Playoff QBs

[mjt328]

I'll stick just to the AFC to keep things simple.

 

 

If the playoff started today, these would be the AFC's playoff quarterbacks:

Tom Brady, Joe Flacco, Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Schaub, Andrew Luck, Peyton Manning

 

 

Last year's playoff quarterbacks:

Brady, Flacco, Roethlisberger, Dalton, Schaub, Tebow

 

The year before:

Brady, Sanchez, Flacco, Roethlisberger, Manning, Cassel

 

The year before:

Brady, Sanchez, Palmer, Flacco, Manning, Rivers

 

 

 

Once in awhile, a team with an average quarterback can sneak into the playoffs. But the odds are very slim.

And they very rarely have continued success year after year.

[C.Biscuit97]

Fitz is probably having a better season than Schaub or Flacco. Much better defenses on those teams.

[mjt328]

Fitz is probably having a better season than Schaub or Flacco. Much better defenses on those teams.

 

I've watched a lot of Ravens/Texans football this year, and this is not accurate in the slightest.

[C.Biscuit97]

I've watched a lot of Ravens/Texans football this year, and this is not accurate in the slightest.

 

Well, I completely disagree. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/bycategory?cat=Passing&sort=49 Don't get me wrong, I love Flacco's potential but he has been a disappointment. And Schaub has become a game manager. My main point is when you're playing on a team with a defense that doesn't give up 30 points a game, you will look a lot better. Those guys don't have to win games for their teams right now. Fitz does and that's the problem the Bills thought they were fixing with their offseason moves.

[section122]

Once in awhile, a team with an average quarterback can sneak into the playoffs. But the odds are very slim.

And they very rarely have continued success year after year.

I read this differently. To me it says if your qb is Manning, Brady, or Roethlisberger you've got a pretty good shot of making the playoffs. I guess Flacco too but he strikes me as that average qb you are talking about. Average qbs have accounted for 1/2 of the playoff slots each year so it is a crapshoot.

 

Also look at the teams:

Pats, Steelers, Ravens every year.

Pats* it is the qb and receiving corp, Colts all about the qb

Jets (2x), Bengals, Texans, Steelers and Ravens it's all about the D

Chiefs/Chargers it's all about playing in a sh**ty division.

 

I've watched a lot of Ravens/Texans football this year, and this is not accurate in the slightest.

Flacco is excellent at home and average at best (I'd even say worse than average) on the road. Schaub is the definition of a care taker qb. Have either of these qbs been asked to win a game for their team? Could either of these qbs win a game for their team? If you put Schaub or Flacco on the Bills would they better appreciably better?

[mjt328]

Well, I completely disagree. http://sports.yahoo....Passing&sort=49 Don't get me wrong, I love Flacco's potential but he has been a disappointment. And Schaub has become a game manager. My main point is when you're playing on a team with a defense that doesn't give up 30 points a game, you will look a lot better. Those guys don't have to win games for their teams right now. Fitz does and that's the problem the Bills thought they were fixing with their offseason moves.

 

I'm not a big stat guy, but according to your link - both Schaub and Flacco are rated higher than Fitz.

 

Schaub may have the luxury of a better defense, but that also means that he doesn't get a chance to pad his stats. The Texans are a run-first and run-second team. By late-third quarter, they are usually up by enough points to put the brakes on and just hand the ball to Arian Foster. Similar with Flacco. For instance, on Sunday he had 5 touchdowns and was on the bench by mid-third quarter. And anybody that watches Baltimore should know that their defense isn't winning them many games anymore. Cam Cameron also seems to have Chan Gailey disease and is reluctant to get Ray Rice involved as much as he should. This year, most of that 6-2 record falls on the shoulders of Flacco.

 

Stats also don't take into account consistency. For every good game Fitz has (Kansas City, Cleveland, New England), he has games that are horrifically bad (Jets, San Francisco, Houston, Tennessee). When their team needs them to make big throws, Flacco and Schaub usually come through. Fitz throws picks. Has he even completed ONE deep ball all season?

[1B4IDie]

I read this differently. To me it says if your qb is Manning, Brady, or Roethlisberger you've got a pretty good shot of making the playoffs. I guess Flacco too but he strikes me as that average qb you are talking about. Average qbs have accounted for 1/2 of the playoff slots each year so it is a crapshoot.

 

Also look at the teams:

Pats, Steelers, Ravens every year.

Pats* it is the qb and receiving corp, Colts all about the qb

Jets (2x), Bengals, Texans, Steelers and Ravens it's all about the D

Chiefs/Chargers it's all about playing in a sh**ty division.

 

 

Flacco is excellent at home and average at best (I'd even say worse than average) on the road. Schaub is the definition of a care taker qb. Have either of these qbs been asked to win a game for their team? Could either of these qbs win a game for their team? If you put Schaub or Flacco on the Bills would they better appreciably better?

This is an insane statement that has no basis in reality.

The logic behind this appears to be.

"I've heard of Arian Foster therefore the QB must just hand it off to him."

 

Schaub is not a caretaker by any stretch of the imagination.

[mjt328]

Flacco is excellent at home and average at best (I'd even say worse than average) on the road. Schaub is the definition of a care taker qb. Have either of these qbs been asked to win a game for their team? Could either of these qbs win a game for their team? If you put Schaub or Flacco on the Bills would they better appreciably better?

 

Yes, I believe we would be MUCH MUCH MUCH better with either of those guys under center.

 

People need to focus less on stats and fantasy football ratings, and actually watch guys play.

 

> Both Schaub and Flacco have much better short to mid accuracy. They consistently hit their receivers in stride, in the hands. Fitz is constantly throwing short, throwing high, throwing behind, etc.

> If the defense clogs the box to stop the run, Schaub and Flacco can hit the deep ball. I don't think Fitz has hit a long pass in 2 years.

> They are better decision-makers. Fitz lost us the Tennessee game with his interception with 3 minutes left. He makes throws like that all the time. Real quarterbacks like Schaub/Flacco don't.

> Fitz is again near the top of the league in turnovers. They are not.

 

It's easy to pad stats when you have a pass-happy coach (like Gailey) and your defense can't stop anybody.

[Orton's Arm]

I've watched a lot of Ravens/Texans football this year, and this is not accurate in the slightest.

 

You are absolutely, 100% right.

 

This season has been a disappointing one for Schaub--at least by his standards. He's averaging "only" 7.3 yards per pass attempt; as compared to his career average of 7.8 yards per attempt.

 

This has been a very good season for Fitz. Only once before in his career has he equaled the yards per attempt he's put up this year; and never before has he exceeded that number. The problem being that the number in question--which is tied for Fitz's best season--is only 6.8 yards per attempt.

 

This season, Joe Flacco has averaged 7.5 yards per attempt. This represents a considerable improvement over his career average of 7.1 yards per attempt.

 

Matt Schaub's career average of 7.8 yards per attempt is higher than Peyton Manning's and Tom Brady's career averages. A very strong case could be made that Schaub is among the five best QBs in the NFL. To make any comparison between Fitz and Schaub, or between Fitz's season and Schaub's season--goes well beyond mere inaccuracy.

[JPS]

Fitz is probably having a better season than Schaub or Flacco. Much better defenses on those teams.

 

I disagree completely. The only stats that matter are wins and losses. Schaub and Flacco WIN. And Fitz is and will always be a sub .500 QB. If you put Fitz on the Texans or Ravens, I think he costs them 1-3 games.

[All_Pro_Bills]

Based on QB rating stats on ESPN.com Fitz is ranked 15th with a rating of 87.5. Whether anybody wants to admit it or not, this team is not losing because of the play from the QB position. Fitz will never be a top 5 QB but I see a lot of his mistakes as being situational, the result of being put in circumstances that require taking some outsized risks. And he doesn't have the talent or ability to pull it off most times. So sure, a QB upgrade would be nice but the discussion takes the focus off the number one problem, the defense is awful. Maybe the worst in team histrory.

 

31st in yards allowed per game, 32nd in rushing yards allowed per game, 21st in passing yards allowed per game. 31st in points allowed

 

Responsibility for this resides with the coaching staff, specifically the defensive coordinator and the head coach. Unfortunately there is no accountability here since the right thing to do here would be to have fired Wandstadt at the bye and promote on of the position coaches to the coordinator role. I can't imagine anyone doing any worse than Dave has to this point in the season.

[mjt328]

Based on QB rating stats on ESPN.com Fitz is ranked 15th with a rating of 87.5. Whether anybody wants to admit it or not, this team is not losing because of the play from the QB position.

 

Wrong.

 

Fitz's numbers look a lot better when averaged out over the course of the whole season. When his play is dissected closely (game by game, throw by throw), it's another story.

He's been a major factor in at least 4 of our 6 losses - New York, San Francisco, Tennessee and Houston.

 

Here is a question for Fitz supporters:

 

Is there anything he does consistently well?

 

> He doesn't win games.

> He doesn't do a consistently good job of reading the defense and making good decisions.

> He doesn't have a strong arm and fails to get the ball downfield, even when receivers have separation.

> His accuracy is all over the place.

 

 

The standards in Buffalo are ridiculously low for the quarterback position. Just because he's doing a better job than Losman, Edwards and Holcomb doesn't mean anything, because they were all terrible.

[section122]

This is an insane statement that has no basis in reality.

The logic behind this appears to be.

"I've heard of Arian Foster therefore the QB must just hand it off to him."

 

Schaub is not a caretaker by any stretch of the imagination.

Schaub has 23 300+ yard passing games since becoming a starter (64 starts). His "breakout years" of 08-10 where he threw for a combined 12183 yards? Well 4360 (over 1/3) of them went to Andre Johnson who is one of the best wrs in the game. So lets see he has the best rb in the game (which I don't think I need to tell you but it does make passing much easier), one of the best receiver's in the game, and a top 2 defense. So when teams play the Texans they need 7-8 in the box and 2 to cover Johnson leaving 1-2 players to cover other passing options.

He is asked to hand the ball off and not turn it over. This is why I consider him a caretaker. His role is to not mess up the teams chances to win. Very different than what is asked of Fitz (not that this is a Fitz vs. Schaub debate).

Edited November 14, 2012 by section122

[Orton's Arm]

Yes, I believe we would be MUCH MUCH MUCH better with either of those guys under center.

 

People need to focus less on stats and fantasy football ratings, and actually watch guys play.

 

> Both Schaub and Flacco have much better short to mid accuracy. They consistently hit their receivers in stride, in the hands. Fitz is constantly throwing short, throwing high, throwing behind, etc.

> If the defense clogs the box to stop the run, Schaub and Flacco can hit the deep ball. I don't think Fitz has hit a long pass in 2 years.

> They are better decision-makers. Fitz lost us the Tennessee game with his interception with 3 minutes left. He makes throws like that all the time. Real quarterbacks like Schaub/Flacco don't.

> Fitz is again near the top of the league in turnovers. They are not.

 

It's easy to pad stats when you have a pass-happy coach (like Gailey) and your defense can't stop anybody.

 

Good post, and I strongly agree with each of the > observations you made.

 

> It's easy to pad stats when you have a pass-happy coach (like Gailey) and your defense can't stop anybody.

 

Some stats are easier to pad than others. Total passing yards is a nearly useless stat, because it's driven largely by the number of passing plays called over the course of a season. A pass-happy team like the Bills will call a lot more passing plays than more run-oriented teams.

 

Any stat involving completion percentage can be easily padded as well: just dump the ball off to your RB all the time. Trent Edwards was no stranger to this tactic.

 

But yards per attempt is much more difficult to pad.

 

A while back, there were some comparisons between Fitz's stats and Jim Kelly's. The problem with those comparisons is that they looked at easily inflated stats (yards over the course of the season, completion percentage) while ignoring more difficult-to-inflate stats, like yards per attempt.

 

For the most part, the Bills called a roughly 50/50 mix of pass plays/run plays while Kelly was the QB. In some years they actually called more running plays than passing plays. This makes yardage per seasons comparisons meaningless, because Gailey is clearly a much more pass-happy coach than Kelly's coaches had been. But when comparing difficult-to-inflate stats like yards per attempt, Ryan Fitzpatrick's best season of 6.8 yards per attempt does not compare to Jim Kelly's career average of 7.4 yards per attempt.

 

One last thing: the Bills called a lot of running plays during the Kelly era. Anyone who called Jim Kelly a caretaker QB on that basis would be sadly mistaken. The Texans also call a lot of running plays; and Matt Schaub's career average of 7.8 yards per attempt is even higher than Jim Kelly's.

[All_Pro_Bills]

Wrong.

 

Fitz's numbers look a lot better when averaged out over the course of the whole season. When his play is dissected closely (game by game, throw by throw), it's another story.

He's been a major factor in at least 4 of our 6 losses - New York, San Francisco, Tennessee and Houston.

 

Here is a question for Fitz supporters:

 

Is there anything he does consistently well?

 

> He doesn't win games.

> He doesn't do a consistently good job of reading the defense and making good decisions.

> He doesn't have a strong arm and fails to get the ball downfield, even when receivers have separation.

> His accuracy is all over the place.

 

 

The standards in Buffalo are ridiculously low for the quarterback position. Just because he's doing a better job than Losman, Edwards and Holcomb doesn't mean anything, because they were all terrible.

All I'm saying is the defense is the number one problem with this team. I'm also convinced that Fitz is not the 'long term' solution here but to single his play out as the major contributor to the Bills poor showing so far this season is unfair and incorrect. I don't care who the QB is as long as you're giving up an average of 37+ points per game in 6 losses you are not focusing on the biggest problem.

 

Even last weekend against the Pats when he threw the pick I said to myself, 'well there's still time on the clock and they have all 3 timeouts so even if the Bills scored here and took a 38-37 lead they'd probably let Brady move the ball down the field and into scoring position for a FG kick to win the game as time expired'. This group and this coordinator cannot dial up a stop when it matters.

[section122]

He's been a major factor in at least 4 of our 6 losses - New York, San Francisco, Tennessee and Houston.

 

Have to disagree here. The Jets game was out of hand quickly, Fitz threw some picks so I won't absolve him of blame but I also won't say he was a major contributor. The Tennessee game the D let Chris Johnson explode after being terrible, 1 bad throw does not make him a major factor. As for Houston and SF how many qbs have those defenses made look bad?

 

Again I'm not a Fitz supporter but I won't ignore he is given nothing to work with. The defense is a major facotr in all of the games you listed. Do I want better than Fitz? Yes. Is he the biggest problem on this team? Not even close. How can people say it is his fault when in the 4 games you listed the D gave up a combined 149 points?!

 

edit: because I feel that I'm being taken out of context I will say that yes I think Flacco and Schaub are better than Fitz. I just don't think they are the game changing qbs that some are making them out to be. I thought Flacco turned the corner this year and then I noticed a trend - his home/road performances are in stark contrast to each other. On the road he is very mediocre. That is all. I'm not saying Fitz is great just that he doesn't have nearly the benefits that these 2 have.

I disagree completely. The only stats that matter are wins and losses. Schaub and Flacco WIN. And Fitz is and will always be a sub .500 QB. If you put Fitz on the Texans or Ravens, I think he costs them 1-3 games.

The most useless stat in SPORTS is qb win/loss. So much more goes into a game - there are 2 other complete phases of the game where the qb doesn't even get to effect the outcome of the game to decide who wins and loses.

Edited November 14, 2012 by section122

[mjt328]

Good post, and I strongly agree with each of the > observations you made.

 

> It's easy to pad stats when you have a pass-happy coach (like Gailey) and your defense can't stop anybody.

 

Some stats are easier to pad than others. Total passing yards is a nearly useless stat, because it's driven largely by the number of passing plays called over the course of a season. A pass-happy team like the Bills will call a lot more passing plays than more run-oriented teams.

 

Any stat involving completion percentage can be easily padded as well: just dump the ball off to your RB all the time. Trent Edwards was no stranger to this tactic.

 

But yards per attempt is much more difficult to pad.

 

A while back, there were some comparisons between Fitz's stats and Jim Kelly's. The problem with those comparisons is that they looked at easily inflated stats (yards over the course of the season, completion percentage) while ignoring more difficult-to-inflate stats, like yards per attempt.

 

For the most part, the Bills called a roughly 50/50 mix of pass plays/run plays while Kelly was the QB. In some years they actually called more running plays than passing plays. This makes yardage per seasons comparisons meaningless, because Gailey is clearly a much more pass-happy coach than Kelly's coaches had been. But when comparing difficult-to-inflate stats like yards per attempt, Ryan Fitzpatrick's best season of 6.8 yards per attempt does not compare to Jim Kelly's career average of 7.4 yards per attempt.

 

One last thing: the Bills called a lot of running plays during the Kelly era. Anyone who called Jim Kelly a caretaker QB on that basis would be sadly mistaken. The Texans also call a lot of running plays; and Matt Schaub's career average of 7.8 yards per attempt is even higher than Jim Kelly's.

 

I agree.

 

Sometimes the secret to being a good quarterback is just not making the back-breaking mistakes... Knowing when to take a chance with a big throw, and knowing when to hold off. Tom Brady has made a Hall of Fame career with this mentality.

 

The Tennessee game was proof-positive that Fitz does not have this trait. It's the same reason that somebody like Tony Romo (who is more physically talented than Fitz and surrounded with great talent) continues to struggle and pull his team down, year after year.

 

Flacco and Schaub aren't big stat guys, but they rarely make those back-breaking mistakes to put their teams in a hole. And when their teams need a big play, they usually come through.

[corey g]

Alright 2 things, Fitz had a great game against the Titans, that doesn't go in his bad column. And here are some stats

 

Flacco VS KC- 13-27 for 187 O TD and 1 INT the result? WIN

Flacco vs CLE-15-24 for 153 1 TD and 0 INT another win

 

Schaub vs CHI- 14-26 for 95 1 TD and 2 INT WIN

Schaub vs JAX- 26-35 for 195 and NO TD or INT

 

Those are just a couple of games apiece I know, but FITZ COULD NEVER get a win with those numbers because of this defense. So if the hypothetical question is are we better with either guy, I don't see it. And btw, just an opinion. Flacco is awful, he throws deep a ton to pile up stats, and in previous years got carried by everything else around him. This has been the year he has been asked to do the most, and sure he can pile up numbers against OAK but they will be an early exit. Book it

 

[Dorkington]

I've asked before and have yet to receive an answer.

 

What options do we have *now*?

 

I don't see anyone available that'd do the job better than Fitz.

 

Also, we're going to finish well enough so that we miss out on an elite QB, or we'll draft the wrong guy. So it's really all moot.

[Orton's Arm]

Have to disagree here. The Jets game was out of hand quickly, Fitz threw some picks so I won't absolve him of blame but I also won't say he was a major contributor. The Tennessee game the D let Chris Johnson explode after being terrible, 1 bad throw does not make him a major factor. As for Houston and SF how many qbs have those defenses made look bad?

 

Again I'm not a Fitz supporter but I won't ignore he is given nothing to work with. The defense is a major facotr in all of the games you listed. Do I want better than Fitz? Yes. Is he the biggest problem on this team? Not even close. How can people say it is his fault when in the 4 games you listed the D gave up a combined 149 points?!

 

 

The most useless stat in SPORTS is qb win/loss. So much more goes into a game - there are 2 other complete phases of the game where the qb doesn't even get to effect the outcome of the game to decide who wins and loses.

 

> Again I'm not a Fitz supporter but I won't ignore he is given nothing to work with.

 

Nothing to work with? How about one of the five best offensive lines in the NFL? Or a RB who has the second-highest per-carry average since 1960? Or a #1 WR who can consistently get open against Revis and other elite CBs? Or a reliable pass-catching TE in the form of Chandler? Or an emerging deep threat in the form of Graham? (At least, Graham would be emerging as a deep threat if he had a QB capable of throwing the long ball.) More recently, Donald Jones has started coming into his own.

 

Assuming Jones' progress continues, the Bills are a quarterback away from having a complete offense.

 

> The defense is a major facotr in all of the games you listed.

 

I agree that the defense is a joke. But it's a mistake to wait until all your other holes are filled before drafting a franchise QB. The earlier in the draft you pick, the more likely you are to be able to get the guy you really want. The Bills should take the franchise QB now, and fix the defense later. Once both areas of the team have been fixed, they'll become a serious threat to win the Super Bowl.

 

> The most useless stat in SPORTS is qb win/loss.

 

Agreed. Football is a team sport. There were plenty of times when John Elway's teams went 7-9. Elway was great, but the guys around him were often disappointing.