Update: What number will Wentz wear? (merge)

[chickenMan 608]

On 2/5/2021 at 10:50 PM, DattMavis said:

They are going to unretire 18, and give it to Wentz.

[King Colt 958]

"According to Mike Kaye of NJ.com, the Colts have requested additional compensation from the Eagles in a Wentz trade. That means they want the Eagles to sweeten the pot by including some combination of extra players or picks along with Wentz if they want the Colts to meet Philadelphia’s asking price.

The Eagles appear willing to at least discuss this, as the report states that a second unnamed Eagles player has come up in those trade talks.

The issues the Eagles are facing are a combination of his hefty contract and the fact that the team still appears to value him more highly than most others. That asking price seems to be scaring some teams away. The Colts aren’t completely out, but it’s clear that they’re expecting some extra compensation to take on Wentz’s contract and pay the price the Eagles want."

[groundnpound 48]

15 hours ago, tvturner said:

 

Thanks, saw that. I doubt there's a tweet or rumor(planted or otherwise) that I haven't seen.

[King Colt 958]

From first to worst. "Why" is the question and unless an organization has the answer why waste time considering him? If they don't have a surprise hidden away go with Brissett.

[jvan1973 5,481]

1 hour ago, King Colt said:

From first to worst. "Why" is the question and unless an organization has the answer why waste time considering him? If they don't have a surprise hidden away go with Brissett.

Because Brissett isn't a surprise.   He isn't THE guy.    Good backup.   Wentz has shown elite talent.    If Frank thinks he can get him back there it is the move.   I have no idea if frank thinks that about Wentz.  But we know they don't think Jacoby is the guy

[crazycolt1 7,556]

42 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Because Brissett isn't a surprise.   He isn't THE guy.    Good backup.   Wentz has shown elite talent.    If Frank thinks he can get him back there it is the move.   I have no idea if frank thinks that about Wentz.  But we know they don't think Jacoby is the guy

I read an article from the Indy Star where Frank is advocating for Wentz. 

I know that don't mean that Ballard will go that direction but who knows? 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/report-frank-reich-believes-the-colts-could-build-around-eagles-qb-carson-wentz-if-traded-to-indy/ar-BB1dEhEd?ocid=msedgntp

[CanuckColt 429]

The Colts WILL trade for Wentz.

He will get No.11 from Pittman and compensate Pittman for it.

Brisset will not be back.....ever.

Wentz will play well and the Colts will be back in the playoffs again next year.

 

[EastStreet 9,779]

On 2/8/2021 at 9:44 AM, Valpo2004 said:

 

His passer rating was 102.2 in 2018.  It was 93.1 in 2019.  I don't know what his QBR was but it couldn't have been that bad with passer ratings like that.  

Passer rating IMO is highly overrated, which is why most folks have moved to QBR which takes a more situational look. Passer rating of 100ish is 10-14ish typically and low 90s is typically 20th-ish. Not saying he was bad, but looking at his overall stats (basic and advanced) along with health/availability history, it's just mediocre. All in all, just inconsistent, especially when you factor they've had a good OL until this year.

On 2/8/2021 at 9:44 AM, Valpo2004 said:

 

1. This is a concern, but he has been healthier the last 2 years.  He played all of 2019 and was healthy for all of 2020 and only didn't play because the Eagles decided to see what they had in Hurts and tank.

 

2. I don't think one year will break a QB's confidence if that's what you mean.  Luck had a terrible year once, everyone seems to forget that year though.  

So for 1, so he's played well when he's not been available the whole year, and bad when available... and 2, all QBs are not built the same mentally. Some guys have different points of breakage, and break differently. I'm not saying he's broken beyond repair, or can't play at a high level, just saying there a history of inconsistency, and risks associated with that.

 

What also concerns me a bit is the simple fact that Philly basically "chose" him (getting rid of a HC and bringing in the best option to rebuild him) yet he's replied to that vote of confidence and investment with a desire to leave.

On 2/8/2021 at 9:44 AM, Valpo2004 said:

 

3. If Reich ok's the trade for him (Which he would almost have to ok a trade for a QB, especially one that he worked with previously) than I have no concerns here.  Reich knows how he is as a player and in the locker room.  If Reich told Ballard he doesn't want Wentz than I would say Ballard shouldn't trade even a 7th round conditional for him.  

 

4. That is overplayed.  The Eagles would have to pay the signing bonus so his cap hit to us next year would be 24.4 million all of which is guaranteed.  (But you arn't going to cut him the same year you trade for him anyways.)  After that his 2022 salary is going to be partially guaranteed because it partially guarantees on the 3rd day of the 2021 league year (I can't find the amount.) . . . the rest of it guarantees on the 3rd day of the 2022 league year.   His 2022 cap hit would be 22 million.

 

After 2022 he would have ZERO guaranteed money on his contract.

 

Even with all the money on his contract combined Wentz's APR is only 8th right now in terms of QB's and he is almost certain to drop to 9th when Dak get's his new deal.

 

5. Watson who is younger, wants out of Houston and if Houston would be willing to trade him in the division everyone would want him.  

 

Wentz has received mixed signals from the organization as to if they even want him to be the QB of the Eagles or not.  Watson on the other hand has only gotten "We love you, please stay" from the Texans but still wants out.  I hardly blame a guy for not wanting to hang around a place where it's not even clear if he's wanted.  

I'd say Philly was pretty clear this year in terms of wanting him. IMO, Sirianni would have never ever been promoted had they not want to go all in on Wentz again. 

[EastStreet 9,779]

On 2/8/2021 at 11:59 AM, conklincolt said:

well hells bells  lets bring manning back for next year while we find a QB. With the team we have now,manning didn't have most his seasons ,I thinks P.Manning would do well.  If Brady is still doing it , so could he. 

I'd be good bringing PM back as HC lol.

[Zoltan 680]

20 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

What also concerns me a bit is the simple fact that Philly basically "chose" him (getting rid of a HC and bringing in the best option to rebuild him) yet he's replied to that vote of confidence and investment with a desire to leave.

 

 

I think coaching staff wasn't the problem, it's like what the NFL analyst guy tweeted (sorry I don't have twitter, it was in another thread), where they said the problem wasn't the head coach the problem is still in Philadelphia, insinuating that Howie Roseman or the FO was the problem. Which from the reports during the head coach search saying they wanted a young head coach so that Roseman could have more control, and other stories I've seen makes me think its gonna be a Grigson situation where once Roseman gets fired a bunch of stories will come out talking about how toxic it was.

[Valpo2004 1,616]

On 2/12/2021 at 7:50 AM, coltsfeva said:

   It’s been reported that the Colts have offered two 2s and a possible future 3rd or 4th, somewhere down the road, for Wentz.

   So, far, the best offer. Everything within me hopes this isn’t true because it may mean we trade our 1st, to acquire another 2. I just don’t like the way Wentz has handled himself and wonder if he’s got the mental attributes they emphasize. But, if they think they can “fix” him, I guess we’ve got to live with it. He does have a high ceiling.

  Here’s the article:

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/eagles-legend-shares-best-trade-offer-philadelphia-has-received-for-carson-wentz/amp/

 

What is interesting is unless Philly is expecting more than just 1 1st round pick, a couple of 2nd round picks would be the same value as 1 first round pick.  

 

I wonder if the sticking point is that Philly wants to have the news headline that they got a 1st for Carson while Ballard wants to hold onto his 1st round pick this year so he can get a new left tackle.  

[danlhart87 8,615]

1 minute ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

What is interesting is unless Philly is expecting more than just 1 1st round pick, a couple of 2nd round picks would be the same value as 1 first round pick.  

 

I wonder if the sticking point is that Philly wants to have the news headline that they got a 1st for Carson while Ballard wants to hold onto his 1st round pick this year so he can get a new left tackle.  

I'm sure he wants incase nobody is there at 21 he could trade back and possibly regain what he just lost in the Wentz deal. 

[Valpo2004 1,616]

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I'm sure he wants incase nobody is there at 21 he could trade back and possibly regain what he just lost in the Wentz deal. 

 

He can't really regain it because without the Wentz deal he would have the first and the 2nd.  

 

Although I would say that the versatility of being able to trade back with that 1st round pick is possibly also in his thinking.  

[Superman 9,398]

On 2/14/2021 at 11:26 AM, EastStreet said:

Passer rating IMO is highly overrated, which is why most folks have moved to QBR which takes a more situational look.

 

Explain QBR, if you don't mind.

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,965]

10 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Explain QBR, if you don't mind.

 

It's a 'rating' a QB gets for completions,incompletions, TD's, interceptions....etc.... the higher the better. 

[jvan1973 5,481]

5 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

It's a 'rating' a QB gets for completions,incompletions, TD's, interceptions....etc.... the higher the better. 

Passer rating is determined by those.   QBR takes those and other things into account as well

 

 

https://www.hogshaven.com/2018/3/13/16839982/5-oclock-club-difference-nfl-passer-rating-and-quarterback-rating-redskins-alex-smith-kirk-cousins

[groundnpound 48]

Come on Bears, get 'er done please.

[NewColtsFan 9,237]

10 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Passer rating is determined by those.   QBR takes those and other things into account as well

 

 

https://www.hogshaven.com/2018/3/13/16839982/5-oclock-club-difference-nfl-passer-rating-and-quarterback-rating-redskins-alex-smith-kirk-cousins

 

Attention:  @Superman       JVan has posted a link to explain QBR.    Wanted to give you a heads-up.

 

[EastStreet 9,779]

On 2/15/2021 at 10:59 AM, Zoltan said:

 

I think coaching staff wasn't the problem, it's like what the NFL analyst guy tweeted (sorry I don't have twitter, it was in another thread), where they said the problem wasn't the head coach the problem is still in Philadelphia, insinuating that Howie Roseman or the FO was the problem. Which from the reports during the head coach search saying they wanted a young head coach so that Roseman could have more control, and other stories I've seen makes me think its gonna be a Grigson situation where once Roseman gets fired a bunch of stories will come out talking about how toxic it was.

IDK. The few things I do know, is that there were many reports that he and Pederson had a falling out, and the big thing to me, there's no way they hire Sirianni if they aren't "choosing" to go all in Wentz.

 

All of the "toxic" FO narratives lately are kinda silly to me. The term is totally overused, and not real world.... 

[EastStreet 9,779]

On 2/15/2021 at 3:29 PM, Superman said:

 

Explain QBR, if you don't mind.

Well the ESPN formula is proprietary IIRC, but it's EPA based and grades each play on D&D, and field position. In other words, it's situational. 

[Superman 9,398]

5 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Well the ESPN formula is proprietary IIRC, but it's EPA based and grades each play on D&D, and field position. In other words, it's situational. 

 

That's my big problem with it. It's locked behind closed doors, and it isn't subject to any kind of review. But admittedly, I've been dismissive of it to the extent that I haven't even fully wrapped my mind around it. I've always thought it was more subjective than it actually is, based on what I've read about it today.

[EastStreet 9,779]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's my big problem with it. It's locked behind closed doors, and it isn't subject to any kind of review. But admittedly, I've been dismissive of it to the extent that I haven't even fully wrapped my mind around it. I've always thought it was more subjective than it actually is, based on what I've read about it today.

I hate that it's hidden too. At the end of the day, the output is pretty good though so it's pretty hard for me to ignore. No rating out there is perfect, but I like it a lot better than passer rating, which is just pure numbers and not situational at all. PR typically diminishes dual threat QBs too at times. And sometimes, both line up pretty well. PR likes Rivers for instance a lot more than QBR. PR really likes Cousins too. 

 

I saw a pretty good podcast or Youtube segment on QBR not to long ago. Probably early last year-ish. All in all, just like PFF, nothing is perfect, but it's a good tool and simply another indicator. I understand the limitations of both PR and QBR, or at least as much as we can glean based on the proprietary nature. 

[Zoltan 680]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

IDK. The few things I do know, is that there were many reports that he and Pederson had a falling out, and the big thing to me, there's no way they hire Sirianni if they aren't "choosing" to go all in Wentz.

 

All of the "toxic" FO narratives lately are kinda silly to me. The term is totally overused, and not real world.... 

Toxic may be to strong of a word maybe dysfunctional would fit better but between the disagreement between Pederson and Roseman about his coaches, looking for a coach that would give a lot of control to the GM, combined with player issues like wentz and Ertz. I wouldn't say these are rare in the NFL but it does seem to be happening a lot in Philly and when there is smoke there's fire.

[EastStreet 9,779]

16 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

Toxic may be to strong of a word maybe dysfunctional would fit better but between the disagreement between Pederson and Roseman about his coaches, looking for a coach that would give a lot of control to the GM, combined with player issues like wentz and Ertz. I wouldn't say these are rare in the NFL but it does seem to be happening a lot in Philly and when there is smoke there's fire.

Every time a star player is unhappy, the narrative seems to turn to the FO being toxic or dysfunctional. I'm tired of hearing players moan and grown about their situations, especially the ones that have huge contracts. If a team/FO tried to get out of contract terms, everyone would go crazy bashing the team. Now any player can get on twitter or leak stuff and play the victim and want out of there contracts, and everyone is awwwweeeee poor player. I'd love it if Houston refused to trade Watson, he threatened to sit out, did, and got sued for breach of contract lol... 

[jvan1973 5,481]

16 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Every time a star player is unhappy, the narrative seems to turn to the FO being toxic or dysfunctional. I'm tired of hearing players moan and grown about their situations, especially the ones that have huge contracts. If a team/FO tried to get out of contract terms, everyone would go crazy bashing the team. Now any player can get on twitter or leak stuff and play the victim and want out of there contracts, and everyone is awwwweeeee poor player. I'd love it if Houston refused to trade Watson, he threatened to sit out, did, and got sued for breach of contract lol... 

Teams get out of contracts all the time.   They cut players before the life of the contract is up.   Also,  pretty sure a player can't be sued for breach for not playing.  They just don't get paid

[EastStreet 9,779]

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Teams get out of contracts all the time.   They cut players before the life of the contract is up.   Also,  pretty sure a player can't be sued for breach for not playing.  They just don't get paid

Teams follow the terms of the contract. They don't just tear it up. If they cut a player, they do it within the rules and have to pay whatever dead cap / guarantees. So they are still fulfilling their obligations that they, and the players agents (or the CBA), agreed to.

 

Players can be sued for breach. Teams can go back to recoup signing bonuses, etc.. It might be called something else, but it's basically the same.

[Zoltan 680]

23 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Every time a star player is unhappy, the narrative seems to turn to the FO being toxic or dysfunctional. I'm tired of hearing players moan and grown about their situations, especially the ones that have huge contracts. If a team/FO tried to get out of contract terms, everyone would go crazy bashing the team. Now any player can get on twitter or leak stuff and play the victim and want out of there contracts, and everyone is awwwweeeee poor player. I'd love it if Houston refused to trade Watson, he threatened to sit out, did, and got sued for breach of contract lol... 

Well that's a completely different conversation, I agree with Brett Favre " if you signed a contract, you should play it out." Watson shouldn't have signed a contract last offseason if he thought it was a sinking ship.

 

Back to what I was talking about I think the more damning is the reports between Roseman and Pederson, and the what was coming out during the coaching search. Reminded me of the back and forth between grigson and Pagano. 

 

Not to mention every time when a GM or HC tries to make a power grab it seems to never end well 

[EastStreet 9,779]

14 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

Well that's a completely different conversation, I agree with Brett Favre " if you signed a contract, you should play it out." Watson shouldn't have signed a contract last offseason if he thought it was a sinking ship.

 

Back to what I was talking about I think the more damning is the reports between Roseman and Pederson, and the what was coming out during the coaching search. Reminded me of the back and forth between grigson and Pagano. 

 

Not to mention every time when a GM or HC tries to make a power grab it seems to never end well 

Grigson was just a bad GM period, and Irsay simply made a bad choice. That said, IMO, it's up to the owner to determine what type of dynamic he wants between a GM and coach. I definitely like a strong GM (IMO Balard is strong), one that holds the coach accountable, and simply looks out for the interest of the franchise. There are exceptions of course. I'm fine with a seasoned and very successful coach having more say. Guys like BB and Reid are some of the exceptions. At the end of the day though, they have to both know there place under the owners choice of models. And one think I don't want, is a player that feels he has the right (or knowledge) to be able to pick a GM or Coach. I'm fine with player input on position coaches, but input is only input, not the deciding factor. But I agree, GM and HC infighting never works out well. It's up to the owner to step in at that point to tell the children how to act.

[Zoltan 680]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

Grigson was just a bad GM period, and Irsay simply made a bad choice. That said, IMO, it's up to the owner to determine what type of dynamic he wants between a GM and coach. I definitely like a strong GM (IMO Balard is strong), one that holds the coach accountable, and simply looks out for the interest of the franchise. There are exceptions of course. I'm fine with a seasoned and very successful coach having more say. Guys like BB and Reid are some of the exceptions. At the end of the day though, they have to both know there place under the owners choice of models. And one think I don't want, is a player that feels he has the right (or knowledge) to be able to pick a GM or Coach. I'm fine with player input on position coaches, but input is only input, not the deciding factor. But I agree, GM and HC infighting never works out well. It's up to the owner to step in at that point to tell the children how to act.

 

53 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Every time a star player is unhappy, the narrative seems to turn to the FO being toxic or dysfunctional. I'm tired of hearing players moan and grown about their situations, especially the ones that have huge contracts. If a team/FO tried to get out of contract terms, everyone would go crazy bashing the team. Now any player can get on twitter or leak stuff and play the victim and want out of there contracts, and everyone is awwwweeeee poor player. I'd love it if Houston refused to trade Watson, he threatened to sit out, did, and got sued for breach of contract lol... 

 

Sounds like this Watson situation is really bugging you lol

[Superman 9,398]

5 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I hate that it's hidden too. At the end of the day, the output is pretty good though so it's pretty hard for me to ignore. No rating out there is perfect, but I like it a lot better than passer rating, which is just pure numbers and not situational at all. PR typically diminishes dual threat QBs too at times. And sometimes, both line up pretty well. PR likes Rivers for instance a lot more than QBR. PR really likes Cousins too. 

 

I saw a pretty good podcast or Youtube segment on QBR not to long ago. Probably early last year-ish. All in all, just like PFF, nothing is perfect, but it's a good tool and simply another indicator. I understand the limitations of both PR and QBR, or at least as much as we can glean based on the proprietary nature. 

 

I shut myself off to it way back when, because they came out and said 'we've figured out how to statistically analyze QB play, and it's so much better than passer rating,' and then the formula was hidden, it was subjective to a significant degree (not as much as I previously thought, to be honest), and what really turned me off is that it's a curve, so a QBR can change as more games are analyzed. I just didn't like it, or the way it was presented. At least PFF never presented their grades as definitive (at least, not if you understood that they were grades, and nothing more). 

 

Passer rating has never been anything more than a composite stat. It's even called passer rating, it involves raw passing stats, nothing more. The problem is when people treat it as if it's more than that. So to me, trying to replace a stat with a grading system was a problem from the start. And then, people started throwing QBR around as if it was definitive, which turned me off even more.

 

I'm going to dig more into it. Now that several years have passed, there's a lot more data to consider. Back in 2012 when people were trying to use QBR to tell me how much better Russell Wilson and RG3 were than Andrew Luck, I wasn't having it. Nearly a decade later, I can try to understand its value better.

[EastStreet 9,779]

4 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

 

Sounds like this Watson situation is really bugging you lol

Well I'm not losing sleep over it, so it's not bothering that much. I just don't want the NFL to turn into the NBA, which is a dumpster anymore. All these mega teams, prima donnas, and politics have ruined it for me. And regardless of the situation, anyone that leaks stuff, or goes on twitter and whines, loses points automatically. Stafford wanted out, and he handled it right way. A lot of guys want out, and get out, you just never hear about it. And a lot of guys want out, but just keep their mouths shut, play out their contract, and move on as a FA.

38 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I shut myself off to it way back when, because they came out and said 'we've figured out how to statistically analyze QB play, and it's so much better than passer rating,' and then the formula was hidden, it was subjective to a significant degree (not as much as I previously thought, to be honest), and what really turned me off is that it's a curve, so a QBR can change as more games are analyzed. I just didn't like it, or the way it was presented. At least PFF never presented their grades as definitive (at least, not if you understood that they were grades, and nothing more). 

 

Passer rating has never been anything more than a composite stat. It's even called passer rating, it involves raw passing stats, nothing more. The problem is when people treat it as if it's more than that. So to me, trying to replace a stat with a grading system was a problem from the start. And then, people started throwing QBR around as if it was definitive, which turned me off even more.

 

I'm going to dig more into it. Now that several years have passed, there's a lot more data to consider. Back in 2012 when people were trying to use QBR to tell me how much better Russell Wilson and RG3 were than Andrew Luck, I wasn't having it. Nearly a decade later, I can try to understand its value better.

I take both with a grain of salt. I admit, QBR has grown on me over the years, and I've become less skeptical. I'll always look at both. If you're good on both, not issue, if there's a big delta, I'm typically triggered to look deep at advanced stats. As far a being on a curve, I'm OK with that if they are evolving the numbers based on more data. Case in point, a passer rating for a QB who's played bad pass Ds early in the year is probably misleading vs a QB that has a schedule full of good pass Ds. A lot of metrics do that these days. Even Net Ratings for CBB does that.

 

I just did a google. Wiki updated their page, so I'd start there. 

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

https://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/123701/how-is-total-qbr-calculated-we-explain-our-quarterback-rating

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17653521/how-total-qbr-calculated-explain-our-improved-qb-rating

 

[crazycolt1 7,556]

7 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Every time a star player is unhappy, the narrative seems to turn to the FO being toxic or dysfunctional. I'm tired of hearing players moan and grown about their situations, especially the ones that have huge contracts. If a team/FO tried to get out of contract terms, everyone would go crazy bashing the team. Now any player can get on twitter or leak stuff and play the victim and want out of there contracts, and everyone is awwwweeeee poor player. I'd love it if Houston refused to trade Watson, he threatened to sit out, did, and got sued for breach of contract lol... 

What bothers me is some players are trying to push themselves like the NBA players have done. 

The results have shown that process turns a lot of fans away. 

Even during the pandemic the viewer ratings have gone down. 

They advertise themselves as entertainment. The problem with that is people tune in to get mentally away from the issues and want to be entertained for that 3 hours. 

[coming on strong 1,154]

I think the eagles are bluffing saying the bears are the best offer and close .   If the bears were close the offer would be leaked to get the colts to put up more . The eagles know the colts have the best offer and are saying the bears are pushing just to trick Ballard .   The bears are 6 million over the cap already how can they take another 35 million without cutting a lot of players . Eagles are 40 million over the cap they can’t help the bears with money .

[Superman 9,398]

9 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I take both with a grain of salt. I admit, QBR has grown on me over the years, and I've become less skeptical. I'll always look at both. If you're good on both, not issue, if there's a big delta, I'm typically triggered to look deep at advanced stats. As far a being on a curve, I'm OK with that if they are evolving the numbers based on more data. Case in point, a passer rating for a QB who's played bad pass Ds early in the year is probably misleading vs a QB that has a schedule full of good pass Ds. A lot of metrics do that these days. Even Net Ratings for CBB does that.

 

 

The curve bothered me because over time, it will continue to have a negative impact on previous generations of QBs. As passing offenses get more efficient, and rules change, it will change the "average" and further the divide. It makes sense to acknowledge a generational breakpoint, but I'm not sure how that would be done.

[stitches 8,416]

16 hours ago, Superman said:

 

That's my big problem with it. It's locked behind closed doors, and it isn't subject to any kind of review. But admittedly, I've been dismissive of it to the extent that I haven't even fully wrapped my mind around it. I've always thought it was more subjective than it actually is, based on what I've read about it today.

My thinking is - as long as it's consistently and uniformly used across the board, I don't mind the blackbox component to it. Now from then on the question is whether it produces good results or not. I am not sure how to evaluate that. 

[Superman 9,398]

6 minutes ago, stitches said:

My thinking is - as long as it's consistently and uniformly used across the board, I don't mind the blackbox component to it. Now from then on the question is whether it produces good results or not. I am not sure how to evaluate that. 

 

Some results are clearly not representative. Jacoby Brissett's first start for the Patriots in 2016, vs the Texans, was graded a 60 QBR (62.1 at the time), and a 70.7 when adjusted for opponent. I watched that game. He didn't play good QB, they used him as a dual threat guy, he threw the ball 19 times for 103 yards, the defense was amazing (0 points allowed), and all three TDs the Patriots scored came on short fields, after two turnovers and one field position battle that gave them the ball at the opponent 47.

 

It's essentially a grading system, not just a statistic.

[EastStreet 9,779]

12 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

What bothers me is some players are trying to push themselves like the NBA players have done. 

The results have shown that process turns a lot of fans away. 

Even during the pandemic the viewer ratings have gone down. 

They advertise themselves as entertainment. The problem with that is people tune in to get mentally away from the issues and want to be entertained for that 3 hours. 

Yup, yup, and yup....

I still watch the Pacers a little, but totally turned off by the NBA. Hardly watched the playoffs. I can't even watch ESPN much anymore. Golic and Wingo was about the only show that didn't go to hell, and then they got rid of it. For NFL news, I watch mostly the NFL network. I still watch college BB. It's just to a point, I'd rather watch a TV show or movie than a lot of sports stuff these days. At least there's a market in China I guess lol.

[EastStreet 9,779]

6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The curve bothered me because over time, it will continue to have a negative impact on previous generations of QBs. As passing offenses get more efficient, and rules change, it will change the "average" and further the divide. It makes sense to acknowledge a generational breakpoint, but I'm not sure how that would be done.

I was talking about modification within the year. 

[1959Colts 1,172]

The Carson Wentz Wait Continues

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/02/17/the-carson-wentz-wait-continues/

 

Carson Wentz is still a member of the Eagles.

Yes, the trade that was supposedly imminent continues to be imminent, or maybe some other word.

Here’s the latest, from Les Bowen of the Philadelphia Inquirer: “Spoke with NFL management source (not from Eagles) about the Wentz melodrama. His viewpoint: If Wentz doesn’t want the Bears, Bears aren’t gonna trade for him. Eventually the Eagles take whatever Indy is offering, maybe a second plus something. Also, Eagles draft a QB 6th overall.”

There’s plenty in that tweet, none of which counts as hard news. Instead, it’s the opinion expressed anonymously from someone in management with a team other than the Eagles.

I’m sharing it because: (1) it’s a little slow today; and (2) it meshes with my view that the Bears shouldn’t want Wentz if Wentz doesn’t want the Bears.

Some of you have bristled at the idea that Wentz is in position to engineer his next destination. Bristle away; the reality is that no team will want a reluctant franchise quarterback. How can any team expect to reach maximum achievement with its starting quarterback if the guy doesn’t want to be there?

The attitude eventually will show up, whether in the extra hours spent working at work or the extra hours spent working at home or the reluctance to hold teammates accountable. Although a team can take a “tough crap” attitude with players at every other position, a team has no chance to win if the starting quarterback doesn’t want to be there.

So if Wentz doesn’t want the Bears (and he shouldn’t), why should the Bears want Wentz? They shouldn’t.

Thus, look for the Colts and Eagles to continue to stare at each other, possibly waiting until March 17 to finalize a deal that will give the Colts what they need — a quarterback — and the Eagles what they want — an exit ramp from Wentz’s contract, along with enough of a return that they can salvage a slim measure of victory from the wreckage that has become Wentz’s Philly career.

 

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,965]

19 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I shut myself off to it way back when, because they came out and said 'we've figured out how to statistically analyze QB play, and it's so much better than passer rating,' and then the formula was hidden, it was subjective to a significant degree (not as much as I previously thought, to be honest), and what really turned me off is that it's a curve, so a QBR can change as more games are analyzed. I just didn't like it, or the way it was presented. At least PFF never presented their grades as definitive (at least, not if you understood that they were grades, and nothing more). 

 

Passer rating has never been anything more than a composite stat. It's even called passer rating, it involves raw passing stats, nothing more. The problem is when people treat it as if it's more than that. So to me, trying to replace a stat with a grading system was a problem from the start. And then, people started throwing QBR around as if it was definitive, which turned me off even more.

 

I'm going to dig more into it. Now that several years have passed, there's a lot more data to consider. Back in 2012 when people were trying to use QBR to tell me how much better Russell Wilson and RG3 were than Andrew Luck, I wasn't having it. Nearly a decade later, I can try to understand its value better.

 

That's news to me. I thought it was fixed formula that was public. And you mentioned that its subjective,  the formula can change?

 

Reminds me of the speed ratings and the most popular one, the Beyer Figure that are used in horse racing.