Career-worst single-game passer rating

[Shaw66]

So, Josh Allen had a career-worst single-game passer rating.  17.   It's, like, phenomenally bad.  

 

I decided to take a look at the career-worst single-game passer ratings for the super-star quarterbacks.  They're interesting.  

 

The single most interesting thing about the best QBs and their worst days is that, although Allen's day was the second-worst passer rating in the group, Allen is the only guy whose team won the game.  Peyton, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, all lost their worst games.  Why is that?   Because Allen's running brought another dimension to the game that the super-stars didn't have.  

 

Here are the worst games for the super-stars:

 

Peyton:   With the Colts, Peyton threw three interceptions against the Dolphins in his rookie season, lost 41-6 and had a passer rating of 35.   With the Broncos, Peyton lost to the Chiefs 29-13, threw four interceptions and had a rating of 0, the lowest of any super-star. 

 

Brees:  With the Chargers, Brees had a passer rating of 27 against the Bears, threw one interception and lost 20-7.   With the Saints, his low was 37.6, losing to Atlanta 23-13.  

 

Brady's low with the Pats came in the 31-0 loss to the Bills.  He threw 4 ints and earned a rating of 22.5.  With Tampa, he lost to the Saints 38.3 and had a passer rating of 40.4, with 3 INTs.  

 

Rodgers made the Bills the only team to hang an all-time low passer rating on two different superstars, when he racked up a 34.3 rating by throwing three INTs in 21-13 loss.  

 

These are just silly little data points, of course, but I think it's more than pure accident.  Brees, Brady, and Rodgers were, like Allen, playing with good teams, but their teams weren't good enough to bail them out of their worst days.   Allen got the win when the super-stars didn't, not because his team bailed him out, but because ALLEN bailed himself out by being an integral part of the running attack that took over the game in the second half.  

 

Allen isn't throwing like the super-stars, but it isn't absurd to say that is throwing is excellent.  He isn't running like Vick or Lamar Jackson, but he's already established himself as a great running quarterback.   Allen's a much better runner than any of the best throwers, and he's a much better thrower than the best runners - Vick, Newton, and Jackson.   

 

 

[Success]

I guess people could say that yesterday was a rough one for Allen - but he was still magnificent, and still basically carried the team on his shoulders for big parts of the game - albeit w/ more help this time.  I personally didn't think that any of the picks were bad throws. A couple of tips, and then Beasley was interfered w/ on the other.

 

The last line is a good comparison - he really doesn't belong in the "running QB" category, since he is now such a good thrower.  If all he did was pass, he'd still be one of the league's top QB's.  

 

I kind of think the running is a conundrum.  He's so good at it, but every time he has a game like yesterday (or the Bucs, or last week), I always think "this isn't sustainable."  I think it's probably necessary this year, but I'd love to see the Bills evolve to a point where the games aren't so physical for him.

 

[78thealltimegreat]

Watch the three ints again…the first if Jarrett doesn’t get his hand on it that’s a touchdown as Beasley was waiting to catch it

 

The second he goes to Beasley again and Beasley has a miscommunication with Josh and cuts his route short only the team knows which player is at fault

The third was just a deflected pass at the line that was basically a fair catch 

 

So Josh had a rough day but there was nothing egregious about any of those throws 

[LewPort71]

19 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

 

 

Allen isn't throwing like the super-stars, but it isn't absurd to say that is throwing is excellent.  He isn't running like Vick or Lamar Jackson, but he's already established himself as a great running quarterback.   Allen's a much better runner than any of the best throwers, and he's a much better thrower than the best runners - Vick, Newton, and Jackson.   

 

 

This  ^^^

Well stated

[Punching Bag]

28 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

 

Allen isn't throwing like the super-stars, but it isn't absurd to say that is throwing is excellent.  He isn't running like Vick or Lamar Jackson, but he's already established himself as a great running quarterback.   Allen's a much better runner than any of the best throwers, and he's a much better thrower than the best runners - Vick, Newton, and Jackson.   

 

 

Allen is closer in ability to Steve Young (who he watched as a kid) to Vick, Newton and Jackson.

 

 

[SF Bills Fan]

Players have bad days. But, we still won handily. When the opposing QB has a rating like that and you still get beat by 14 points that is embarrassing. 

[Shaw66]

4 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

Watch the three ints again…the first if Jarrett doesn’t get his hand on it that’s a touchdown as Beasley was waiting to catch it

 

The second he goes to Beasley again and Beasley has a miscommunication with Josh and cuts his route short only the team knows which player is at fault

The third was just a deflected pass at the line that was basically a fair catch 

 

So Josh had a rough day but there was nothing egregious about any of those throws 

I haven't listened to any of the interviews.  Do we know he was throwing to Beasley?   I think it looked like he was throwing to Beas because he was closest to the ball when it was intercepted, but when I watched the replays, it looked to be like he was targeting Diggs in the back corner of the end zone.  I think that because Beas was cutting to open space toward the center of the field and Diggs was coming across to the corner.  It looks like Allen was throwing up the sideline and as the ball got deflected it went toward the spot where Beasley was.  

 

In either case, except for the fact that Allen didn't see the guys who could make deflections, I didn't have a lot of trouble with any of the INTs.  They just happened, and they all happened within minutes of each other.  

[NewEra]

Yet there are people that don’t think we struggled passing yesterday 🤷🏻‍♂️ Sorry guys, I just don’t understand the rationale
 

He’s well on his way to becoming the best dual threat QB ever.  

[ExiledInIllinois]

Passer rating, as strange as it sounds, should include rushing TDs... Just as good as a passing TD.

 

Josh had 2. 

[london_bills]

21 minutes ago, Success said:

I guess people could say that yesterday was a rough one for Allen - but he was still magnificent, and still basically carried the team on his shoulders for big parts of the game - albeit w/ more help this time.  I personally didn't think that any of the picks were bad throws. A couple of tips, and then Beasley was interfered w/ on the other.

 

The last line is a good comparison - he really doesn't belong in the "running QB" category, since he is now such a good thrower.  If all he did was pass, he'd still be one of the league's top QB's.  

 

I kind of think the running is a conundrum.  He's so good at it, but every time he has a game like yesterday (or the Bucs, or last week), I always think "this isn't sustainable."  I think it's probably necessary this year, but I'd love to see the Bills evolve to a point where the games aren't so physical for him.

 

I think people who say Allen could have taken more check downs like last week tend to see that Allen could be even better than he is. And we may need that to win it all. No one disputes he carries the team for the most part and is the only 1st rd pick on offence, but if we're in the afc championship game and he doesnt take what is given like last week we might be giving the opponent more possesions

[ExiledInIllinois]

1 minute ago, NewEra said:

Yet there are people that don’t think we struggled passing yesterday 🤷🏻‍♂️ Sorry guys, I just don’t understand the rationale
 

He’s well on his way to becoming the best dual threat QB ever.  

They didn't struggle.  Always got the pass when they needed it most.  Even a 2pt. conversion via a pass.

[Coach Tuesday]

Allen’s worst play yesterday was actually pulling it back from McKenzie on the option - 19 would’ve scored.

[Rocky Landing]

IMO, really all this does is highlight what a useless stat passer rating is.

 

And for those who don't know, the formula for PR is:

PR = ((a + b + c + d)/6) x 100

where:

a = (COMP/ATT - .3) x 5

b = (YARDS/ATT - 3) x 0.25

c = (TD/ATT) x 20

d = 2.375 - (INT/ATT x 25?

ATT = Number of passing attempts

COMP = Number of completions

YDS = Passing yards

TD = Touchdown passes

INT = Interceptions

 

What's missing from all of this? Any context whatsoever.

 

The passer rating does not take numerous things into consideration, like strength of opponent, ability of WRs, difficulty of passes, whether the ball is being thrown away, dropped, or just poorly thrown, or anything else beyond just the basic numbers listed above. 

 

In my opinion, far more important than the useless PR stat, is the fact that Allen did not get rattled after any of these interceptions. His game was simply not anywhere near as bad as that PR number would suggest.

 

 

 

Edited January 3, 2022 by Rocky Landing

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, Rocky Landing said:

IMO, really all this does is highlight what a useless stat passer rating is.

 

And for those who don't know, the formula for PR is:

PR = ((a + b + c + d)/6) x 100

where:

a = (COMP/ATT - .3) x 5

b = (YARDS/ATT - 3) x 0.25

c = (TD/ATT) x 20

d = 2.375 - (INT/ATT x 25?

ATT = Number of passing attempts

COMP = Number of completions

YDS = Passing yards

TD = Touchdown passes

INT = Interceptions

 

What's missing from all of this? Any context whatsoever.

 

The passer rating does not take numerous things into consideration, like strength of opponent, ability of WRs, difficulty of passes, whether the ball is being thrown away, dropped, or just poorly thrown, or anything else beyond just the basic numbers listed above. 

 

Im my opinion, far more important than the useless PR stat, is the fact that Allen did not get rattled after any of these interceptions. His game was simply not anywhere near as bad as that PR number would suggest.

Lol passer rating is a terrible stat but it is quite literally the best stat for evaluating QB’s.

[ExiledInIllinois]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

Lol passer rating is a terrible stat but it is quite literally the best stat for evaluating QB’s.

Didn't work this time.  JA had two TDs not accounted for directly related to his ability that didn't factor in.

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Didn't work this time.  JA had two TDs not accounted for directly related to his ability that didn't factor in.

No stats are perfect. Everyone should know that.

[LABILLBACKER]

14 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

Allen is closer in ability to Steve Young (who he watched as a kid) to Vick, Newton and Jackson.

 

 

Good if not great comparison. He's a taller stronger version of Steve Young with some Big Ben. I would never lazily compare him to Cam because of his superior attitude. I am concerned with this bad weather bad game trend. You can't deny it,  it's right there. They better build that new "open" stadium with engineering the wind out of it.

[Rocky Landing]

12 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Lol passer rating is a terrible stat but it is quite literally the best stat for evaluating QB’s.

As an average over the course of an entire season, it's useful. For use in evaluating a QB for a single game? It's worthy of being ignored.

[FireChans]

3 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

As an average over the course of an entire season, it's useful. For use in evaluating a QB for a single game? It's worthy of being ignored.

What stat isn't worthy of being ignored for a single game?  Completion percentage? Yards? INT's?

 

All of those things were bad for Josh last week. His passer rating would indicate he had a pretty bad day passing the ball. Would you disagree he had a bad day?

[Shaw66]

4 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

As an average over the course of an entire season, it's useful. For use in evaluating a QB for a single game? It's worthy of being ignored.

Well, you're sort of right about this.   It's good for seasons and careers. 

 

For games, it's just interesting.   It does tell you something about how the game went, but the actual number is irrelevant.