ESPN: QBR or RG3?

[Brotherz]

Whatever. I'm more than happy with the guy we have. I don't give a crap about Luck and I am more than content on letting this play out to see which one has the best career. I am not sweating anyone in this league compared to our QB. Nobody.

[asnpcwiz]

This columnist is a retard. How is Luck better than RG3 if no one in the league or in football would rather have Luck over RG3?!? The only exception is Indy and Indy fans. Even this columnist agrees that he'd rather have RG3. That simple fact just tells you who is better (not including all the numbers that count).

[Symbol]

The only ones that use the "QBR" is ESPN. The NFL uses Quarterback Rating, though admittedly not to many people understand the NFL's version, it's the one that counts. Using the one that counts, RGIII is higher rated than Andrew Luck. The voters won't be looking at ESPN's version, they'll be looking at the NFL's version.

[ouvan59]

I've been browsing the Colts message board, they try to convince themselves Luck is the real deal with biased arguments, sometimes truth hurts.

Luck is the real deal. If it weren't for RGIII he would be having one of the best rookie campaigns of all time (he is). Just because he hasn't been as good as RGIII doesn't mean he isn't going to be a superstar. And sorry Rick Reilly but you can try to manipulate the stats any way you want but RGIII has been miles better than Luck. YAC is the hallmark of a good QB. It's not something to be ashamed of. A swing pass that gets 12 yards is better than an amazing thread of the needle pass that nets 11 yards 100% of the time. YAC is the result of a QB hitting a receiver in stride and on time. And I love that Reilly uses the first down runs to show that Luck is a better runner because he has 10 first downs to Griffin's 9. Guess what you don't get when you run a ball in for a touchdown? A first down. Stupid article.

[No_Pressure]

I remember watching RG3 last week getting babied by the Shanahans who asked him to convert what, three 4th downs two of which were in his own territory? One was a 4th and 10 and baby Griffin converted by easily running around Jason Pierre-Paul. What a wuss.

[skinsfan07]

Read this post from the Colts Message board, and this is a Colts fan talking



I said it earlier, RR is only trying to oppose Wilbon and what Wilbon said on Korny's show a couple of days ago. I really never cared for Rick Reiley back when he was at SI and still don't care for him now.

Actually that is the 1st time someone said he has a quick release like Marino.

What's the Colts main forums? ColtsFreaks?

[Painkiller]

Write-ups like that Reilly argument are just further evidence of the times we live in. Over-analyze and spin everything, and ignore what is right in front of your face. So far in their careers, Griffin has clearly been the better QB. There is no comparison. No question who has been better. Luck will be a fine QB, but to try to spin stats in some ass-backwards way to try to prove Luck has been better than Griffin so far this year, even as a running QB?

Complete bull ****, and everyone who reads that should see right through the haterade.

[ouvan59]

Just went back and looked at the splits for both. Reilly, as we suspected, completely manipulated the numbers. Yes, RGIII has more passes thrown behind the line of scrimmage but Luck has more passes thrown 10 yards or fewer (that includes behind the line of scrimmage) 132-119. But the real divider among the two is passes from 11-20 yards. RGIII completes 71.0% of these passes for an average of 15.71 ypa which is astounding. Luck completes 51.7% of his passes with no TDs and 4 ints and 8.38 ypa. So in reality it's Luck who is relying on the short pass not RGIII.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Reilly has been awful for years.

I love how this is one of the few articles on espn where people can't reply to it or have a discussion, either.

And I really hate how ESPN is trying to jam this QBR thing down our throats. Give it up already, wtf? Why can't you just stick to news and highlights and stop trying to reinvent everything? Your station was the first sports only news station of all time and changed how we watch sports and get sports news. Can't you just live with that? It's a pretty big achievement. No one cares about QBR...except for you.

This reminds me of the time they came out with their ****ty espn cell phone and no one bought it. No. One. So they bludgeoned their viewers with commercial after commercial about why this espn cell phone was so ****ing amazing and it ended up just pissing everyone off.

Unfortunately QBR isn't a product. It's a stat that they can just use over and over and no one can do anything about it.

[GoDeep81]

Reilly just tryin to drum up blog hits with that nonsense.. Yea, it's his hair, smile, and sock collection that has everyone so excited..

[Spaceman Spiff]

Just went back and looked at the splits for both. Reilly, as we suspected, completely manipulated the numbers. Yes, RGIII has more passes thrown behind the line of scrimmage but Luck has more passes thrown 10 yards or fewer (that includes behind the line of scrimmage) 132-119. But the real divider among the two is passes from 11-20 yards. RGIII completes 71.0% of these passes for an average of 15.71 ypa which is astounding. Luck completes 51.7% of his passes with no TDs and 4 ints and 8.38 ypa. So in reality it's Luck who is relying on the short pass not RGIII.

Good research!

[FrFan]

Luck is the real deal. If it weren't for RGIII he would be having one of the best rookie campaigns of all time (he is). Just because he hasn't been as good as RGIII doesn't mean he isn't going to be a superstar.

I never said that, I'm just convinced that Robert will outplay Luck in the NFL, as he did in the NCAA when he won the Heisman.

[BornToHail]

Ridiculous article. Luck and RG3 are both having excellent rookie campaigns. This article is one big stupid infomercial for ESPN's unique (and quite useless) QBR statistic.

[Mr. Sinister]

Reilly has been awful for years.

I love how this is one of the few articles on espn where people can't reply to it or have a discussion, either.

And I really hate how ESPN is trying to jam this QBR thing down our throats. Give it up already, wtf? Why can't you just stick to news and highlights and stop trying to reinvent everything? Your station was the first sports only news station of all time and changed how we watch sports and get sports news. Can't you just live with that? It's a pretty big achievement. No one cares about QBR...except for you.

This reminds me of the time they came out with their ****ty espn cell phone and no one bought it. No. One. So they bludgeoned their viewers with commercial after commercial about why this espn cell phone was so ****ing amazing and it ended up just pissing everyone off.

Unfortunately QBR isn't a product. It's a stat that they can just use over and over and no one can do anything about it.

They don't even refer to the NFL qb rating (which actually matters) anymore. It's always "QBR! QBR! QBR! QBR! QBR!" I think Steve Young (probably the one guy who decided not to tote that company line) sort of laughed it off on the MNF postgame sometime around the beginning of the season.

[darrelgreenie]

I hate that this article is wronglfully adding to hatred of the QBR which imo is by and large a good metric for QB play. NO metric should be taken as gospel in and of itself; but short of watching every QB play the QBR in conjunction with the other QBs metrics gives a good picture.