Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 84

Thread: Sanchez's ESPN QBR Rating!??!?!

  1. #41
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    [QUOTE=JStokes;4142047]Let me see if I understand this correctly.

    "Matty Ice" threw ZERO TDs (which is approximately 2 LESS than Mark).

    Threw for LESS yards that Sanchez on MORE attempts.

    Threw ONE INT that led directly to a TD on the next drive.

    Then FUMBLED without even getting touched--which fumble was picked up and run in for a TD.

    "Matty Ice" gave Bears to 14 points.

    And the Falcons lost.

    Yet he had a higher QBR than Sanchez?

    Are we really arguing about this?

    _[/QUOTE]

    LMAO

  2. #42
    [QUOTE=JStokes;4142047]Let me see if I understand this correctly.

    "Matty Ice" threw ZERO TDs (which is approximately 2 LESS than Mark).

    Threw for LESS yards that Sanchez on MORE attempts.

    Threw ONE INT that led directly to a TD on the next drive.

    Then FUMBLED without even getting touched--which fumble was picked up and run in for a TD.

    "Matty Ice" gave Bears to 14 points.

    And the Falcons lost.

    Yet he had a higher QBR than Sanchez?

    Are we really arguing about this?

    _[/QUOTE]

    I totally agree... that's why i started this thread. Not to argue about Sanchez's night, but to debate the validity of the QBR rating. I thought it was going to eventually take over for the QB Rating, but there is no way with a system like this.

    I'm not saying Sanchez should have a HIGH number, but the fact that his number was SO low is insane to me. 17.6 out of 100? Really now?

    I mean, seriously, McNabb was under 50% completion, had 39 YARDS and a pick with just one TD. 39 yards, seriously?!?! Sanchez had 2 COMPLETIONS over 30 yards and 2 more over 25. How can McNabb's QBR be better?!

    Stats are flawed, but this stat is the most flawed I've ever seen!

  3. #43
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    The Big Green Apple
    Posts
    1,252
    from what i've heard espn's qbr seems like it can be pretty subjective. who and how many "experts" evaluate a qb's performance? if 10 experts were to evaluate a particular qb's performance would they all be in agreement or would they be split?

    i agree with the op that the old qbr seems more in line with sanchez's performance.

  4. #44
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bergen County, NJ
    Posts
    20,115
    [QUOTE=TheMikeIsHot;4142056]First of all, you're in no position to call anyone stupid. Except for FF2.

    [/QUOTE]

    Somebody had to say it.

    _

  5. #45
    [QUOTE=Magnus;4141993]The completion percent was misleading also. He had two lateral passes that went for no yards and 2 passes completed short for a third down. Take away those 4 passes and he had his regular 55% game.[/QUOTE]

    This is totally illogical. Every QB completes a few short passes for little or no yards, why only remove Sanchez's completions (and also not include his incompletions)

    I though Sanchez was inconsistent, making some good and bad throws. The interesting thing about the fumble lost, is that the whole drive is a huge negative, but the fact that they were in the shadow of their own endzone and move the ball to the 50 was pretty important too, and gets discounted.
    30 to me is way too low, but 20th this weekend is about right (without knowing everything that happened around the league)

    What's truly bizarre about the rankings is that Romo gets a postive ranking for his clutch play.

  6. #46
    Not one of Sanchez's better games.... but would think that he would rate a bit higher. Thank God they weren't rating the offensive line!

    This Kid can play the position. He may not have the ideal size and arm strengh, but this kid has demonstrated some things very early in his career that some qb's never do. Play big, in big games and win playoff games on the road.

    Glad he plays for Jets and think he has all the tools to get us to and win a super bowl.

  7. #47
    Just asking because I don't really know all of the criteria, but does the fact that Dallas was missing their top 3 corners for most of the game affect the rating at all?

  8. #48
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bergen County, NJ
    Posts
    20,115
    [QUOTE=Foley21;4142069]I totally agree... that's why i started this thread. Not to argue about Sanchez's night, but to debate the validity of the QBR rating. I thought it was going to eventually take over for the QB Rating, but there is no way with a system like this.

    I'm not saying Sanchez should have a HIGH number, but the fact that his number was SO low is insane to me. 17.6 out of 100? Really now?

    I mean, seriously, McNabb was under 50% completion, had 39 YARDS and a pick with just one TD. 39 yards, seriously?!?! Sanchez had 2 COMPLETIONS over 30 yards and 2 more over 25. How can McNabb's QBR be better?!

    Stats are flawed, but this stat is the most flawed I've ever seen![/QUOTE]

    I heard Mike and Mike shilling for the QBR this am and the only thing they could come up with was that Mark didn't have anything to do with the last 10 points to win the game.

    Which completely ignores what he did to GET them to within 10 points.

    Yea, the fact that losing QBs with totally crappy stats had a "higher" QBR than Mark is just mornic.

    It strains the bounds of credulity.

    If the QBR were developed by WFAN or CBS Sportsline, Greenie would have been mocking it like Golic eating tofu.

    _

  9. #49
    [QUOTE=scrizzy;4142089]Just asking because I don't really know all of the criteria, but does the fact that Dallas was missing their top 3 corners for most of the game affect the rating at all?[/QUOTE]

    Forget it, answered my own question, defense is not weighted. This system makes no sense to me.

  10. #50
    Football Outsiders does a similar kind of statisitical ranking. They have not been kind to Sanchez over the last two years. But their ranking for the weekend is more in line with the general thought of people here

    [url]http://footballoutsiders.com/quick-reads/2011/week-1-quick-reads[/url]

    [QUOTE]17. Mark Sanchez

    King of clutch? Sanchez converted six third downs. Going into Monday night, only Drew Brees and Josh Freeman converted more. On the other hand, his 14 dropbacks on third down were one fewer than anyone else had, and not one of those dropbacks came with more than ten yards to go.
    [/QUOTE]

    Romo, for the record, finished 12th. Which makes sense, because they don't count "clutchness" as a factor, and he in the top 5 before the 4th quarter.

  11. #51
    [QUOTE=scrizzy;4142100]Forget it, answered my own question, defense is not weighted. This system makes no sense to me.[/QUOTE]

    How do you weigh a defense in week 1?

  12. #52
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bergen County, NJ
    Posts
    20,115
    [QUOTE=Batmans A Scientist;4142108]How do you weigh a defense in week 1?[/QUOTE]

    Probably around 3200 pounds.

    _

  13. #53
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    [QUOTE=Batmans A Scientist;4142108]How do you weigh a defense in week 1?[/QUOTE]

    same way they have college rankings in week 1.

    same way they have point spreads in Vegas in week 1.

    Most experts who are close to the game can separate the good defenses from the bad ones, even in week 1.

    it's not like this stat matters anyways. it's all BS for message boards and taking heads to discuss

  14. #54
    Jets Insider VIP
    Board Moderator

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    27,416
    [QUOTE=Jgrlica3;4142029]I invite anyone who agrees with Sanchez's 17.6 Total QBR to explain why Romo got a 62.9 rating. That's more than 3x Sanchez's rating even though both QBs had a bad interception and fumble.[/QUOTE]

    Yup, indisputable proof that this stat is crap, right on par with QB rating, which isn't much better. Best indicators of QB performance are:

    1. Wins
    2. TD's vs. INT's
    3. Offensive points scored

  15. #55
    The thing that many people are discounting is that the statistic takes into account the situation of the game. Comparing Matt Ryans completion yards vs Sanchez's does nothing if you don't know when they occurred. The same is going to hold true for Sanchez's fumble and INT. It's going to cost him more when the team is down then when the team is up.

    It should also be noted that getting sacked also has a very large effect, and in Sanchez's case, negative effect, on the rating. (the thought process being that if you can avoid a sack you have a better chance of helping your team win. at times, this is something a qb has no control over.)

    Like many stats, it is not perfect but it does show a clearer picture than the QB rating IMO. Had Romo not been picked and Folk not hit a deep FG, the loss would fall on Sanchez's shoulders for two turnovers at very inopportune times.

    Here is the full ESPN article about how the stat is calculated: [url]http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating[/url]

  16. #56
    [QUOTE=tripside;4142134]The thing that many people are discounting is that the statistic takes into account the situation of the game. Comparing Matt Ryans completion yards vs Sanchez's does nothing if you don't know when they occurred. The same is going to hold true for Sanchez's fumble and INT. It's going to cost him more when the team is down then when the team is up.

    It should also be noted that getting sacked also has a very large effect, and in Sanchez's case, negative effect, on the rating. (the thought process being that if you can avoid a sack you have a better chance of helping your team win. at times, this is something a qb has no control over.)

    Like many stats, it is not perfect but it does show a clearer picture than the QB rating IMO. Had Romo not been picked and Folk not hit a deep FG, the loss would fall on Sanchez's shoulders for two turnovers at very inopportune times.

    Here is the full ESPN article about how the stat is calculated: [url]http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating[/url][/QUOTE]

    Romo single handedly cost the Cowboys the game, in TWO situations. Those ones should way pretty heavy. The thing is extremely flawed.

  17. #57
    [QUOTE=OrangeJet;4142141]Romo single handedly cost the Cowboys the game, in TWO situations. Those ones should way pretty heavy. The thing is extremely flawed.[/QUOTE]

    I have to agree... If your logic is to take away points from Sanchez because he COULD have lost the game but Romo who DID lose the game is rewarded, that shiz is faulty...

  18. #58
    [QUOTE=JStokes;4142078]Somebody had to say it.

    _[/QUOTE]

    Mods? :confused:

  19. #59
    Romo's 4th quater was rated at 10.2. His other 3 quarters were significantly higher.

    [quote]Dallas Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo's game was the most fascinating, as you might expect. Through three quarters, against one of the toughest defenses in the league (something the formula takes into account, by the way), Romo had a Total QBR of 85.2, which would have been good for fourth-best in the league so far if he'd finished the game at that number. But his Total QBR in the fourth quarter, thanks to the turnovers that cost his team the game (especially the one on the Jets' one-yard line, where the expected-points total was high), was 10.2, which would have been second-worst in the league ahead of only Kerry Collins if it had been his number for the whole game. As it stands, he still finished at 62.9, 11th-best in the league so far. But his case demonstrates the way in which things that maybe didn't depress a traditional passer rating are taken into account when using Total QBR to evaluate quarterback performance.
    [/quote]

  20. #60
    [QUOTE=AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite;4142150]I have to agree... If your logic is to take away points from Sanchez because he COULD have lost the game but Romo who DID lose the game is rewarded, that shiz is faulty...[/QUOTE]

    If anything...they should bring it down even further. He was going in to all but ice the game, and blew it...which led to a complete meltdown. The cowboys had this game locked, and lost because of one guy. The QB.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us