The Almighty Quarterback Bandwagon Runs Out of Control

As regular readers know, I have been waging a one-man battle in the Stadium for years against what I believe to be rampant stupidity on 1) the way quarterbacks are graded and 2) the value of the quarterback position. My charge is that typical fans are simply jumping on bandwagon opinions without thought. The "experts" who keep the bandwagon rolling are people like Rick Gosselin, Hall of Fame football writer for the Dallas Morning News who recently wrote:

"With all the rule changes over the years that have handcuffed defenses, football is now a game played in the hands of the quarterback. I’ve long believed the quarterback position is 85 percent of a championship equation in college and 75 percent in the NFL."

While the quarterback position is certainly the most important on any NFL team, that 75% estimate is world-class dumb. The average NFL team over the past nine years, passed the football 33 times per game while the offense, defense and special teams were involved in 142.4 plays in the average game. 33 divided by 142.4 is 23.2%.

In other words, if the quarterback designed the scheme, trained all the players, called his own plays, needed no protection, passed the ball, and then ran downfield to catch it, his position would be worth about 23%. Gosselin's 75% estimate is an example of the kind of absurdity that propels the bandwagon thinking on quarterbacks.

If we give the coaching (scheme, training and playcalling) its due and value the average QB position as equal in worth to all ten of his teammates in the passing game put together, the average quarterback position value is about 9.3%. That number makes him the most important player on the field by far.

This thread is concerned only with the value of the position

The reader needs to bear in mind that the average quarterback position value does not change whether the quarterback is good, bad or mediocre. However, the scheme and play calling can change the QB position value. For example, the average scheme passes on 54.5% of their offensive plays. If the scheme called for more passing, the value of the QB position would go up. If the QB is asked to use his legs outside the pocket and throw on the move, the position value goes up. Example:

The value of a specific NFL team's QB position is 10% based on a pocket passer averaging 35 throws per game. Using a scale of five to grade the talent of pocket passers, an average pocket passer is a three. The top grade passer is a five.

So, .10 X 3 = .30 and .10 X 5 = .50

However, for this discussion, you must understand that we are only concerned with estimating the value of the position, .10 in this example. So, QB grades on his talent are not relevant.

The stats used in this estimate were obtained as follows:

The average pass and rush attempts were based on the 16th ranked teams over a nine-year stretch (2003 - 2011). The special teams stats were based on a 176 game sample in 2012.

33.0 -- pass attempts

27.6 -- rush attempts

02.2 -- FG attempts

02.7 -- XP attempts

05.2 -- punts*

05.7 -- kickoffs

71.2 -- for each team on offense

71.2 -- for each team on defense

142.4 -- average team total of plays per game

[ *I just noticed that I did not add in the 5.2 for punts which would give me a slightly stronger argument. I'll just leave it as it is.]

23.2% -- the 33 pass attempts as % of 142.4

18.6% -- after reduction for 20% coaching factor: techniques, playcalling, scheme

09.3% -- after reducing for 50% value of protection and receivers

9.3% -- value of the average QB position

Since this calculation isn't a precision instrument, let's round that number up to 10%

A 10% impact is a big number for one player in a league where parity reigns.

My primary source for stats:

http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/rankings/

Well... in college he is way wrong. Everette Golston is going to be good... but he's barely "okay" right now and that's from a Notre Dame fan. And say what you want about AJ McCarron's W-L record, but he's nothing to write home about. Aaron Murray will contribute on Sunday's however.

Good post OF.

I wonder what percentage of points scored per game come from the hand of the QB?

I wonder what percentage of points scored per game come from the hand of the QB?

You could argue that 100% of the Redskins points come from the hand/legs of the quarterback. But that's definitely a scheme thing.

EDIT: Albeit, indirectly on some occasions, but it's the threat that's what counts. So really the argument should be about coaching scheme and whether they are a run to set up the pass or pass to set up the run type of coach and how they use their players. But obviously the most important piece in the pro game is the Quarterback far and away. 75% is a bit much of a percentage, but it's well over 40% in my opinion and maybe higher than 50%.

RGIII IS our team.

I don't know what percentage you'd like to put on that but the percentage of doing much of anything decreases immeasurably without him. We have a line for one that's getting great praise, but is still an average to below average unit aside from Williams and maybe Lichtensteiger. All being made to look considerably better than they are thanks to #10. (And in part great scheming to utilize 10's unique talents.).

And I'm still convinced without Robert, Shanahan would of seen it all unravel after the Carolina debacle, and his ridiculous comments afterward. IMHO, and opinion is all we have as we're all on the outside looking in, Robert held it all together by his tremendous example the players all believe in over the bye. Not the coaching staff.

As regards this team, right now, I honestly don't think you can understate the importance of RGIII. Nor do I think you can over inflate him as regards a percentage number. On whatever scale you wish to use.

Hail.

I wonder what percentage of points scored per game come from the hand of the QB?

Most. Why? Because the quarterback touches the ball on nearly every play aside from wildcat formations and direct snaps. But it's not a relevent statistic to the discussion.

Most. Why? Because the quarterback touches the ball on nearly every play aside from wildcat formations and direct snaps. But it's not a relevent statistic to the discussion.

You also have to take into account the QB calling plays at the line, making adjustments. Also the impact of good QB on the run game. There are a lot of aspects of a football game that the QB has an effect on that you cant measure.

I wonder what percentage of points scored per game come from the hand of the QB?

If you mean the % that TD passes contribute, that should be easy enough to figure out. But, that number wouldn't tell us much since most drives combine the pass and run -- and yardage alone would not tell us about their importance to the drive.

Say that you have the exact same team that is quarterbacked by one guy one week, and a different guy the next week... with vastly different results. What percentage of the blame would you put on the fact that a backup was in there?

Like, if Jay Cutler got hurt, and Jason Campbell came in and stunk it up... would you say that 75% of the blame is on the rest of the team or 100% of the loss goes to Cutler not being there?

9.3% -- value of the average QB position

So if Griffin goes out, the Redskins 90.7% as good with Cousins under center?

Say that you have the exact same team that is quarterbacked by one guy one week, and a different guy the next week... with vastly different results. What percentage of the blame would you put on the fact that a backup was in there?

Like, if Jay Cutler got hurt, and Jason Campbell came in and stunk it up... would you say that 75% of the blame is on the rest of the team or 100% of the loss goes to Cutler not being there?

....or you can make the colts without Manning argument also. The backup lost 75% more games. The number 1 pick in the draft this year has the same team back to a winning record.

With a crappy quarterback, a defense is more inclined to overplay the run knowing that the QB's crappiness makes them less susceptible to getting beat through the air. As far as I can tell, your numbers don't account for that. That's just one example of weakness I see in your formula. Sometimes numbers and percentages alone don't tell the whole story. How does your scheme take into account the ability of a quarterback to extend a play in the pocket vs. one who stands like a statue? The numbers won't show that either.

For better or worse, a quarterback's influence on the success of an offense is way disproportional to any other player. Percentages aside.

... But obviously the most important piece in the pro game is the Quarterback far and away. 75% is a bit much of a percentage, but it's well over 40% in my opinion and maybe higher than 50%.

---------- Post added November-27th-2012 at 11:46 AM ----------

With a crappy quarterback, a defense is more inclined to overplay the run knowing that the QB's crappiness makes them less susceptible to getting beat through the air. As far as I can tell, your numbers don't account for that. That's just one example of weakness I see in your formula. Sometimes numbers and percentages alone don't tell the whole story. How does your scheme take into account the ability of a quarterback to extend a play in the pocket vs. one who stands like a statue? The numbers won't show that either.

For better or worse, a quarterback's influence on the success of an offense is way disproportional to any other player. Percentages aside.

The reader needs to bear in mind that the average quarterback position value does not change whether the quarterback is good, bad or mediocre. However, the scheme and play calling can change the QB position value. For example, the average scheme passes on 54.5% of their offensive plays. If the scheme called for more passing, the value of the QB position would go up. If the QB is asked to use his legs outside the pocket and throw on the move, the position value goes up.

RGIII IS our team.

I don't know what percentage you'd like to put on that but the percentage of doing much of anything decreases immeasurably without him. We have a line for one that's getting great praise, but is still an average to below average unit aside from Williams and maybe Lichtensteiger.

I'd say that statement would be stronger if you had Montgomery instead of Lich. I'm not sure why our own fans can't just admit a guy is good. People keep judging Montgomery playing out of position, he's a CENTER, and a pretty good one. He is, however, not much of a guard.

How can you give the QB 40-50% when he doesn't play special teams, defense, or play the RB position? That's 75 - 80% of the plays right there.

It's like this... if Jay Cutler plays and the offense scores... the defense can blitz because they have the lead... thus making the opposing one dimensional so that they can catch up (see the Redskins vs Cowboys, Redskins vs Eagles game)... if you have Jason Campbell at QB... then the offense doesn't score... and you have to defend the run and the pass. Even when you are the number 1 defense in the NFL... and you have the best returner in NFL history on your special teams... and a pro bowl kicker in Robbie Gould.

Say that you have the exact same team that is quarterbacked by one guy one week, and a different guy the next week... with vastly different results. What percentage of the blame would you put on the fact that a backup was in there?

Like, if Jay Cutler got hurt, and Jason Campbell came in and stunk it up... would you say that 75% of the blame is on the rest of the team or 100% of the loss goes to Cutler not being there?

Same thing happened to the Bears last year when Cutler went down. They started the season 7-3, he got hurt, and they finished 0-6 without him.

How can you give the QB 40-50% when he doesn't play special teams, defense, or play the RB position? That's 75 - 80% of the plays right there.

Is there a different influence on a defense from a quarterback who goes 3 and out most offensive possessions vs. a quarterback who leads scoring drives? In neither case is the quarterback playing defense, but his play certainly affects the D.

I'd say that statement would be stronger if you had Montgomery instead of Lich. I'm not sure why our own fans can't just admit a guy is good. People keep judging Montgomery playing out of position, he's a CENTER, and a pretty good one. He is, however, not much of a guard.

Call me crazy, but I love our offensive line, especially from Center to Left Tackle... #allday

....or you can make the colts without Manning argument also. The backup lost 75% more games. The number 1 pick in the draft this year has the same team back to a winning record.

---------- Post added November-27th-2012 at 11:56 AM ----------

Is there a different influence on a defense from a quarterback who goes 3 and out most offensive possessions vs. a quarterback who leads scoring drives? In neither case is the quarterback playing defense, but his play certainly affects the D.

However, if you removed RG3 and substituted another QB, the scheme-determined QB position value would remain the same.

Maybe Peyton decided to have his surgery because his Colts lost six of their seven best linemen to injury and their receivers were in and out of the lineup with injuries.

Yeah, I'm sure he did that on purpose to ensure they would pick his replacement in the draft.

RGIII is already the most important player in Redskins' history.

Excluding Sammy Baugh (who played a sport that I am not convinced is actually football)...he is already the greatest QB in Redskins history.

Better than Sonny. Better than Joe T. Better than Rypien.

Arguing about made up percentages is kind of pointles.

---------- Post added November-27th-2012 at 12:58 PM ----------

Maybe Peyton decided to have his surgery because his Colts lost six of their seven best linemen to injury and their receivers were in and out of the lineup with injuries.

He had four surgeries. To his neck.

I'm not sure he had a lot of options there.

I think you should factor in reading the defense, audibles and adjustments made on every offensive down. Not to mention handoffs. The ball touches the QB's hands virtually every offensive play.

Same thing happened to the Bears last year when Cutler went down. They started the season 7-3, he got hurt, and they finished 0-6 without him.

Did anyone watch the Steelers the last two weeks? They aren't competitive without Roethlisberger.

So if Griffin goes out, the Redskins 90.7% as good with Cousins under center?

Like Dan, you are confusing two numbers. I'm giving an estimate of the position value which is scheme related but cannot be changed by the ability of the QB.

---------- Post added November-27th-2012 at 12:02 PM ----------

RGIII is already the most important player in Redskins' history.

Excluding Sammy Baugh (who played a sport that I am not convinced is actually football)...he is already the greatest QB in Redskins history.

Better than Sonny. Better than Joe T. Better than Rypien.

Arguing about made up percentages is kind of pointles.

---------- Post added November-27th-2012 at 12:58 PM ----------

He had four surgeries. To his neck.

I'm not sure he had a lot of options there.

No.

Like Dan, you are confusing two numbers. I'm giving an estimate of the position value which is scheme related but cannot be changed by the ability of the QB.

In other words, you are just completely making up numbers. Gotcha.

The QB position is 52.6 percent more important than the center position. That's science.