RG3 posts the highest QBTG ever.

[Oldfan]

...Neither Manning nor Brady run 100% of their passes from the shotgun. Were that so, then you would have a point. However, they run plays from under center also, and are just as accurate (yes, I've seen enough of their games to make that statement).

Why must it be 100% to count? Manning and Brady have been number 1 and 2, usually with Brady as #1, in attempts from the shotgun for the better part of the last decade. Both QBs have been more efficient in the gun than they have been under center. Almost all NFL QBs have been. Manning's stat was 75% attempts from the shotgun in his last Colt season.

I'm not saying "accuracy" is completion percentage. It's a judgment of whether or not the QB was able to throw the ball to the receiver A) in stride and/or B) where the defender could not reach the ball. Which has nothing to do with whether they are in shotgun or not.

Shotun increases accuracy. Accuracy is one factor in throwing into a tight window.

Either way, how do you give a grade for "short/medium/deep passing" then? Going by what you said about having to isolate his performance from his support, you wouldn't be able to give those a grade then.

It's about looking for the things a scout would look for. I would need a couple of pages to explain more. Maybe that's a topic for another thread.

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 08:47 PM ----------

...That's odd. That's almost exactly what I was saying about extending the play, yet you want to argue semantics with me.

I couldn't find your remark. Which post?

[KDawg]

It amazes me how many people here are missing the point.

This isn't a rating system to fully grade a quarterback. It's speaking purely on the physical. It's not for use with a GM, it's for use for a fan (one in particular that likes it, who is sharing his formula) to grade physical characteristics in a purely subjective manner. It is fairly difficult to grade intelligence from a fans perspective. From a GM or head coach perspective it's much easier, such as using Coach Belichicks method of throwing a crash course at a prospect, taking a break and then reconvening with the prospect and having them outline everything they were just taught... Or Gruden's "QB Boot Camp".

This is purely based on physical skills. Peyton is a phenomenal pocket passer. He's not athletic. His lack of athletic ability hurts him slightly in the physical tools area. He makes up for that with his brain and work ethic, but we have no accurate way of measuring that.

[Hitman21ST]

Shotun increases accuracy.

You keep saying that. Can you provide a source to corroborate that argument?

I couldn't find your remark. Which post?

78, 104, 116, 121, 125

My saying that "extending the play" doesn't have to mean running ability. It can also be considered under pocket awareness.

[Bishop Hammer]

I will say this, based on the eye test, Robert Griffin III blows anyone we ever had out of the water. He reminds me very much of Donovan McNabb except with BETTER accuracy. If we can ever get RG3 paired up with a #1 receiver, we might see something amazing a la McNabb and Owens until the meltdown. And no I dont believe Garcon is that #1 receiver.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who saw shades of McNabb's game in Griffin's. Here's hoping our team has many playoff runs his team had!

[Oldfan]

It amazes me how many people here are missing the point.

Why does this amaze you? Doesn't it happen in your threads? Is it just me?

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 09:02 PM ----------

You keep saying that. Can you provide a source to corroborate that argument?

Footballoutsiders publishes their Prospectus which has all the starting QBs listed by completion percentage Shotgun v. under center. I can't link you to my hard copy. Here's what they have to say online:

Shotgun formations are generally more efficient than formations with the quarterback under center.

Over the past four seasons, offenses have averaged 6.0 yards per play from Shotgun, but just 5.2 yards per play with the quarterback under center. This wide split exists even if you analyze the data to try to weed out biases like teams using Shotgun more often on third-and-long, or against prevent defenses in the fourth quarter. Shotgun offense is more efficient if you only look at the first half, on every down, and even if you only look at running back carries rather than passes and scrambles.

Clearly, NFL teams have figured the importance of the Shotgun out for themselves. In 2001, NFL teams only used Shotgun on 14 percent of plays. Five years later, in 2006, that had increased slightly, to 20 percent of plays. In 2011, Shotgun was used on a record-setting 41 percent of plays (not counting the Wildcat or other college-style option plays). Before 2007, no team had ever used Shotgun on more than half its offensive plays. In 2011, six different teams used Shotgun over 50 percent of the time, led by Detroit which used Shotgun on an NFL-record 68 percent of plays. It is likely that if teams continue to increase their usage of the Shotgun, defenses will adapt and the benefit of the formation will become less pronounced. But it certainly isn't happening yet; the difference between success on Shotgun and non-Shotgun plays in 2001 was bigger than in 2008, 2009, or 2010.

The QB who set the new record in 2007 was Tom Brady.

My saying that "extending the play" doesn't have to mean running ability. It can also be considered under pocket awareness.

That statement is nothing like TD's point.

[darrelgreenie]

If you grade a player in aggregate over the course of a season, isn't consistency inherent in the grade?

Yes, their play over the course of a season would reflect their consistency or lack.

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 09:13 PM ----------

Theoretically possible, but that's a mammoth task requiring analysts who understand the schemes of 32 teams and were on the same page with their scoring.

It would be a monumental task no doubt, but it would be parsed among a staff of as many people as needed. They wouldn't need to understand the scheme as much as the rules by which they grade would make sure they assess withtin the confines of what they can grade independent of assessment that requires scheme knowledge.

[Hitman21ST]

Footballoutsiders publishes their Prospectus which has all the starting QBs listed by completion percentage Shotgun v. under center. I can't link you to my hard copy. Here's what they have to say online:

I see yards per play and % of plays that shotgun is used. Nothing about accuracy or completion percentage.

That statement is nothing like TD's point.

Let me explain.

He said mobility (defined by him as running ability) is being weighed doubly, which you appear to agree with. I was saying that you gave mobile (using his definition) quarterbacks an edge in the grading system based on their ability to run, labeling that as "extending the play". While running ability is definitely an aspect of extending the play, it is not the sole determiner of the ability to extend a play. Moving within the pocket is another way to extend the play (regardless of footwork while throwing). I was saying (in probably not the clearest way, for which I apologize) that movement within the pocket needs to be considered also. I viewed his and my statements regarding running ability not being the only determiner of "extending the play" to be similar.

[Dallsux]

His talent is undeniable. What truly astonishes me about RG3's game is how fluid-smooth he is when things break down around him. It's as if the guy has another sense or something. He's not 100% automatic in this regard, and it's simply ridiculous to expect that of him, but way more often than not; RG3 does amazing things to extend drives - simply amazing...

It is truly breath-taking, literally & figuratively, to watch him. I find myself holding my breath as the pocket collapses around him & he starts to wander from the pocket with a defender hot on his heels & then...like that, he's down the field, turning a sure sack into a 25 yard gain. It doesn't seem to me that he has blazing speed, but his ability to escape tackles & make great decisiosn is, as you say, undeniable. I still can't believe he wears B&G. I am very thankful he does.

He was nearly perfect yesterday. (of course, you wouldn't know it listening to Billick & his cohort slobbering all over Andy Reid & the Eagles all day).

It was awesome to see him pick them apart like that with relative ease. I hope to see the same kind of effort from the team on Thursday in Dallas.

PLEASE, Redskins, help RG3 beat Dallas! :

[Oldfan]

I see yards per play and % of plays that shotgun is used. Nothing about accuracy or completion percentage.

I see. You aren't willing to make the logical deduction that greater accuracy would have to be part of the scenario if teams are using it more. Fine, let's move on.

Let me explain.

He said mobility (defined by him as running ability) is being weighed doubly, which you appear to agree with. I was saying that you gave mobile (using his definition) quarterbacks an edge in the grading system based on their ability to run, labeling that as "extending the play". While running ability is definitely an aspect of extending the play, it is not the sole determiner of the ability to extend a play. Moving within the pocket is another way to extend the play (regardless of footwork while throwing). I was saying (in probably not the clearest way, for which I apologize) that movement within the pocket needs to be considered also. I viewed his and my statements regarding running ability not being the only determiner of "extending the play" to be similar.

I don't see them as similar. I see TD's a a logical criticism. That's different than yours.

[Hitman21ST]

I see. You aren't willing to make the logical deduction that greater accuracy would have to be part of the scenario if teams are using it more. Fine, let's move on.

Personal attack, huh?

Now you're just being obtuse. You can't make that assumption. Teams are using it more because it gives the QB more time to read the defense. That is a different aspect than accuracy. If the QB doesn't have to worry about his dropback as he does under center, he has more time to make the right read. Making the right read and delivering the pass accurately are two entirely different things. Being in shotgun affects the former, not the latter.

Just because you can make the right read doesn't mean you can deliver an accurate pass. Conversely, just because you can deliver an accurate pass doesn't mean you can make the right read.

I don't see them as similar. I see TD's a a logical criticism. That's different than yours.

Wow, look at that. Another personal attack. You seem to hate them so much, but you have no problem using them. I've been nothing but cordial in my discussion, yet you seem to want to attack me.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I see what you mean. You're right. I have to make some adjustments, but how much weight should be given each in what I'll call the arm/legs ratio?

That's what's tough...I by no means believe I have a better break down! I apparently like to identify problems without providing solutions.

[Hitman21ST]

Footballoutsiders publishes their Prospectus which has all the starting QBs listed by completion percentage Shotgun v. under center.

But according to you, you can't judge a QB based on their completion percentage, because completion percentage is based too much on outside variables. So you need to throw that entire list out the window.

[NLC1054]

This is purely based on physical skills.

The problem is that the criteria for the so-called rating scale that's supposed to be based purely on physical attributes is that there's a number of guys who aren't technically the athletes Robert are that would rate higher.

I already bought up Aaron Rodgers, who, if we're just going on this scale, would have a near perfect score, 29 out of 30. Rodgers is not the athlete that RGIII is, but just using Oldfan's criteria, is damn near impossible to say RGIII is better than Rodgers at any of it.

That, as is, completely debunks the whole concept of RGIII having the highest "QBTG" ever unless you either 1.) ignore Aaron Rodgers completely and/or 2.) conjure up someway to devalue him.

Stats are not a perfect way to measure a quarterback's performance, but judging a quarterback purely on physical skillsets is just as imperfect a science. It's for use for a fan, sure, but people have the right to tell that fan that his methodology is faulty. If not downright wrong and crafted around a notion he's long believed in, long before he even know their was a quarterback named Robert Griffin III, which is basically "Brady is overrated, Belichick made him everything he is and since Belichick is awesome he could do that with anybody and Brady would suck without him."

It's easy to create of formula around a biased opinion, which is why subjective ratings like this, even if only for one's personal use, come under such scrutiny.

[BobGriffin]

The top picks don't all score highly. For example, a pocket passer like Tom Brady could not possiblly score as highly on his talent with both arm and legs as Robert Griffin. But if a team designs a scheme for a pocket passer, they will ignore mobility scores.

Intangibles are important, but there are no experts in what can't be seen, IMO.

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 06:16 PM ----------

Being able to extend the play in the pocket is my minimum requirement. I give it a one. If the QB is an absolute statue, I could give it a zero I suppose. But most QBs develop some ability to extend a play within the pocket.

Brady 's ability to do it gets hyped because his fans have to find some explanation for his outstanding performances. They can't claim that it's because he has a better skill set.

Pocket presence is a vague concept, and since it's vague, people can claim expertise they don't have to assess it.

I watch footwork in the pocket. Tom Brady has a bad habit of throwing off his back foot even when not forced to do it by pressure. I noticed it before hearing Belichik with a microphone on him castigating Brady for it when Brady didn't seem to want to hear it. "Step into your throws!" Belichik reminded him impatiently.

Some QBs can get away with throwing off the back foot. Brady can't. His ball floats.

But Brady was a sixth round pick due to his measurables...

[Oldfan]

...Wow, look at that. Another personal attack. You seem to hate them so much, but you have no problem using them. I've been nothing but cordial in my discussion, yet you seem to want to attack me.

What the hell are you talking about? When the opponent attacks your statement as being illogical, that's debate. When he accuses you of not being willing to make a logical deduction, that's debate. It's not a personal attack.

Look, my friend. Your argumentative style of debate is annoying. I don't come here to be annoyed. Don't expect responses from me in the future.

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 11:03 PM ----------

But Brady was a sixth round pick due to his measurables...

I don't understand your point.

---------- Post added November-19th-2012 at 11:08 PM ----------

That's what's tough...I by no means believe I have a better break down! I apparently like to identify problems without providing solutions.

That's okay. Recognizing problems is a valuable contribution. I appreciate it.