into a lengthy conversation statistics) QBR is a more accurate reflection of how efficient a QB was from more than just a td/int ratio... Then again, maybe I'm just biased because #18 had the best QBR (retroactively) in the NFL for like the last 10 years and lesser QBs has better passer ratings during that time. Perfect example is how many times Peyton threw it away instead of throwing to a well covered receiver, this play is good for his QBR and bad for his passer rating. Neither are perfect, but passer rating is just a bad stat... not as useful, like judging DEs solely on sacks or CBs solely on INTs... we all know that the game is much more complex than that. JMO

edit: all that being said (in the interest of full disclosure) I don't think even ESPN is quite sure how they come up with QBR in all its detail... it is a very complex stat model...

The QBR has only been researched back to 2008, so there isn't 10 years of data on it, so I'm not sure where that is coming from.

The QBR seems too subjective to be accurate. Like drops for example. The Welker/Brady play from the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl. Some call it a drop. some call it a bad pass. The official drops that Stats/Elias list each season are supposed to be made by their employees using the same guidelines, but when different people evaluate the same play there will be differences, but fans always feel there are more drops than what is listed. It's a subjective stat and I feel can be influenced by personal views.

I'll unignore the Total QBR long enough to point out that I have found justification for ignoring it: Under the Total QBR, Tim Tebow performed better on Sunday than Aaron Rodgers.

Rodgers, whose Packers won at the Georgia Dome, completed 26 of 39 passes for 396 yards and two touchdowns. His Total QBR was 82.1.

Tebow, whose Broncos lost at home to the Chargers, completed four of 10 passes for 79 yards and a touchdown. And he ran the ball six times for 38 yards and a touchdown. And his Total QBR was 83.2.

http://deadspin.com/...-qbr-kerfluffle

The Tebow/Rodgers comparison is just one example.

I'm all for a new rating that can encompass all aspects of playing quarterback. It's nearly impossible to create a formula that adequately addresses the difference of a 7 yard touchdown while down 4, in the 4th quarter than a 7 yard touchdown up 15 in the 4th quarter. The throws are identical in the passer rating, but who knows how they are treated in the QBR. How much better is that throw inflated if it's 12, 22, or 32 yards in the 4th quarter down by 7. Without a static formula that explains in great detail, it is as worthless as any ranking/opinion based system. At least with the passer rating, you know exactly how it is computed. I do like the College passer rating system, which is similar to the NFL, but there is not a limit(158.3), and a player can have a negative rating.

Most weeks, the passer rating passes the eye ball test more than the QBR.

There were a handful of quarterbacks that had better games than Luck this week, yet he has the top QBR. Hence, not passing the eye ball test.

The perfect system might not be possible. Some of the variables that would need to be considered would have to come from a personal opinion which would then make it seem biased whether it was or not. Just like some interceptions aren't 100% on the QB and some are... How do you accurately gauge those. It would be easy to determine the difference between the incomplete pass due to the QB clocking the ball, as opposed to over/underthrowing the tight end, but not everything would be that simple.

If anything, if the passer rating was tweaked to add emphasis to key situations, 3rd down conversions, scrambles, 2 minute scores, etc, then it would be more complete, but as it is, I put more value in the passer rating than the QBR because it can be qualified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownColt Walk On

HtownColt

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If anything, if the passer rating was tweaked to add emphasis to key situations, 3rd down conversions, scrambles, 2 minute scores, etc, then it would be more complete, but as it is, I put more value in the passer rating than the QBR because it can be qualified.

thats what the total QBR does, it takes all those situational stats in account. and one example is like a screen pass that travels 2 yards in the air and the receiver takes it 50yrds for a touchdown is valued differently than a qb throwing a 50 yrd td in the air because the screen pass has little to do with the qb as for the passer rating doesnt differentiate the two types of play

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carlos Danger Practice Squad

Carlos Danger

Posted
Posted

The QBR has only been researched back to 2008, so there isn't 10 years of data on it, so I'm not sure where that is coming from.

i agree with much of your post... but the QBR has been applied to all NFL seasons since the merger by multiple sources... here is a ranked list.... I exaggerated by saying that Manning led for like the last 10 years, but he does appear on the list of top QBR seasons more than any other QB since the merger....

This produces the following list of the best estimated post-merger "QBR" seasons (min 225 att): Rk Player Year Age Tm G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Sk SkYds Cmp%+ Y/A+ TD%+ Rate+ AY/A+ NY/A+ predQBR 1 Dan Marino 1984 23 MIA 16 362 564 5084 48 17 13 120 127 140 148 141 141 153 95.8 2 Peyton Manning 2004 28 IND 16 336 497 4557 49 10 13 101 127 141 168 151 149 147 95.8 3 Kurt Warner 2000 29 STL 11 235 347 3429 21 18 20 115 138 158 125 128 136 158 90.0 4 Joe Montana 1984 28 SFO 16 279 432 3630 28 10 22 138 128 127 125 134 133 135 87.6 5 Dan Fouts 1982 31 SDG 9 204 330 2883 17 11 12 94 119 133 111 124 130 143 87.1 6 John Brodie 1970 35 SFO 14 223 378 2941 24 10 8 67 123 118 119 129 126 133 84.6 7 Steve Young 1991 30 SFO 11 180 279 2517 17 8 13 79 127 145 126 135 140 145 83.4 8 Mark Rypien 1991 29 WAS 16 249 421 3564 28 11 7 59 108 133 132 130 135 142 82.8 9 R. Cunningham 1998 35 MIN 15 259 425 3704 34 10 20 132 117 135 141 134 136 140 82.6 10 Ken Stabler 1976 31 OAK 12 194 291 2737 27 17 19 203 142 145 148 140 137 143 82.2 11 Steve Young 1992 31 SFO 16 268 402 3465 25 7 29 152 129 134 130 142 142 132 82.2 12 Steve Young 1994 33 SFO 16 324 461 3969 35 10 31 163 138 139 147 147 143 136 82.1 13 C. Pennington 2002 26 NYJ 15 275 399 3120 22 6 22 135 135 125 123 138 134 127 81.9 14 Joe Montana 1989 33 SFO 13 271 386 3521 26 8 33 198 152 145 132 149 145 138 81.8 15 Tom Brady 2007 30 NWE 16 398 578 4806 50 8 21 128 129 130 153 148 142 132 81.7 16 Erik Kramer 1995 31 CHI 16 315 522 3838 29 10 15 95 108 115 121 122 124 124 81.5 17 Brian Griese 2000 25 DEN 10 216 336 2688 19 4 17 139 125 123 121 135 134 125 81.3 18 Drew Brees 2009 30 NOR 15 363 514 4388 34 11 20 135 133 129 131 132 129 132 81.0 19 Dan Fouts 1983 32 SDG 10 215 340 2975 20 15 14 107 121 132 118 121 124 142 81.0 20 Dan Marino 1983 22 MIA 11 173 296 2210 20 6 10 80 106 107 127 125 123 120 80.6 Rk Player Year Age Tm G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Sk SkYds Cmp%+ Y/A+ TD%+ Rate+ AY/A+ NY/A+ predQBR 21 Bert Jones 1976 25 BAL 14 207 343 3104 24 9 29 284 124 139 127 139 143 134 80.4 22 Dan Fouts 1981 30 SDG 16 360 609 4802 33 17 19 134 111 118 115 125 126 131 79.9 23 Kurt Warner 1999 28 STL 16 325 499 4353 41 13 29 201 130 132 143 136 133 132 79.5 24 Brett Favre 1995 26 GNB 16 359 570 4413 38 13 33 217 117 125 135 130 131 124 79.3 25 Dan Marino 1986 25 MIA 16 378 623 4746 44 23 17 119 121 114 132 124 118 129 79.2 26 Jeff Garcia 2000 30 SFO 16 355 561 4278 31 10 24 155 121 116 119 127 125 122 79.0 27 V. Testaverde 1998 35 NYJ 14 259 421 3256 29 7 19 140 120 117 129 129 126 123 79.0 28 Bernie Kosar 1987 24 CLE 12 241 389 3033 22 9 22 129 123 117 116 127 125 123 78.8 29 Troy Aikman 1995 29 DAL 16 280 432 3304 16 7 14 89 123 122 97 122 124 130 78.4 30 Peyton Manning 2006 30 IND 16 362 557 4397 31 9 14 86 116 121 118 126 127 127 78.1 31 Joe Theismann 1983 34 WAS 16 276 459 3714 29 11 34 242 111 119 123 126 128 122 78.1 32 Norm Snead 1972 33 NYG 14 196 325 2307 17 12 8 66 126 107 109 121 115 120 77.7 33 Peyton Manning 2000 24 IND 16 357 571 4413 33 15 20 131 118 118 122 123 122 125 77.6 34 Peyton Manning 2005 29 IND 16 305 453 3747 28 10 17 81 125 124 124 129 127 129 77.6 35 Kurt Warner 2001 30 STL 16 375 546 4830 36 22 38 233 133 140 136 132 132 137 77.5 36 Steve DeBerg 1990 36 KAN 16 258 444 3444 23 4 22 191 106 117 114 128 132 119 77.5 37 Ken Anderson 1981 32 CIN 16 300 479 3754 29 10 25 140 123 117 123 137 132 125 77.4 38 Scott Mitchell 1995 27 DET 16 346 583 4338 32 12 31 145 105 117 120 120 124 121 77.3 39 Trent Green 2002 32 KAN 16 287 470 3690 26 13 26 141 107 126 123 120 126 128 77.3 40 Peyton Manning 2009 33 IND 16 393 571 4500 33 16 10 74 127 117 120 120 116 126 77.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buccolts Hall of Famer

buccolts

Posted
Posted

i agree with much of your post... but the QBR has been applied to all NFL seasons since the merger by multiple sources... here is a ranked list.... I exaggerated by saying that Manning led for like the last 10 years, but he does appear on the list of top QBR seasons more than any other QB since the merger....

This produces the following list of the best estimated post-merger "QBR" seasons (min 225 att): Rk Player Year Age Tm G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Sk SkYds Cmp%+ Y/A+ TD%+ Rate+ AY/A+ NY/A+ predQBR 1 Dan Marino 1984 23 MIA 16 362 564 5084 48 17 13 120 127 140 148 141 141 153 95.8 2 Peyton Manning 2004 28 IND 16 336 497 4557 49 10 13 101 127 141 168 151 149 147 95.8 3 Kurt Warner 2000 29 STL 11 235 347 3429 21 18 20 115 138 158 125 128 136 158 90.0 4 Joe Montana 1984 28 SFO 16 279 432 3630 28 10 22 138 128 127 125 134 133 135 87.6 5 Dan Fouts 1982 31 SDG 9 204 330 2883 17 11 12 94 119 133 111 124 130 143 87.1 6 John Brodie 1970 35 SFO 14 223 378 2941 24 10 8 67 123 118 119 129 126 133 84.6 7 Steve Young 1991 30 SFO 11 180 279 2517 17 8 13 79 127 145 126 135 140 145 83.4 8 Mark Rypien 1991 29 WAS 16 249 421 3564 28 11 7 59 108 133 132 130 135 142 82.8 9 R. Cunningham 1998 35 MIN 15 259 425 3704 34 10 20 132 117 135 141 134 136 140 82.6 10 Ken Stabler 1976 31 OAK 12 194 291 2737 27 17 19 203 142 145 148 140 137 143 82.2 11 Steve Young 1992 31 SFO 16 268 402 3465 25 7 29 152 129 134 130 142 142 132 82.2 12 Steve Young 1994 33 SFO 16 324 461 3969 35 10 31 163 138 139 147 147 143 136 82.1 13 C. Pennington 2002 26 NYJ 15 275 399 3120 22 6 22 135 135 125 123 138 134 127 81.9 14 Joe Montana 1989 33 SFO 13 271 386 3521 26 8 33 198 152 145 132 149 145 138 81.8 15 Tom Brady 2007 30 NWE 16 398 578 4806 50 8 21 128 129 130 153 148 142 132 81.7 16 Erik Kramer 1995 31 CHI 16 315 522 3838 29 10 15 95 108 115 121 122 124 124 81.5 17 Brian Griese 2000 25 DEN 10 216 336 2688 19 4 17 139 125 123 121 135 134 125 81.3 18 Drew Brees 2009 30 NOR 15 363 514 4388 34 11 20 135 133 129 131 132 129 132 81.0 19 Dan Fouts 1983 32 SDG 10 215 340 2975 20 15 14 107 121 132 118 121 124 142 81.0 20 Dan Marino 1983 22 MIA 11 173 296 2210 20 6 10 80 106 107 127 125 123 120 80.6 Rk Player Year Age Tm G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Sk SkYds Cmp%+ Y/A+ TD%+ Rate+ AY/A+ NY/A+ predQBR 21 Bert Jones 1976 25 BAL 14 207 343 3104 24 9 29 284 124 139 127 139 143 134 80.4 22 Dan Fouts 1981 30 SDG 16 360 609 4802 33 17 19 134 111 118 115 125 126 131 79.9 23 Kurt Warner 1999 28 STL 16 325 499 4353 41 13 29 201 130 132 143 136 133 132 79.5 24 Brett Favre 1995 26 GNB 16 359 570 4413 38 13 33 217 117 125 135 130 131 124 79.3 25 Dan Marino 1986 25 MIA 16 378 623 4746 44 23 17 119 121 114 132 124 118 129 79.2 26 Jeff Garcia 2000 30 SFO 16 355 561 4278 31 10 24 155 121 116 119 127 125 122 79.0 27 V. Testaverde 1998 35 NYJ 14 259 421 3256 29 7 19 140 120 117 129 129 126 123 79.0 28 Bernie Kosar 1987 24 CLE 12 241 389 3033 22 9 22 129 123 117 116 127 125 123 78.8 29 Troy Aikman 1995 29 DAL 16 280 432 3304 16 7 14 89 123 122 97 122 124 130 78.4 30 Peyton Manning 2006 30 IND 16 362 557 4397 31 9 14 86 116 121 118 126 127 127 78.1 31 Joe Theismann 1983 34 WAS 16 276 459 3714 29 11 34 242 111 119 123 126 128 122 78.1 32 Norm Snead 1972 33 NYG 14 196 325 2307 17 12 8 66 126 107 109 121 115 120 77.7 33 Peyton Manning 2000 24 IND 16 357 571 4413 33 15 20 131 118 118 122 123 122 125 77.6 34 Peyton Manning 2005 29 IND 16 305 453 3747 28 10 17 81 125 124 124 129 127 129 77.6 35 Kurt Warner 2001 30 STL 16 375 546 4830 36 22 38 233 133 140 136 132 132 137 77.5 36 Steve DeBerg 1990 36 KAN 16 258 444 3444 23 4 22 191 106 117 114 128 132 119 77.5 37 Ken Anderson 1981 32 CIN 16 300 479 3754 29 10 25 140 123 117 123 137 132 125 77.4 38 Scott Mitchell 1995 27 DET 16 346 583 4338 32 12 31 145 105 117 120 120 124 121 77.3 39 Trent Green 2002 32 KAN 16 287 470 3690 26 13 26 141 107 126 123 120 126 128 77.3 40 Peyton Manning 2009 33 IND 16 393 571 4500 33 16 10 74 127 117 120 120 116 126 77.1

Don't ya hate when that happens?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FireJimCaldwell Walk On

FireJimCaldwell

Posted
Posted

didn't really paste like I wanted, but you get the point... I'd say that this list very closely resembles the list that I would make for the top performers at QB for each of those seasons (the ones im familiar with anyway)

Do you have a link to where that information is from?

To my knowledge ESPN only crunched the #'s back to 2008 and haven't released the formula.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldunclemark Walk On

oldunclemark

Posted
Posted

you guessed right(i hope) not taking account the MNF game Andrew Luck has the highest Total QB Rating in week 2 at 95.7 out of possible 100 score

1) Andrew Luck 95.7

2)Ben Roethlisberger 93.4

3) Cam Newton 88.3

4)Ryan Fitzpatrick 88.3

5)Phillip Rivers 84.7

6) Alex Smith 79.4

7)Mike Vick 78.7

8) Andy Dalton 78.3

9) Russell Wilson 76.3

10) Ryan Tannehill 76.2

Notable rankings:

11) RGIII 72.3

15) Eli Manning 59.3

21) Drew Brees 41.9

23) Mathew Stafford 31.9

24) Tom Brady 30.6

25) Aaron Rodgers 29.3

30) Jay Cutler 4.7

http://espn.go.com/n...yer-week/week/2

That just shows how bogus the Total QB rating is:

Eli dominated his game in the second half....and he's in the high 50s.....

That's like fantasy points..its not real...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superman Ring of Honor

Superman

Posted
Posted

They're both just aggregate stats. The difference is that QBR takes some situational stats into consideration, gives weight to sacks, yards after catch, drops, tipped balls, etc. It's more comprehensive. I don't think it should be completely dismissed, but I don't think it should be propped up as the new standard with which to grade quarterback play. It has its merits. Nothing replaces watching the game film if you want to know how a quarterback is playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...