Josh Allen vs. Mahomes: Last 32 regular season starts

[Shaw66]

23 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Forget passer rating/QBR since they're jokes.  I'm talking about total yards, TDs and turnovers, and completion percentage.

Doc - Passer rating IS total yards, TDs, turnovers and completion percentage.  It's the best single number to measure passers, and probably quarterbacks generally. 

 

[PatsFanNH]

2 hours ago, TH3 said:

I mean….what are we even talking about…McCorkle gonna be goat2 right?

 

Gotta love the radio boys up here in NE….they got the Pats in the AFCCG already🤪

Dont know who you listen  but on 98.5 they still see them as a fringe playoff team.  Anyone can see that they are a few pieces on O away from challenging the Bills. 
 

also I stand by saying Mahomes is a better QB than Allen.  I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

[TH3]

3 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dont know who you listen  but on 98.5 they still see them as a fringe playoff team.  Anyone can see that they are a few pieces on O away from challenging the Bills. 
 

also I stand by saying Mahomes is a better QB than Allen.  I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

well you can go on about Mahomes better than JA…Happy we have JA and not really worried about a PM comp…..You should be worried though that McCorkle will never be good enough for any comparison to JA🤪

[Doc]

23 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

They're not jokes. They are just one of many ways to quantify a QB's success or lack of. Same as TD's, total yards, turnovers and completion percentage. Of the four you mentioned I believe Mahomes leads in all four of them over Allen unless we throw in rushing/receiving TD's. Of course, turnovers is one you don't want to lead in.

 

Yes, total yards, TDs and turnovers, including rushing.

 

11 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Doc - Passer rating IS total yards, TDs, turnovers and completion percentage.  It's the best single number to measure passers, and probably quarterbacks generally.

 

It doesn't factor-in rushing yards and TDs, and fumbles IIRC.

[Shaw66]

45 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

 

I asked you previously how you felt about pitchers and goalies getting wins that you didn't answer. I don't mind, just bring it up again because I feel like that's the reason why they are given wins and loses. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pitchers and goalies aren't the same.   It is at some level about simple mathematics.   The question is how much of credit does one person get for a win or a loss in an athletic contest.    At it's most fundamental, the amount of credit one player gets is the ratio of his contribution to to other players' contribution.   All things being equal, a basketball player gets 1/5.   He's one player out of five.   Okay, you should factor in minutes played, but for discussion purposes assume five guys go the whole game.   So, a basketball player gets 20% of the credit.  A tennis player playing singles gets 100% of the credit.   Same with a golfer.  

 

A hockey player gets 1/6. a baseball player gets 1/9 in the national league, 1/10 in the American league.  A football player gets 1/22, forgetting about special teams.   

 

So a hockey play gets 16%, a baseball player gets 10%, a football player gets less than 5%.   So without looking at it any more carefully than that, its obvious that crediting wins to one football player makes a lot less sense than to one pitcher or one hockey player.   Then you make adjustments for position.   A hockey goalie isn't 16%, he's more like 30%, and a pitcher who goes 9 isn't 10%, he's also more like 30%.  A quarterback gets more than 5% of the credit - maybe double, or 10%.  Or maybe even 15%.   But probably no more than that. 

 

It's just obvious on the numbers that QBs as less responsible for wins than goalies and pitchers.  Or golfers. 

 

Football is the ultimate team game.  Football is the game where teamwork and team precision creates a huge value added beyond the actual talents of the individuals.  

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

 

 

It doesn't factor-in rushing yards and TDs, and fumbles IIRC.

Yes, it doesn't.   What I said is that it's the best way to evaluate PASSERS, and a good way to evaluate quarterbacks.   At the end of the season, with very few exceptions, the guys with the best passer ratings were both the most effective passers in the league AND the most effective quarterbacks.   Why?   Because you to have a high passer rating you have to be among the best at reading defenses, because reading defenses is how you find easy throws, and easy throws gets you a high passer rating.  And the best QBs in the league are the best at reading defense.  

 

So, yeah, you have to add in rushing yards and TDs and fumbles.   But seriously, other than Lamar Jackson, and Murray, and Allen, rushing yards for QBs are negligible.   

[HappyDays]

23 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

 

If he is hurting why is he running out of clean pockets and missing open reads? Also his defense won him the Giants game. This year Allen has been much better than Mahomes, period. There is no reasonable argument you can make to the contrary.

[Doc]

12 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Yes, it doesn't.   What I said is that it's the best way to evaluate PASSERS, and a good way to evaluate quarterbacks.   At the end of the season, with very few exceptions, the guys with the best passer ratings were both the most effective passers in the league AND the most effective quarterbacks.   Why?   Because you to have a high passer rating you have to be among the best at reading defenses, because reading defenses is how you find easy throws, and easy throws gets you a high passer rating.  And the best QBs in the league are the best at reading defense.  

 

So, yeah, you have to add in rushing yards and TDs and fumbles.   But seriously, other than Lamar Jackson, and Murray, and Allen, rushing yards for QBs are negligible.   

 

But that's the point Shaw.  A guy like Josh (or those other guys) is more than just a passer and therefore passer rating/QBR aren't effective measures of him (them) as QBs as a whole. 

[GoBills808]

37 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Doc - Passer rating IS total yards, TDs, turnovers and completion percentage.  It's the best single number to measure passers, and probably quarterbacks generally. 

 

Adjusted net yards/attempt is more closely correlated with winning than passer rating. It’s the superior metric for evaluating quarterbacks imo.

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

You can't say to guys who won a Superbowl "you are not winners".

Like I told you before, they’re Champions!  

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

5 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Mahomes > Allen right now..

In your dreams 🛌 

 

[starrymessenger]

I will see Greg Cosell and I will raise him. JMO but I think Josh Allen will eventually (not today and probably not tomorrow) take the art of playing quarterback to a level not previously seen. I think he has the physical and mental wherewithal to do that and I think he fully intends to do it. I do think that PM has maybe pretty much plateaud, albeit at a very high level. He’s a great player and his troubles this year, however we chose to account for them, do not imo detract from what we have already seen and know. But Josh Allen has not plateaud. Though already a superstar, he’s today maybe 70%- 80% the player he will be. There are still rough edges to his game that he will refine. His talent and his prospects have yet to mature. Meanwhile there will be bad plays and also subpar games. Given the untrodden path that has led him to stardom, his career is really just getting started. Barring injury he might well play for the next 10-12 years or more.

Winning of course is important but there are some great QBs, including HoFmers, who never got there, so winning cannot be determinative in QB evaluations. Is Brady six times better than AR? Don’t think so. Its a team sport. Fortunately Allen now has the horses to help him continue to develop but its worth mentioning that it goes both ways and my eyes tell me that he actually makes them better than they make him. Josh Allen leads his team in every possible way. 

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

Like I told you before, they’re Champions!  

 

Sport is about being Champions. It is about titles and championships. It is winning those, and only those, that makes you a winner. 

[LeGOATski]

3 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dont know who you listen  but on 98.5 they still see them as a fringe playoff team.  Anyone can see that they are a few pieces on O away from challenging the Bills. 
 

also I stand by saying Mahomes is a better QB than Allen.  I still say he is hurting and his D is hot garbage..  

When did he get hurt?

[Rico]

9 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

When did he get hurt?

Suffered severe exposure in the SB.

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Sport is about being Champions. It is about titles and championships. It is winning those, and only those, that makes you a winner. 

I agree with a majority of what you post Gunner, but there's not a snowballs chance in hell I'm calling Trent Diller a winner. The Ravens won the Super Bowl in spite of him, not because of him. Career numbers include a 58-55 record, more INTs than Tds(113 vs 129), completed 55.5% of his passes, averaged below 160 yards a game(Only once in his 13 year career did he average over 200 yards a game) and a QB Rating of 70.2.

 

 Even in their 4 postseason games.... Completed 47.95% of his passes, less than 148 yards a game, less than a TD a game QB Rating of 83.7.

 

He was so bad that in their 2nd game of the playoffs(Against Tenn.) he only completed 5 passes all game. Nah, they won in the regular season, playoffs and Super Bowl solely because of the defense. Anyone could've been the QB of that team, don't turn the ball over and wins will come. That defense was really good and were even better in the playoffs only giving up 5.75 points a game.

 

Diller is not a winner, he's lucky.

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

I agree with a majority of what you post Gunner, but there's not a snowballs chance in hell I'm calling Trent Diller a winner. The Ravens won the Super Bowl in spite of him, not because of him. Career numbers include a 58-55 record, more INTs than Tds(113 vs 129), completed 55.5% of his passes, averaged below 160 yards a game(Only once in his 13 year career did he average over 200 yards a game) and a QB Rating of 70.2.

 

 Even in their 4 postseason games.... Completed 47.95% of his passes, less than 148 yards a game, less than a TD a game QB Rating of 83.7.

 

He was so bad that in their 2nd game of the playoffs(Against Tenn.) he only completed 5 passes all game. Nah, they won in the regular season, playoffs and Super Bowl solely because of the defense. Anyone could've been the QB of that team, don't turn the ball over and wins will come. That defense was really good and were even better in the playoffs only giving up 5.75 points a game.

 

Diller is not a winner, he's lucky.

 

He is a winner. He has the hardware to prove it. It doesn't mean he is great, or even good. That is a different thing entirely. I dunno maybe winner has some different colloquial meaning in the US but by the actual meaning of the word Trent Dilfer being a winner is a simple matter of fact.  

[78thealltimegreat]

10 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dude! Mahomes led his team to 2 SB in 3 years and the other year they went to the AFC CHAMPIONSHIP game!  (Only playoff losses came to Brady led teams) Yes Mahomes is having a down year but I bet it’s an injury that no one knows about.. Mahomes > Allen right now.. that can change but not for at least another year and Mahomes struggling again. 

You mean a Super Bowl he lost 38-9 in and another where he’s lucky Jimmy Garafolo missed a wide open Emmanuel Sanders in the 4th quarter that would have sealed the game for the Niners? It’s not like in either Super Bowl he was exactly Joe Montana 

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

He is a winner. He has the hardware to prove it. It doesn't mean he is great, or even good. That is a different thing entirely. I dunno maybe winner has some different colloquial meaning in the US but by the actual meaning of the word Trent Dilfer being a winner is a simple matter of fact.  

It’s the chip on the shoulder effect. If Dilfer is a winner, Kelly is a loser. Can’t have that. If Mahomes is a winner, Josh isn’t (yet.)

[Doc]

The Ravens could have won that SB with literally any QB.  Kerry Collins threw 4 INTs, one of which was returned for a TD, and the Ravens scored on a KO return.  That was enough to win the game considering the Giants only scored 7 points, from a KO return of their own.

[Scott7975]

Tyrod Taylor and Rob Johnson are also winners.  They both were on teams that won the super bowl and have rings.

[Putin]

12 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dude! Mahomes led his team to 2 SB in 3 years and the other year they went to the AFC CHAMPIONSHIP game!  (Only playoff losses came to Brady led teams) Yes Mahomes is having a down year but I bet it’s an injury that no one knows about.. Mahomes > Allen right now.. that can change but not for at least another year and Mahomes struggling again. 

Shouldn’t you be deflating 🏈🏈 somewhere ?? 

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, Doc said:

The Ravens could have won that SB with literally any QB.  Kerry Collins threw 4 INTs, one of which was returned for a TD, and the Ravens scored on a KO return.  That was enough to win the game considering the Giants only scored 7 points, from a KO return of their own.

 

I don't disagree with that at all by the way. But they won it with Dilfer. Wins are not a QB stat or a defense stat they are a team stat. The guys on that Ravens team all got rings. They are all winners. 

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

Tyrod Taylor and Rob Johnson are also winners.  They both were on teams that won the super bowl and have rings.

 

I think backups who didn't play it is arguable either way but those guys will have those rings for the rest of their days. You can't take it away from them. 

 

Again I think the problem here might a little bit be the American psyche that kinda projects this winners are people who deserve it. I mean it isn't always true in life generally or in football. Sometimes the people who win don't deserve it. Life isn't a true meritocracy. Trent Dilfer has a ring and Dan Marino doesn't. That feels unfair. But it is a fact. You can't re-write the definition of winner to make it fair. 

[JoPoy88]

16 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dude! Mahomes led his team to 2 SB in 3 years and the other year they went to the AFC CHAMPIONSHIP game!  (Only playoff losses came to Brady led teams) Yes Mahomes is having a down year but I bet it’s an injury that no one knows about.. Mahomes > Allen right now.. that can change but not for at least another year and Mahomes struggling again. 

This guy thinks Mac Jones is good, possibly elite 🥸🥸🥸😂🤣😂

[BigDingus]

17 hours ago, Doc said:

Compare the last 2 seasons.  That is, after Josh ascended to elite status.  Josh is the better QB.

 

I don't care who's better in whatever time frame you want to count, I'd still rather have Mahomes' accomplishments (50 TD/MVP season, 2 x SB appearances, 1 x SB win) than anything any other QB has done in the league over the same time frame. 

 

This board has hated Mahomes since he blew up the first year he started. There's a rooting interest in his failure & an understandable bias. That said, I love both the guys, except when we play the Chiefs. Then Mahomes can suck it.

[BuffaloBill]

Passer Rating is a useless comparison. In the end it will come down to W-L’s. Especially w’s in the Super Bowl. They are both elite. 

[Brennan Huff]

19 hours ago, PatsFanNH said:

Dude! Mahomes led his team to 2 SB in 3 years and the other year they went to the AFC CHAMPIONSHIP game!  (Only playoff losses came to Brady led teams) Yes Mahomes is having a down year but I bet it’s an injury that no one knows about.. Mahomes > Allen right now.. that can change but not for at least another year and Mahomes struggling again. 

You are absolutely not allowed to have this opinion here.

[Son of a K-Gun]

17 hours ago, Logic said:

The amount of variables that go into winning football games make “quarterback wins” a ridiculous thing to measure. 
 

Why not measure offensive guard wins? Punter wins? 

I can think of a punter loss 🤔

 

[Son of a K-Gun]

I think a lot of the Allen/Mahomes comparisons come down to the supporting cast, much like any comparison between QB’s.  When one QB is slinging balls to Kelvin Benjamin and Robert Foster of course the QB with Hill and Kelce will look better (and he was better).

 

However, Mahomes’ development may be a victim of his early success.  When he sees results in the form of MVP trophies and Super Bowls, there is little reason for him to spend time on the finer points of his craft.  When things go pear-shaped as they have in 2021, those small flaws become magnified.  I’m no QB-whisperer but I have seen poor mechanics from the jump with Mahomes.  Those cute underhands, sidearms and no looks are one thing when everything is clicking, but when they miss the target or get picked off…not so cute anymore and cue the “What’s wrong with Patrick Mahomes?” takes.

 

Counter that with the progress of Josh Allen.  Every season we hear the stories and see the tape of his workouts with Palmer.  They identify weaknesses and hone his craft.  The results are obvious…he is putting in the work required to become better every year.  And he’s doing that because he has had to.  Success has never come “easy” for Josh Allen, he has had to work his ass off for everything.  It is what makes him a great QB, a great leader and a guy that is fans can so easily root for.  And the best part?  He is still putting that work in even after finding success and recognition.  That’s how we know we have something special in Buffalo.

 

Go Bills.

[Scott7975]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think backups who didn't play it is arguable either way but those guys will have those rings for the rest of their days. You can't take it away from them. 

 

Again I think the problem here might a little bit be the American psyche that kinda projects this winners are people who deserve it. I mean it isn't always true in life generally or in football. Sometimes the people who win don't deserve it. Life isn't a true meritocracy. Trent Dilfer has a ring and Dan Marino doesn't. That feels unfair. But it is a fact. You can't re-write the definition of winner to make it fair. 

 

I think its just more of a personal perception thing.  Would I say that Trent Dilfer is a winner?  Yes, he may not have been an elite QB but he was still the QB of a team that won a superbowl on the highest stage of a competitive sport.  Would I say Dan Marino is a winner?  Yes, even though he never got a ring he was one of the best QBs of his time in the highest stage of sports.

[eball]

18 hours ago, The Wiz said:

So do you not believe in pitcher wins and goalie wins also?  Just curious.

 

I don’t. ERA is the most important pitching stat and goals against/save percentage are the most important goalie stats. When those stats are great, that player’s team typically wins. 
 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

8 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

Tyrod Taylor and Rob Johnson are also winners.  They both were on teams that won the super bowl and have rings.

Tua as well (well last season when Fitz bailed him out)

 

oh and Tebow and Flutie and ummm Orton? 

1 hour ago, BuffaloBill said:

Passer Rating is a useless comparison. In the end it will come down to W-L’s. Especially w’s in the Super Bowl. They are both elite. 

 

Stats are truthful?

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

20 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

I think its just more of a personal perception thing.  Would I say that Trent Dilfer is a winner?  Yes, he may not have been an elite QB but he was still the QB of a team that won a superbowl on the highest stage of a competitive sport.  Would I say Dan Marino is a winner?  Yes, even though he never got a ring he was one of the best QBs of his time in the highest stage of sports.

 

See I would say Marino was great. I wouldn't say he was a winner. It might be semantics but for me the winner tag is reserved for those who win titles. Being great doesn't make you a winner and being a winner doesn't make you great.

[Rico]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

See I would say Marino was great. I wouldn't say he was a winner. It might be semantics but for me the winner tag is reserved for those who win titles. Being great doesn't make you a winner and being a winner doesn't make you great.

He was a regular season winner.

[Doc]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I don't disagree with that at all by the way. But they won it with Dilfer. Wins are not a QB stat or a defense stat they are a team stat. The guys on that Ravens team all got rings. They are all winners. 

 

Dilfer is a SB winner, but he was a bad QB who got lucky by being inserted mid-season for Tony Banks, who just as easily could have been along for the ride with that Ravens team.  Dilfer would even tell you he all he had to do was hand the ball off to Jamal Lewis, let his defense dominate and not make boneheaded plays, which admittedly was hard for him given his overall career.

 

4 hours ago, BigDingus said:

I don't care who's better in whatever time frame you want to count, I'd still rather have Mahomes' accomplishments (50 TD/MVP season, 2 x SB appearances, 1 x SB win) than anything any other QB has done in the league over the same time frame. 

 

This board has hated Mahomes since he blew up the first year he started. There's a rooting interest in his failure & an understandable bias. That said, I love both the guys, except when we play the Chiefs. Then Mahomes can suck it.

 

Fair enough on the first paragraph.  But the biggest question is whether Mahomes is declining or is this just an off-year?  We'll see.

[Dr. Who]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

See I would say Marino was great. I wouldn't say he was a winner. It might be semantics but for me the winner tag is reserved for those who win titles. Being great doesn't make you a winner and being a winner doesn't make you great.

It is semantic and something of an intellectual quibble folks mainly aren't interested in except as a reason to argue over a quibble. Objectively, the winner is the fella, gal, or team that wins the trophy. Whether they do so because of luck, talent, bad officiating, etc. or a combination (frequently the latter) is something one assesses on a case by case basis. In general, one can say having great players increases your odds of winning. I think we have some great players starting with Allen.

[Rico]

Brady is the GOAT, and the only stat that proves it is number of rings.

[FireChans]

Mahome's career: Superbowl win, NFL MVP, Superbowl MVP, All-Pro x3, ProBowl x 3

 

Allen's career: All-Pro x1, ProBowl x1

 

Allen can hopefully be that dude, and Mahomes is slumping right now, but you don't overwrite his first 3 seasons.

22 hours ago, Doc said:

Compare the last 2 seasons.  That is, after Josh ascended to elite status.  Josh is the better QB.

Unfortunately, before Allen ascended to elite status, Mahomes won an MVP and a SuperBowl.

 

Despite the last few weeks, Allen is still chasing Mahomes.

Edited November 7, 2021 by FireChans

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

TUCK gate

Spygate

Smashed phon and Deflategate  

 

Oh and let’s not just ignore the Refs and “Just give it to them” bogus calls.  
 

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

FWIW
Mahomes started on a WINNING team with 
Alex Smith and Andy R. 
 

 

JA did not.

 

JA had Zay Jones and Robert Foster as his # 1 & 2 WR’s for goodness sake!