DisplacedBillsFan Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Mike and Mike were talking about this, this morning on ESPN radio. I do not know how the new rating system ranks QBs, or what it takes into account, but in week one Fitzpatrick was the highest rated QB using this new system!!! They also mentioned that out of the lowest 8 rated QBs, only one got the win, and that was Mark Sanchez. They attributed that to the fact that he was never on the field when his team made the plays most crucial to winning the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Mike and Mike were talking about this, this morning on ESPN radio. I do not know how the new rating system ranks QBs, or what it takes into account, but in week one Fitzpatrick was the highest rated QB using this new system!!! They also mentioned that out of the lowest 8 rated QBs, only one got the win, and that was Mark Sanchez. They attributed that to the fact that he was never on the field when his team made the plays most crucial to winning the game. Sanchez was rated 17th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Sanchez was rated 17th. You're looking at the traditional QB rating system, and yes, using that formula Sanchez was 17th (Fitz #1). Using the newly-developed "Total QB" ratings, Fitz was still first, but Sanchez was #30. Here's the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not that I'm arguing against QB rating, or this new system... But it's funny that he finished ahead of Rodgers and Brady, when the latter two definitely had better games. Either way... GO FITZBEARD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsObserver Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 No better time than now to update the FITZMAGIC TRACKER. See below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not that I'm arguing against QB rating, or this new system... But it's funny that he finished ahead of Rodgers and Brady, when the latter two definitely had better games. Either way... GO FITZBEARD! It seems to me you're getting caught up looking at gaudy yardage stats rather than pure efficiency. You'd probably be well served to read the details on the new rating system, which explains why certain things receive greater consideration than others. 4 TDs in 17 completions is a sick percentage, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoretalk Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 It seems to me you're getting caught up looking at gaudy yardage stats rather than pure efficiency. You'd probably be well served to read the details on the new rating system, which explains why certain things receive greater consideration than others. 4 TDs in 17 completions is a sick percentage, by the way. Under the old or the new system it was not just yards and Fitz was amazing on Sunday. Gunslinger mentality, leadership skills, ... what it takes to win (And, yes he will throw interceptions along the way but what a great start and one that was better than Rogers and Brady but Brady is a robot.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandemonium Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not that I'm arguing against QB rating, or this new system... But it's funny that he finished ahead of Rodgers and Brady, when the latter two definitely had better games. Either way... GO FITZBEARD! How did they "definitely" have better games? Fitz threw more td's in fewer attempts than Rogers. He also threw the same amount of td's as Brady in half the attempts, and had a better completion percentage than Brady. Brady also threw a pick while Fitz didn't. He didn't have near the yards these two (especially Brady)had, but that's because the Bills D and ST gave them excellent field position all game, and I saw nothing to indicate that he wouldn't have been able to get those yards if he needed to. I'm not saying Fitz is as good as these guys overall but this week, he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 It seems to me you're getting caught up looking at gaudy yardage stats rather than pure efficiency. You'd probably be well served to read the details on the new rating system, which explains why certain things receive greater consideration than others.4 TDs in 17 completions is a sick percentage, by the way. How did they "definitely" have better games? Fitz threw more td's in fewer attempts than Rogers. He also threw the same amount of td's as Brady in half the attempts, and had a better completion percentage than Brady. Brady also threw a pick while Fitz didn't. He didn't have near the yards these two (especially Brady)had, but that's because the Bills D and ST gave them excellent field position all game, and I saw nothing to indicate that he wouldn't have been able to get those yards if he needed to. I'm not saying Fitz is as good as these guys overall but this week, he was. IMO, I think Rodgers and Brady moved the ball better than Fitzpatrick. Fitzpatrick didn't need to air it out, he had a simple and efficient game, and that's awesome. He was allowed to do that because our Defense/ST won the field position battle, and our running game was on point and we controlled the clock. Rodgers and Brady were depended on more to move the chains, and they did that spectacularly. I thought Rodgers/Brady had better games, but Fitzpatrick was more efficient, I agree. Keep in mind, saying any of these three had better games than the other is NOT an insult, they all three played really well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungmack Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 How did they "definitely" have better games? Fitz threw more td's in fewer attempts than Rogers. He also threw the same amount of td's as Brady in half the attempts, and had a better completion percentage than Brady. Brady also threw a pick while Fitz didn't. He didn't have near the yards these two (especially Brady)had, but that's because the Bills D and ST gave them excellent field position all game, and I saw nothing to indicate that he wouldn't have been able to get those yards if he needed to. I'm not saying Fitz is as good as these guys overall but this week, he was. Oh, so you're going to go with that old dodge of "making sense?" Or "using facts?" Don't you know we now live in Tea Party Nation where you make up whatever you want and then believe the hell out of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Not that I'm arguing against QB rating, or this new system... But it's funny that he finished ahead of Rodgers and Brady, when the latter two definitely had better games. Either way... GO FITZBEARD! Yep,... I'm just scratching my had about the same thing. In what aspect did Fitz outperform Brady? Its not clear from the numbers they give.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Yep,... I'm just scratching my had about the same thing. In what aspect did Fitz outperform Brady? Its not clear from the numbers they give.. Brady threw an INT. That's pretty much what dropped him, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Brady threw an INT. That's pretty much what dropped him, I think. Really? 1 INT wipes out a nearly 300yd passing advantage? Plus from what I understand the situation also counts. Throwing a 99yd TD when you're trapped on your own 1 yd line seems like you get bonus points for that Still puzzled... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Really? 1 INT wipes out a nearly 300yd passing advantage? Plus from what I understand the situation also counts. Throwing a 99yd TD when you're trapped on your own 1 yd line seems like you get bonus points for that Still puzzled... It's because almost 1 out of every 4 completions was a TD for fitz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Really? 1 INT wipes out a nearly 300yd passing advantage? Plus from what I understand the situation also counts. Throwing a 99yd TD when you're trapped on your own 1 yd line seems like you get bonus points for that Still puzzled... So Brady should get rewarded for throwing a 30 pass and having the WR run the remaining 69 yards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 no way fitz did not deserve the number one ranking this week. Cut it any way you want, but 4 td's in 17 attempts with anything but a veteran receiving corps is awesome. I have to give the offensive line credit for a very good game, so I'm not giving fitz the points I used to for having a poor offensive line. Nope... On another note I was driving home from work and a local sports station (concentrating mostly on SEC football) was commenting on the NFL and named the five "best" and five "worst" teams after week one. We didn't make the five best, no surprise, but we didn't even make the guys second five. And when he named the worst five...the bottom team was KC!! I called in and asked how a team that came close to going to the playoffs, could get beat 41-7 and not give credit to the team that beat them....offensively...41 points...defensively 7 points....and why wouldn't buffalo at least be in the top 10. He said he wasn't "ready" to move Buffalo up the list, and wasn't sure if it was because KC was all that bad. I told him that if the Jets had beat KC 41-7 or the Titans had done it, they would have made his top ten for sure. He was silent and then said..."I guess your right"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 So Brady should get rewarded for throwing a 30 pass and having the WR run the remaining 69 yards? It's only like he probably called the play, and executed a great throw.... Why would he get credit for finding a matchup he liked, figuring out how to exploit it, and putting the ball in a place his WR could make a play. You act like the qb has no effect on yards after catch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I think people are taking my statement a little far. It's not that I don't think Fitzpatrick deserved praise. He had a *stellar* performance. But to my eyes, watching both games, I thought Brady's and Rodgers's were better. But the stats line up for Fitzpatrick to come out on top, and I'm totally ok with that. Like I said... all three played "lights out" in their own way, all three deserve a high amount of praise. Not exactly a big argument, guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 It seems to me you're getting caught up looking at gaudy yardage stats rather than pure efficiency. You'd probably be well served to read the details on the new rating system, which explains why certain things receive greater consideration than others. 4 TDs in 17 completions is a sick percentage, by the way. Exactly Fitz could have had 400 yards if we hadn't called of the dogs by the end of the third quarter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts