Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

By KC Joyner:Why Brett Favre isn't needed

darrelgreenie

By darrelgreenie
in Around the NFL

Recommended Posts

Hitman21ST

Hitman21ST

Posted
Posted

by KC Joyner

Why Brett Favre isn't needed

A 1-2 punch of Sage Rosenfels and Tavaris Jackson can keep Minnesota elite

0803MyMan.jpg

Judging by the comments, the primary fan reaction to Brett Favre's retirement reports is skepticism, but the second-most-prevalent reaction is that No. 4 may be setting up a situation wherein he rides in on a white horse to turn the Minnesota Vikings' struggling offense around in midseason and help salvage a Super Bowl run.

As entertaining as that mindset is, it is based on the faulty assumption that Minnesota's quarterbacking productivity will falter in the event they actually have to play without Favre. There is no denying that Favre is coming off the best season of his illustrious career (it was the first time his passer rating topped 100) but there are ample metric reasons to think that the Purple and Gold's passing game will not only be nowhere near as bad as some are suggesting it will be -- it may actually be nearly as good as it was last season, even without Favre.

Before you call me crazy for thinking that either Tarvaris Jackson or Sage Rosenfels can fill Favre's statistical shoes, check out some of the evidence that backs up this claim.

Let's start by noting the two areas in which Favre really excelled in 2009: yards per attempt (YPA) on vertical passes and bad-decision percentage rate. Favre posted an 11.7 YPA total on vertical throws (defined as aerials of 11 or more yards downfield), which was tied for 10th in the league.

As impressive as that statistical ranking is, it pales in comparison to Favre's bad-decision rate. A bad decision is defined as a play in which a quarterback makes an error with the ball that leads either to a turnover or a near-turnover (e.g. a dropped interception, a fumble that is recovered by the offense, etc.).

I have been tracking this metric since 2005 and, prior to the 2009 campaign, Favre was as bad as his gun-slinging reputation would indicate. His percentages were always near or above the 3 percent mark, which is just above the league median point -- and the benchmark for poor performance in this metric -- of 2.5.

He did a 180-degree turn in that statistic last season, as his 1.2 percent bad-decision mark was tied with Green Bay's Aaron Rodgers for the No. 1 ranking in the league.

Using the vertical pass YPA and bad-decision rates as baselines, let's take a look at how Jackson and Rosenfels have historically fared in these areas.

Rosenfels is the veteran, so we'll start with him. His largest single-season pass volume came in Houston during the 2007 season, when he threw 240 passes while filling in for the injured Matt Schaub.

Rosenfels posted a 10.9 vertical YPA that season, or a total that was less than a yard away from Favre's 11.7 mark in 2009. Pro-rate the eight-tenths of a yard of YPA difference over the course of, say, 154 vertical throws (Favre's total in this category last year) and it equals 123 yards.

In other words, if Rosenfels can perform as well for the Vikings in this area as he did for the Texans in 2007, Minnesota should barely see a dip in its vertical pass production. And that doesn't even take into account the 13.3 vertical YPA Rosenfels posted while filling in for Schaub in the 2008 season.

Rosenfels did not fare nearly as well in the bad-decision metric, as his 3.7 percent rate in 2007 was three times as high as Favre's pace in this category last season. That obviously forecasts an increase in interceptions, but how many more picks are we looking at?

If we assume a pass volume of about 550 throws (slightly more than Favre's 545 throws last season), Favre's 1.2 percent bad-decision rate would mean about seven mistakes that could potentially lead to a turnover. Rosenfels' 3.7 percent mark would mean about 21 potential giveaways.

Fourteen picks is a significant difference -- but not every bad decision throw ends up being picked off. The typical rates for how often erroneous aerials are intercepted vary, but in general, it is somewhere around 50 percent; apply that number here and it would mean four picks via mistakes for Favre versus 11 for Rosenfels.

A difference of seven interceptions isn't good -- but they wouldn't cripple the Vikings' offense (especially considering the production they should get out of Adrian Peterson). That total also assumes that Favre would have kept up his anomalous 2009 pace and that Rosenfels would not improve on his poor performance in this area.

Now let's look at Jackson. His largest pass volume also came in 2007 and it contained more than a few high points. The two most notable of these were his 11.8 medium pass (11-19 yards) YPA, which was the best in the league, and his 2.3 percent bad-decision rate (tied for ninth).

Jackson's weakest metric points that season were low deep (20-29 yards) and bomb (30-plus yards) YPA totals. Those totals kept his overall vertical YPA down to 9.3, but a lot of that was due to having to throw long passes to Troy Williamson and Robert Ferguson. If the 18 deep/bomb passes Jackson threw to those two underachievers were taken out, his vertical YPA would have jumped to 10.9 yards, or exactly the aforementioned pace set by Rosenfels that proved to be a more than acceptable metric substitute for Favre.

Put all of these numbers together and it means one thing: If the man from Kiln, Miss., tries to ride that white stallion into town a few weeks into the season, Brad Childress should tell Favre and the horse to both head back home because their services won't be needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hitman21ST

Hitman21ST

Posted
Posted
Ummm, no. Sage and Tavaris? Minnesota is barely a wild-card with those 2. Favre makes the team elite. Favre had 33 TD's last season which is more than Sage and Jackson each have in their careers.

Again, it's skewing the stats so that one player (or two, in this case) look better than another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
darrelgreenie

darrelgreenie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
by KC Joyner

Why Brett Favre isn't needed

A 1-2 punch of Sage Rosenfels and Tavaris Jackson can keep Minnesota elite

Thanks for posting this article i was pretty close to buying the insider package to read 1 article.

M_Id_60916_cheers.jpgThanks.

While i don't think they would be elite without Favre i think that Tavaris Jackson is a good QB and the time behind Favre has only made him better.

The Vikes are too good of a team from top to bottom not to make the playoffs with decent play from the QB.

Afterall prior to Favre they were still a playoff team with Gus Ferrotte and Tavaris Jackson. A lot of people forget but at the season end Jackson was playing about as good as any QB in the league:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d80da1615/NFLTA-Viking-way

I kinda hope that Favre does retire to see what Tavaris can do with this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Warhead36

Warhead36

Posted
Posted

I don't care what the stats say. Nobody in the NFL is afraid of Tarvaris Jackson and Sage Rosenfels is a servicable journeyman at best. The Vikings aren't even the best team in their division without Favre(and even with Favre you can still argue the Packers).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conn

Conn

Posted
Posted

You can twist these metrics any way that you want to, Joyner, but I'm never going to be convinced that the combination of these two is just as good as Brett Favre. MAYBE when he's 48 :ols:

And really, wtf does that even mean? The combination of the two QB's will make up for it? Really? You're going to switch them in and out depending on which skills you need, YPA or good decision making :ols: That's ridiculous, and its a moronic way to look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustAfan47

JustAfan47

Posted
Posted
You can twist these metrics any way that you want to, Joyner, but I'm never going to be convinced that the combination of these two is just as good as Brett Favre. MAYBE when he's 48 :ols:

And really, wtf does that even mean? The combination of the two QB's will make up for it? Really? You're going to switch them in and out depending on which skills you need, YPA or good decision making :ols: That's ridiculous, and its a moronic way to look at it.

Rite!... I how did that work out for the phins, Iggles, or hmmm Oakland?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hitman21ST

Hitman21ST

Posted
Posted
maybe someone besides DOTS needs Wiki....Are you sure your a Skins fan, or do you just know that little about your team? :D

My memory's a little fuzzy, I haven't been getting much sleep lately.

I just thought that Williams came in because Schroeder got hurt. That's what I had always heard. I wasn't privvy to the "whoever's hotter is playing" mantra. My understanding was that it was a little like when Collins led the Skins to the playoffs following Campbell's injury: Williams stepped in for an injured Schroeder, but because he was hot come the playoffs, he stayed the QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pjfootballer

pjfootballer

Posted
Posted
Well thanks a lot for disproving my point, jerk. ;)

Umm, err, sorry! :(

maybe someone besides DOTS needs Wiki....Are you sure your a Skins fan, or do you just know that little about your team? :D

Good one!

My memory's a little fuzzy, I haven't been getting much sleep lately.

I just thought that Williams came in because Schroeder got hurt. That's what I had always heard. I wasn't privvy to the "whoever's hotter is playing" mantra. My understanding was that it was a little like when Collins led the Skins to the playoffs following Campbell's injury: Williams stepped in for an injured Schroeder, but because he was hot come the playoffs, he stayed the QB.

I'm going totally by memory on this one and not Wiki. Schroeder had come off a 4,000 yard season the year before leading us to the NFCC game. He was the defacto starter going into the season, but played poorly. He was yanked and Williams started a couple of games before he went out with appendicitis. Jay was put back in as the starter, won some games, but played poorly down the stretch. Williams engineered a comback win against the Vikings in the last game, subing for an ineffective Schroeder. Gibbs was 50/50 as to who he wanted starting the playoffs. He chose Doug. But before either the Chicago or Minnesota playoff game, Williams had to have a root canal. But he played and the rest is history. Your welcome. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hitman21ST

Hitman21ST

Posted
Posted
Umm, err, sorry! :(

Good one!

I'm going totally by memory on this one and not Wiki. Schroeder had come off a 4,000 yard season the year before leading us to the NFCC game. He was the defacto starter going into the season, but played poorly. He was yanked and Williams started a couple of games before he went out with appendicitis. Jay was put back in as the starter, won some games, but played poorly down the stretch. Williams engineered a comback win against the Vikings in the last game, subing for an ineffective Schroeder. Gibbs was 50/50 as to who he wanted starting the playoffs. He chose Doug. But before either the Chicago or Minnesota playoff game, Williams had to have a root canal. But he played and the rest is history. Your welcome. :D

Fair enough. I was 3 at the time, I vaguely remember rooting for the Skins but any of the specificities about the season are lost to me. Thanks for clearing me up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pjfootballer

pjfootballer

Posted
Posted
Fair enough. I was 3 at the time, I vaguely remember rooting for the Skins but any of the specificities about the season are lost to me. Thanks for clearing me up.

No Problem. I wouldn't expect you to know something like that unless you read about it. At least you know how many SB's we've been to.

not bad youngin.......didnt realize your just 25 years old.

I didn't use Wiki...where's my respect? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...