RG3 posts the highest QBTG ever.

[Oldfan]

In my opinion...

Tom Brady is a grade A pocket passer. Peyton Manning is a grade A pocket passers. As pocket passers go, I don't grade any higher. However, the defensive game plan against them is the same and it's simple: Get them to move their feet.

I'm grading QBs on their talent-ability to create problems for the defense. The Grade A atheltic QBs create more problems for the DC, so they get higher grades from me.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

It's a subjective, but intelligent way to grades QBs -- as opposed to a commonly used objective, but unintelligent, way.

you gave Tom Brady a one for extending plays when he is probably the best at it in the NFL, and maybe ever (especially pre knee injury). Thats why this metric cant work, biases get in the way.


But I do agree with you that just using statistics do not work. The problem is football is a sport that is wholly dependent on others so you could make a case for and against any player.

[Oldfan]

There should be a difference though between "minimum level talent" and "minimum requirement" though. I agree that most QBs should be able to extend the play in the pocket. But look at John Skelton or Kevin Kolb - they don't have that ability. Their pocket awareness is nonexistent. That should be the "minimum level talent". Moving around in the pocket to extend the play (a la Brady or Manning) should be around a 3. Manning I might even give a 4 to, because his pocket awareness is outstanding. He steps up when need be, he does those subtle moves that help make a great QB.

'Minimum level talent" "minimum requirement" "Pocket presence" doesn't include throwing off the back foot under phantom pressure for you...I'm not going to debate semantics.

If you want to include pocket presence in your grading and grade extending plays in the pocket differently, go right ahead.

[Hitman21ST]

Hypothetically:
Brady is successful on 85% of level 1 plays, 80% on level 2 plays, and 45% on level 3 plays.
I'd then compare these statistics between QBs and arrive at my own subjective ranking.
Now please feel free to tear it my method fellas , try and take it easy if you can.

That doesn't seem too bad, Mahons, my only hangup is that good QBs would try to stay away from the "level 3" plays in your scenario. Meaning that a good QB would do something to avoid them (audible out of it, hot route, whatever) - if he presnap reads a cover 2, I would expect him to change the routes to find the hole.

Having a lower number of level three plays then would probably then mean a smaller success rate.

Just for numbers sake:

In a given game, his offense runs 40 pass plays.

20 of them would qualify as a "level 1" play. His success rate is 95%.

12 are "level 2" plays. His success rate is 75%.

8 are "level 3" plays, but he correctly reads the defense and audibles out of 4 of them to level 1. On the remaining 4, he has a success rate of 25%. However, that system wouldn't take into account the 4 plays which he audibled out of.

[NLC1054]

Seriously.

No one is going to bring up Aaron Rodgers.

Huh.

[Oldfan]

you gave Tom Brady a one for extending plays when he is probably the best at it in the NFL, and maybe ever (especially pre knee injury). Thats why this metric cant work, biases get in the way.

Brady was never mobile enough to extend plays by moving out of the pocket. The best he can do is reset his feet within the pocket to buy a little more time.

But I do agree with you that just using statistics do not work. The problem is football is a sport that is wholly dependent on others so you could make a case for and against any player.

Exactly.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I thnk you give too many QBs the benefit of the doubt in your Extending Plays category. I don't think Brady can be a 1 when there are guys like Grossman and Campbell in the league. By assuming most QBs can step up, side step, etc. in the pocket you are actually indirectly weighing mobility too much.

I think the movement we see from Manning and Brady within the pocket would warrant a 3. That way you aren't essentially rating Mobility twice and double counting it. To me, someone like Campbell (pat, pat, pat....sack) would get a 1, someone like Brady would get a 3, and someone like Griffin would get a 5.

[Mahons21]

That doesn't seem too bad, Mahons, my only hangup is that good QBs would try to stay away from the "level 3" plays in your scenario. Meaning that a good QB would do something to avoid them (audible out of it, hot route, whatever) - if he presnap reads a cover 2, I would expect him to change the routes to find the hole.

Having a lower number of level three plays then would probably then mean a smaller success rate.

Just for numbers sake:

In a given game, his offense runs 40 pass plays.

20 of them would qualify as a "level 1" play. His success rate is 95%.

12 are "level 2" plays. His success rate is 75%.

8 are "level 3" plays, but he correctly reads the defense and audibles out of 4 of them to level 1. On the remaining 4, he has a success rate of 25%. However, that system wouldn't take into account the 4 plays which he audibled out of.

It's a valid point, but one that I hope would be minimized by a larger sample size (course of a season).

Furthermore, a successful level 2 play is going to look better than an unsuccessful level 3 play on the final stats, and I would imagine that many of these plays that QBs audible out of would be unsuccessful. I've also pointed out if a level 3 play is a bad decision as some are but still completed, the play would only count as a level 2 completion.

But your point makes me think the # of plays within each level should be taken into account.
Level 1 60/70, level 2 35/50, level 3 8/20, something of that nature to show a percentage and attempts.

[Oldfan]

...I'd then compare these statistics between QBs and arrive at my own subjective ranking.
Now please feel free to tear it my method fellas , try and take it easy if you can.

Are you only grading their passing?

[skinnyskins]

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 05:27 PM ----------

[/COLOR] You didn't show a flaw in my method. You showed you don't grade QBs very well. EXAMPLE: Besides a low Wonderlik grade, which would have disqualified him in my grading method, Vince Young has terrible mechanics, even worse than Jason Campbell's as a rookie.

Your grades would not withstand, critical judgment by knowledgeable posters.

My thread has already drawn four very knowledgeable posters who are perfectly capable of spotting serious flaws in my grading. A few thought my four should have been raised to a five on RG3's deep ball. Our difference of opinion was due to the fact that I based my judgment on NFL not college plays.[COLOR="Gold"]

I rated Young as a 2, 3, and 2 respectively for your passer ratings; you make it sound like I gave him a ringing endorsement. You bring in mechanics for the first time in this thread and that is reflected in my low score.

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 07:12 PM ----------

Seriously.

No one is going to bring up Aaron Rodgers.

Huh.

Im in total agreement with you.

[Hitman21ST]

'Minimum level talent" "minimum requirement" "Pocket presence" doesn't include throwing off the back foot under phantom pressure for you...I'm not going to debate semantics.

If you want to include pocket presence in your grading and grade extending plays in the pocket differently, go right ahead.

It just appears that you aren't giving Brady a fair grade - his ability to extend the play in the pocket is close to unparalleled. On the level with Peyton Manning. To give grade Brady and Manning the same grade as John Skelton or Kevin Kolb isn't exactly fair on the sole basis that they are pocket passers. Manning and Brady extend in the pocket a whole lot better than any other pocket passer, which is why giving them a 1 for extending plays isn't accurate. You can't honestly say that Skelton and Kolb (among others) would rank above a 1 in "extending plays", and by giving Brady a 1 in that category you're saying he's no better than either of those two.

His throwing mechanics need work, so you can knock him on that by all means. But Brady can extend the play. I would give Brady a three in that category, and RG3 would get a 5. Mobile passers would definitely rank higher, but that doesn't mean Brady is a 1.

[ArmchairRedskin]

I'm sure if this scale had been brought up before the 2011 season, Beck would have ranked very highly according to OF

[Hitman21ST]

Seriously.

No one is going to bring up Aaron Rodgers.

Huh.

I agree with you, NLC, I'm just arguing a different point

[Oldfan]

I thnk you give too many QBs the benefit of the doubt in your Extending Plays category. I don't think Brady can be a 1 when there are guys like Grossman and Campbell in the league. By assuming most QBs can step up, side step, etc. in the pocket you are actually indirectly weighing mobility too much.

I think the movement we see from Manning and Brady within the pocket would warrant a 3. That way you aren't essentially rating Mobility twice and double counting it. To me, someone like Campbell (pat, pat, pat....sack) would get a 1, someone like Brady would get a 3, and someone like Griffin would get a 5.

Why should movment within the pocket be a three when there is such a wide range of QBs in the league who can do so much more? Romo is far more dangerous out of the pocket than he is within. That's why defenses game plan to keep him in. With Brady and Manning, the game plan calls for getting them to move their feet. They are not nearly as dangerous when you get them to move.

[Mahons21]

Are you only grading their passing?

No.

In my intial post I gave the example of RG3's run on 3rd down that got a first, said play would qualify as a successful 3.

I think I'd then quantify all zone-reads as a 1, if the QB reads it right then he would get a successful grade, if he reads it wrong unsuccessful, and if the play is simply blown up by the d-line dominating the o-line in more than one area I'd void it all together. Which means I would have to include some HB runs, but they aren't solely designed HB runs. In addition, if the QB is able to make a gain of say 15+ yards, I'd move the zone read into a successful level 2 play.