The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[Skinsinparadise]

From a pure stats standpoint, especially zoning in on QBR, you can see the variance to some extent from game to game.

 

A 60 score is really good.  One web site said 65 is pro bowl caliber.  He had 9 games of 60 plus and almost 10, he had one game just short of that. 

 

Also 30 or lower is pretty abysmal as to QBR.   He had 6 games like that.  And he had 1 game in between.

 

So I'll just say the narrrative from some Colt fans, and media members that he's a bit of a roller coaster doesn't look wildly off.  But more highs than lows.  

 

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Redskins 2021]

Looks like he is up and down but does not turn the ball over that is key. Heinike had 15 int last year. Wentz should be fine for us. I suspect he not as bad as colts fans say. They had Manning and Luck imagine what they would say if they had are Qb over past 20 years. 

Edited May 29, 2022 by Redskins 2021

[Skinsinparadise]

The 2019 season, which some say is the more realistic season that Wentz can match at this point in his career.  The swings weren't as wild.

 

8 games with 60 plus scores, almost 9.   Just 3 games with 30 or worse, and one of those was just a hair under 40.    And 4 somewhat so so games, slightly below average in those 5 games. 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Redskins 2021]

 Over the past five years how does Wentz number compare to our qb? How much of an improvement is he? 

 

His number compared to Heinicke are alot better 20 td and 15 int for Heinicke and Wentz 27 td and 7 int. That looks like a big difference to me. 

Edited May 29, 2022 by Redskins 2021

[SmallDaddy]

https://www.nfl.com/videos/sam-howell-takes-steve-mariucci-s-whiteboard-test

 

Here is a quick pre-draft video

I still think Sam Howell will be legit one day 

[Dark Acre]

How do you get a QBR of 95 when you're 17-24 for 172, 1 TD, 0 ints, and 3 sacks?  Those are good numbers for the 1970's.  You know, like Philly at Washington, November 24, 1974:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/197411240was.htm

 

[CTskin]

Realistically, wentz and a developmental rookie were as good as we could have possibly done this off-season to improve the qb position. 

 

im not going to say he’s a world beater or that he will take us too deep in the playoffs (esp if our D doesn’t play to their potential) but he will make us legitimate. I don’t give a **** what the analysts say, he’s a solid starting qb in this league… barring injury and covid. 
 

Very curious how Ryan pans out in Indy. Ryan had zero weapons last year so fair enough that his numbers dipped. I’m a Pittman fan but there’s not much better in Indy. Really looking forward to seeing that fanbase disappointed when they realize Ryan is not special and they made a lateral move at the qb position.

[FootballZombie]

1 hour ago, Dark Acre said:

How do you get a QBR of 95 when you're 17-24 for 172, 1 TD, 0 ints, and 3 sacks?  Those are good numbers for the 1970's.  You know, like Philly at Washington, November 24, 1974:

 

That game is just one of the many examples of how QBR can only measure a QBs performance in their given role.

QBR does not care that Philly ran the ball 41 times vs 24 passes, or that they accrued more rushing yards than passing yards in that game.

It does not care that Wentz was not the main cataylst, its only about what he provided in the role he was assigned, which in that game was minor for a NFL QB.

Even though Wentz gets an astronomical QBR score for that game, he was far from the main contributor, but QBR can not relay that information.

 

In terms of the job laid before him, Wentz did great in that game, couldn't have performed much better, but QBR can't show you that he did it w/ a hurricane at his back, while basically standing around chewing gum while their run game decimated the opposition.

 

The stat is absolutely worthless for comparing players as all QBs play different roles, even across different games. Its like getting a bunch of kids to take tests on fractions, decimals, calculus and trig and then comparing the final grades apples to apples w/o knowing which kid took the harder exams.

Edited May 30, 2022 by FootballZombie

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

From a pure stats standpoint, especially zoning in on QBR, you can see the variance to some extent from game to game.

 

A 60 score is really good.  One web site said 65 is pro bowl caliber.  He had 9 games of 60 plus and almost 10, he had one game just short of that. 

 

Also 30 or lower is pretty abysmal as to QBR.   He had 6 games like that.  And he had 1 game in between.

 

So I'll just say the narrrative from some Colt fans, and media members that he's a bit of a roller coaster doesn't look wildly off.  But more highs than lows.  

 

 

 

 

 

He had a broken foot and missed all of preseason and most of training camp.  First week being off isn't surprising.  If he's hurt again in preseason we can probably expect him to be rusty as well.  Last two weeks as everyone has mentioned, he had covid.

 

That's half the poor games with a narrative that with explainable factors.

 

I think the general consensus among this forum is that he's been unfairly maligned, but expectations for us aren't outrageous.  Given that all-in-all he had average if not slightly better last season, I think most here are expecting above average play with a group of pass catchers that can better fit his strengths.

 

For the first time ever.  Washington Commander fans are being reasonable with expectations whereas national media isn't. 

[Skinsinparadise]

As far as QBR being worthless as a frame of comparison.  I disagree.  But I do agree that ALL QB stats and rankings have flaws.

 

It would be one thing if we saw name that struggiling QB like Sam Darnold or Jared Goff killing it on QBR and Brady struggiling or name that weird thing. The list tends to be someone predictable.  This year with Brady, Herbert, Rodgers, Mahomes at the top, etc. 

 

You don't get much wild stuff on QBR that's shocking where bad QBs look good and good QBs look bad.  They seem to value the heck out of the TD-INT ratio so that helps players who excel on that metric or in particular avoid turnovers.  Some odd things here and there but not much ala Tannehill for whatever reason scores well on this metric pretty consistently. 

 

Total Quarterback Rating (QBR)

The metric takes into account all of a quarterback's contribution to a game, including passing, rushing, sacks, penalties, touchdowns, and turnovers. Moreover, each play is weighted based on its "difficulty", the context of the game, and the strength of the opposing defense.

 

 

Here's another ranking.  As far as the Qb contribution to points.   And yes of course far from the perfect way to judge as to how the metric is computed.    Though it says QBR, its ranked based on PAA

 

 

 

 

Edited May 30, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Thinking Skins]

29 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As far as QBR being worthless as a frame of comparison.  I disagree.  But I do agree that ALL QB stats and rankings have flaws.

 

It would be one thing if we saw name that struggiling QB like Sam Darnold or Jared Goff killing it on QBR and Brady struggiling or name that weird thing. The list tends to be someone predictable.  This year with Brady, Herbert, Rodgers, Mahomes at the top, etc. 

 

You don't get much wild stuff on QBR that's shocking where bad QBs look good and good QBs look bad.  They seem to value the heck out of the TD-INT ratio so that helps players who excel on that metric or in particular avoid turnovers.  Some odd things here and there but not much ala Tannehill for whatever reason scores well on this metric pretty consistently. 

 

Total Quarterback Rating (QBR)

The metric takes into account all of a quarterback's contribution to a game, including passing, rushing, sacks, penalties, touchdowns, and turnovers. Moreover, each play is weighted based on its "difficulty", the context of the game, and the strength of the opposing defense.

 

 

Here's another ranking.  As far as the Qb contribution to points.   And yes of course far from the perfect way to judge as to how the metric is computed.    Though it says QBR, its ranked based on PAA

 

 

 

 

The main reason I'm mostly pro QBR is because it's looking at basically the probability of scoring on the next play. So a 18 yard completion on 3rd and 20 isn't a good thing. But a 16 yard completion on 3rd and 10 is. 

 

When people talk about a person's high QBR but low stats liked tds or yards, what it probably means was that he made a lot of critical plays like scrambles for first downs or the throws for first downs that kept drives alive. I know I'm switching to WRs but my argument for Art Monk in the Hall of Fame was along these lines. People wanted to look at his TD and Yards numbers, which were nice in themselves, but he was a consistent first down getter. Maybe not known for the do l dynamic plays like Clark but he'd get that 10 yards in 3rd and 7. 

 

I haven't looked at Wentz's play by play or games but if suspect this is the case because that's kinda the story. He's talked about for making the dynamic plays but not checking down enough. And the story behind that is that Indy was so dependent on running that he tried to make the most of what he had. So I'm guessing that he was really good on 3rd and 4th down passing. 

[Thinking Skins]

So I just looked it up because I was curious. Here are his 3rd down stats

 

77/137 for 56.20% 994 yards 10 TDs 52 1stDowns 1 int 100.4 rating

 

and to go a step further. Here's his numbers from 3td and 10+

 

26/46 for 56.52% 450 yards 4TDs 141st downs  0ints 118.9rating. 

 

it's not like he's playing bad ball (last year), it's just that he played his best when they needed him to (down and distance wise). This can contribute to a higher QBR even if he's not putting up 300+ yard games. 

[FootballZombie]

42 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As far as QBR being worthless as a frame of comparison.  I disagree.  But I do agree that ALL QB stats and rankings have flaws.

 

They do all have flaws, but at least other metrics are more consistent.

If you tell me a QB had a QBR of  70 he could have had a 400 yards and 4 TD game or 160 yards and 1 TD. As long as he is contributing to points, he will score well on the metric, problem is, some QBs don't need to do much of anything to contribute.

Wentz was a major beneficiary of this last season thanks to his team as they were rushing predicated, but as far as QBR is concerned he was productive.

[Thinking Skins]

4 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

 

They do all have flaws, but at least other metrics are more consistent.

If you tell me a QB had a QBR of  70 he could have had a 400 yards and 4 TD game or 160 yards and 1 TD. As long as he is contributing to points, he will score well on the metric, problem is, some QBs don't need to do much of anything to contribute.

Wentz was a major beneficiary of this last season thanks to his team as they were rushing predicated, but as far as QBR is concerned he was productive.

This is interesting. I've always been skeptical of QBR because I feel like it favors running QBs. It's all about these plays that keep drives moving, so a Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts can run for that first down and boom, we have the yards. But there's a reason these guys are QBs. We don't want them taking hits, ala RG3. This was the problem with Heinicke in the season, he was trying to not run, to save his body but he wasn't as good of a QB without running the ball. 

 

Plus it doesn't grade things like ball placement or checkdown or audibling out of a bad play, or heck something simple like over reliance on a single target. PFF tries to measure these things but they don't do it in a way that I think competes with QBR. Instead, they have their own scale that penalizes a guy for what should have happened even though it didn't, and I'm very skeptical of that. I'm also skeptical of them calling a pass a bad decision, especially if it's complete. So I think it's a bit of pick your poison right now 

[Vandelay_Industries]

9 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The 2019 season, which some say is the more realistic season that Wentz can match at this point in his career.  The swings weren't as wild.

 

8 games with 60 plus scores, almost 9.   Just 3 games with 30 or worse, and one of those was just a hair under 40.    And 4 somewhat so so games, slightly below average in those 5 games. 

 

 

 

That season has been wild for them. At times, almost the entire Eagles starting offense was injured. I think one game their center Kelce was the only offensive starter besides Wentz himself.

 

Wentz ended up becoming the first QB with 4000 passing yards without a WR with more than 500 receiving yards. Thanks to their final stretch, they still made it into the playoffs though.

 

 

Edited May 30, 2022 by Vandelay_Industries

[Skinsinparadise]

I think I am pretty balanced on Wentz, not all good, not all bad.  I think it was @goskins10 who said he sees Wentz in that 12-20 range of QBs.  I am pretty much in the same place.

 

While as i mentioned, i am not pretending that the national media guys and anaylitc guys don't hate Wentz,  I've posted a lot of their stuff here.  I typically like the opnions of those who are higher on Wentz like Chris Sims, Greg Cosell, Matt Bowen.  By the way the haters of Wentz, at least most of them, seem to think Heinicke is a scrub at best.  Almost all of them say yeah Wentz isn't good but he is a signficant upgrade over Heinicke, especially the anayltic types.  so as harsh as they are on Wentz, most of them kick Heinicke down in a much bigger way.  When you listen to a litany from them about how Wentz sucks and then they also admit that he's a major upgrade over Heinicke, then what does that say about their thoughts about Heinicke?

 

Colts ended up running about 1 more rush a game than us.  Yes Taylor was the best in the league IMO.  As for what that means to Wentz?  You can argue it in different ways depending on your perspective.  Cosell's point watching Wentz was he thought he played well but also noticed down the stretch they took the ball out of his hands a lot. 

 

I think if anything its a mystery if the Colts relying on the running game bolstered Wentz's season or tapered it down.   Cosell thought that Turner's more vertical stretch the field type of offense is a better fit to Wentz's style of play than Reich's system.   No doubt if the Colts let Wentz let it fly more, he'd have thrown more picks.  Also though good chance it would be more yards and TDs.  Old school football I'd rather have an elite RB than really good Wrs ala the Colts set up.  But in today's NFL, I'd rather have the receivers than the RB. 

 

I was a big Stafford guy in the previous off season.  It's not that i thought Stafford was elite but I did think he was very good and with a better system and supporting cast he'd raise his game at the next spot.  I thought Stafford had a rocket and has sneaky mobility. And was clutch.   To me Wentz is sort of in that same school outside of not having the same reputation for clutch play.  He's mobile for a big dude and has a rocket. 

 

Like Stafford if you let it fly with Wentz, I expect him to pile on yards and TDs but also he'd have his share of picks.  Neither are on the caliber of Rodgers, Brady, Wilson where they are great IMO at making big plays AND avoiding turnovers.  But I do think they are capable of making enough big plays that offset the turnovers where they aren't that big a deal.   

 

I do think Stafford is the better player.  But Wentz stylstically shares some traits with him.  Stafford in his last year with the Lions had a 26-10 TD-INT ratio.  With the Rams it was 41-17 and almost 5000 yards.

 

I am not saying Wentz explodes the same way.  But my point is the premise of Indy holding him back was a good thing for Wentz's performance is really an unknown.  You can argue the point either way.  Will see.  My gut is it held him back more than helped in terms of shining.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NFL Team Rushing Attempts per Game

More Team Stats...

Season:                                                                          2003                                                                         2004                                                                         2005                                                                         2006                                                                         2007                                                                         2008                                                                         2009                                                                         2010                                                                         2011                                                                         2012                                                                         2013                                                                         2014                                                                         2015                                                                         2016                                                                         2017                                                                         2018                                                                         2019                                                                         2020                                                                         2021                                                                         2022                                                         

Date: 

Rank	Team	2021	Last 3	Last 1	Home	Away	2020
1	Tennessee	32.1	33.0	27.0	29.5	35.4	31.9
2	Philadelphia	31.5	28.0	17.0	32.5	30.7	25.2
3	Baltimore	30.4	28.0	36.0	34.4	25.9	34.6
4	New Orleans	30.0	32.3	46.0	28.3	31.2	30.8
5	Indianapolis	29.4	25.7	18.0	27.1	31.9	28.8
6	San Francisco	29.3	29.0	20.0	29.6	29.1	27.3
7	Arizona	28.6	26.0	18.0	24.5	31.8	29.9
8	Cleveland	28.5	28.7	41.0	31.2	25.5	30.4
9	New England	28.3	27.7	20.0	26.1	30.4	31.4
10	Washington	28.1	26.3	37.0	27.9	28.2	24.9

Edited May 30, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Redskins 2021]

 People may like or dislike Wentz but the bottom line is he is a starting level Qb in the NFL. Not the best or worst Qb but starting level.

 

Other then Alex Smith pre injury was the last Qb we had of this level.  I suspect we would have traded for him last year but eagles would not trade him in the division. I think this will be a good move for us. Now hopefully the defense steps up .

[Thinking Skins]

For comparison, I wanted to see how other QBs did in the third down metrics. 

 

Here's Cousins

3rd Down: 100/153, 61.35%, 1267 yards, 13 TDs, 66 1st downs, 3 Ints, 104.5 rating

3rd and 10+: 41/53, 77.36%, 450 yards, 4 TDs, 15 1st downs, 0ints, 127.1 rating

 

Here's Ryan

3rd Down: 101/155, 65.16%, 1117 yards, 8 TDs, 67 1st downs, 3 Ints, 95.6 rating

3rd and 10+: 33/45, 73.33%, 402 yards, 2 TDs, 16 1st downs, 0ints, 115.2 rating

 

Heres Stafford

3rd Down: 91/141, 64.54%, 1379 yards, 12 TDs, 74 1st downs, 7 Ints, 104.3 rating

3rd and 10+: 23/36, 63.89%, 530 yards, 1 TDs, 16 1st downs, 3 ints, 81.9 rating

 

Here's Prescott

3rd Down: 90/145, 62.07%, 1068 yards, 12 TDs, 63 1st downs, 2 Ints, 106.3 rating

3rd and 10+: 16/32, 50.00%, 187 yards, 0 TDs, 4 1st downs, 0 ints, 68.1 rating

 

Here's Hurts

3rd Down: 58/108, 53.70%, 792 yards, 5 TDs, 41 1st downs, 3 Ints, 81.3 rating

3rd and 10+: 16/30, 53.33%, 222 yards, 1 TDs, 5 1st downs, 0 ints, 88.5 rating

 

Here's Wilson

3rd Down: 53/103, 51.46%, 800 yards, 8 TDs, 41 1st downs, 3 Ints, 91.1 rating

3rd and 10+: 12/28, 42.86%, 228 yards, 1 TDs, 8 1st downs, 1 ints, 68.8 rating

 

Here's Wentz again: 

3rd Down: 77/137, 56.20%, 994 yards, 10 TDs, 52 1st downs, 1 Ints, 100.4 rating

3rd and 10+: 26/46, 56.52%, 450 yards, 4 TDs, 14 1st downs, 0ints, 118.9 rating

 

I don't want to rank Wentz in terms of the other guys. but if you look at things like number of first downs and number of completions, you can see he's in a similar ball park as a lot of the other guys. HIs completion percentage in both areas is lacking compared to some of the better QBs, but he's not the worse even in our division. And I think this plays into his QBR looking good for last year. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

17 hours ago, Redskins 2021 said:

If you get rid of the last two weeks how bad was he? He was at least average if not better? How he do before he got covid? He played at least average? I am more worried about the defense then Wentz. All Wentz has to do is play average we should be able to get the ten wins.

QBR is not a be-all, end-all stat, but it's better than passer rating.  It's sortof a quasi-advanced stat. It's on a rating from 0 to 100.  

 

There are times when QBR is a complete head-scratcher, also.  But, it's at least consistent, takes into account more than just passing, it does take into account situation and some context.

 

So, Wentz ended up with the 9th best QBR in the NFL. 

 

His QBR for the week 17 game against the Raiders was 27.9.  And I still contend that's a game they should have won, or at least gotten into OT. Wentz didn't play spectacularly, but he made some plays down the stretch which were impressive.  He led a 9 minute drive to tie the game, consuming almost the entire 4th quarter.  And the Colt's defense, which was supposedly very good, let the Raiders go right down the field and kick a game-winning FG.  There were ample opportunities to win that game, and the Colt's defense just blew it.

 

But his QBR was 27.9, which is bad.

 

His QBR for the week 18 loss against the Jags was 4.3.  Which is just about as bad as you can get.  

 

So, he ended up in the to 10 in QBR for the season with 2 one really bad and one horrendous rating at the end of the year.

 

I'm not exactly sure how they compute the annual QBR, but you've got to think if they computed it through week 16 (take the last 2 out), Wentz might have been higher than 9.  

 

It's just one stat.  The PFF ratings all hate Wentz, for whatever reason.  I don't care much for PFF because a lot of their ratings are subjective and the folks they have making the ratings are inconsistent and biased.  Some of Wentz's advanced stats are not great, others are ok.  

 

Regardless, I think you can reasonably assume he wasn't as much of a train wreck as the Irsay Agenda is painting him out to be.

 

Now, he might be that big a disaster this year.  We don't know.  The future is unwritten.

 

Just to state QBR isn't completely useless, it does kindof go along with "the eye test" in a lot of ways:

 

1. Rodgers

2. Brady

3. Herbert

4. Stafford

5. Mahomes

6. Allen

7. Murray

8. Tannehill

9. Wentz

10. Wilson

11. Dak

12. Burrow

13. Jimmy G.

14. Carr

15. Cousins

16. Jones

17. Lamar

18. Tua

19. Hurts

20. Teddy B.

21. Matt Ryan ****

22. Jones

23. Taylor Heinicke

24. Goff

25. Big Ben

26. Mills

27. Mayfield

28. Lawrence

29. Darnold

30. Zach Wilson

31. Justin Fields

 

Notes:

- You'd think Russell Wilson would be higher, but he had a miserable stretch coming off of the finger injury.  

- There is nobody in the top 15 I would argue shouldn't be, and 2 players outside of the top 15 that should be, who would be Matt Ryan and Lamar Jackson.  But Ryan didn't have a great season, for whatever the reasons. Lamar was hurt so much of the season, it's tough to really judge him. 

 

My big takeaway from this is QBR is a reasonable way to judge how the QBs seasons went.  It's not perfect, but it's not completely skewed either.  You can make a few arguments here and there, but again, it's statistics based.  It's not one of those lists where you look at it and go, "nawwww, that aint right."  

 

It's also just a look at one year.  

 

So, I think it would be safe to assume Wentz played at least average last year, and that includes 2 clunkers at the end of the year.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

14 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

 

That game is just one of the many examples of how QBR can only measure a QBs performance in their given role.

And that is literally the only thing you can judge, so that's probably good right? 

 

14 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

QBR does not care that Philly ran the ball 41 times vs 24 passes, or that they accrued more rushing yards than passing yards in that game.

It does not care that Wentz was not the main cataylst, its only about what he provided in the role he was assigned, which in that game was minor for a NFL QB.

Even though Wentz gets an astronomical QBR score for that game, he was far from the main contributor, but QBR can not relay that information.

Any QB stat that tries to take in anything other than what the QB was asked to run brings in a judgement call of the evaluator, which immediately brings in bias.  

 

You judge what you are asked to do.  It's all you can do.  And there is no way anybody knows, literally nobody, what the QBs role is getting the offense into the right play call.  You can't tell which plays are checked into and out of.  

 

If you're trying to minimize the QB role in a run-first offense, I think that seems massively agenda driven and kindof silly to be honest.  

 

14 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

In terms of the job laid before him, Wentz did great in that game, couldn't have performed much better, but QBR can't show you that he did it w/ a hurricane at his back, while basically standing around chewing gum while their run game decimated the opposition.

So what?  There are games when the Patriots at their peak ran the ball 60 times and Brady just stood there doing nothing.  Or he checked into run after run after run.  We don't know.

 

A QB can only be judged on what they do.  Nothing more, nothing less.  You can't judge a QB on factors completely outside of their control.  

 

 

14 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

The stat is absolutely worthless for comparing players as all QBs play different roles, even across different games. Its like getting a bunch of kids to take tests on fractions, decimals, calculus and trig and then comparing the final grades apples to apples w/o knowing which kid took the harder exams.

You're just dead wrong.  And if you look at the QBR rankings, they compare extremely well to who you would put into different tiers.  You just don't believe Wentz should be in what is probably the second tier based on last year's performance, so you're attacking the statistic. 

[FootballZombie]

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

According to ESPN, the final QBR score is a per-play measure of efficiency in numerical form.

If you are directly measuring the efficiency of a game manager, vs the efficiency of a QB who has to be the entirety of his team you are not doing a fair comparison and doing someone a major dis-justice.

 

That is why the stat is terrible for player comparison. It is a a measure of their performance in their role, and not one based on what they actually provide. It is entirely missing the point to rank the efficiency of QBs performing different roles and then compare them apples to apples like they are doing the same assignments.

 

The Colts offense was not predicated on Wentz in the way other QBs are. He was not the first priority for opposing D Coordinators. He was not asked to do many of the things other QBs were responsible for at nearly the same rate. Ranking his job score against other QBs who did have to face these hurdles is like comparing the performance scores of people doing entirely different jobs.

 

QBR has value for what it can tell you about how a player performed in their role, but it is godawful for player comparison. A players QBR score can be consistently lower than another players, but that first player could also be contributing far more to their team then the player w/ the higher score.

 

And that is the crux of the problem here. If you knew Johnny scored a 90 on his fractions test, you wouldn't think he was smarter than Jane who got a 80 on her Calculus test. But if you remove the knowledge of test difficulty, and you only look at Johnny's 90 vs Jane's 80 Johnny comes out ahead. That is QBR in a nutshell. It is a score based on what was placed in front of you, but it does not relay what was in front of whom.

 

We know the Colts ran a run first attack. We know D Coordinatiors had to stop J Taylor first and foremost. We know they relegated Wentz to a game manager role. Wentz job efficiency score in such a position is meaningless when compared to QBs who were the catalysts of their offenses, he was not taking the same test.

 

And this is a problem for comparing all QBs scores, as they all have different roles across different games. Wentz just gets the spotlight treatment.

Edited May 30, 2022 by FootballZombie

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Um…there’s GOT to be a better way of phrasing that lol..,

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

The way the Colts are hyping Matt Ryan, you'd think he's some newbee rookie and they are selling the world that he's a stud.  Strange.

 

the Wentz hate is strange.  I might be one of the top 3 or so here as for being high on Ryan on this thread -- I still find the Ryan hype strange and over the top.   The dude is 37 years old.  You'd think they are selling him as some dude who is about to hit his stride now as if his whole career was leading up to his stint with the Colts.

[ntotoro]

9 minutes ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

Um…there’s GOT to be a better way of phrasing that lol..,

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The way the Colts are hyping Matt Ryan, you'd think he's some newbee rookie and they are selling the world that he's a stud.  Strange.

 

the Wentz hate is strange.  I might be one of the top 3 or so here as for being high on Ryan on this thread -- I still find the Ryan hype strange and over the top.   The dude is 37 years old.  You'd think they are selling him as some dude who is about to hit his stride now as if his whole career was leading up to his stint with the Colts.

 

You'd think he was the HoF QB they had on their roster, but took for granted for double-digit years.

[Skinsinparadise]

JP Finlay catching on to the Wentz is a punchline argument that he sees all over the place and thinking its unfair.   He was talking about it on air.  He does impute it some to Irsay and Ballard continuing to take shots.

 

Finlay said he talked to an NFL observer he knows about it and they told him, Wentz has 17 games to shut all those people up.

 

I can't wait for this season to start. 😀

Edited May 31, 2022 by Skinsinparadise