eball Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Jake Delhomme, Byron Leftwich, Daunte Culpepper, Drew Bledsoe, Brad Johnson, Brett Favre, Steve McNair, Matt Hasselbeck, Mike Vick, and Jake Plummer. What do they have in common? They all have poorer QB ratings after a quarter of the season than our own JP Losman. Just thought that was interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Here here!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Jake Delhomme, Byron Leftwich, Daunte Culpepper, Drew Bledsoe, Brad Johnson, Brett Favre, Steve McNair, Matt Hasselbeck, Mike Vick, and Jake Plummer. What do they have in common? They all have poorer QB ratings after a quarter of the season than our own JP Losman. Just thought that was interesting. 793779[/snapback] Palmer had a devastating knee injury, Brady has no receivers, Delhomme was missing Steve Smith, Leftwich and the Jags have had a tough schedule, Culpepper is being dragged down by Mularkey, Brad Johnson can't be expected to play well in those purple pants, Favre has to throw picks so that Ahman Green doesn't feel bad about all his fumbles, McNair just wins baby (and he's probaby hurt), Hasselbeck has no RB or LT, Vick was a victim of the NFL fix when the league forced them to lose the New Orleans game, Plummer just has to manage the game with that rushing attack...Trust me, it's a fluke, Losman sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 All kidding aside, Brady really doesn't have any receivers. If you've got a great QB, why don't you give him the tools to finish the job, rather than cheapingn out with Doug Gabriel and Reche Caldwell? The Pats are $13M under the salary cap. If you're not going to pay Branch, pay SOMEBODY. Well, their loss! :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnychemo Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Hehe, I almost posted the same thing after looking through the NFL.com stats pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 The Pats are $13M under the salary cap. 793854[/snapback] That is appalling. It's not like staying under does you any favors. You can't roll those savings into the next season and be $13M over the cap... A 1st-rounder for Branch was a real coup, but not using that money while watching McGinnest, Vinatieri, Branch, and Givens walk just seems idiotic. I have a feeling this would be a much bigger deal in the media if it was another contender, like Baltimore or Cincy, hanging that far under the cap. The fact is, the Pats have made all of their moves work for the last five years, so it's hard to criticize them until the season plays out. I can't believe they haven't given Charles Rogers a look...He can be trouble, and has been injured, but that's a former #2 overall who is young and unemployed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Passer rating was a dumb, very often misleading stat when Losman had a lousy one, and remains a dumb, very often misleading stat when he has a pretty decent one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Did you see JP Losman was in the top 3 as top fantasy free agents for QB's.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Passer rating was a dumb, very often misleading stat when Losman had a lousy one, and remains a dumb, very often misleading stat when he has a pretty decent one. 793870[/snapback] Amen. I'm sure Roethlisberger's QB rating is god awful right now. Anyone here who wouldn't rather have Ben? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Amen. I'm sure Roethlisberger's QB rating is god awful right now. Anyone here who wouldn't rather have Ben? 793893[/snapback] I wouldn't rather have had Ben in his lousy two games that earned him that god awful rating. Are you trying to argue that he played better than his QB rating this season indicates or that he IS better than his QB rating indicates? Your problem is that QB rating is a summary statistic, not a predictive statistic. Big Ben is probably better than his 34 QB Rating, but his play the last two games certainly isn't. That 34.3 rating only applies to the last two games, in which he has been awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 That is appalling. It's not like staying under does you any favors. You can't roll those savings into the next season and be $13M over the cap... A 1st-rounder for Branch was a real coup, but not using that money while watching McGinnest, Vinatieri, Branch, and Givens walk just seems idiotic. I have a feeling this would be a much bigger deal in the media if it was another contender, like Baltimore or Cincy, hanging that far under the cap. The fact is, the Pats have made all of their moves work for the last five years, so it's hard to criticize them until the season plays out. I can't believe they haven't given Charles Rogers a look...He can be trouble, and has been injured, but that's a former #2 overall who is young and unemployed. 793864[/snapback] And so far, at 3-1, its working out for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phlegm Alley Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I wouldn't rather have had Ben in his lousy two games that earned him that god awful rating. Big Ben is probably better than his 34 QB Rating, but his play the last two games certainly isn't. That 34.3 rating only applies to the last two games, in which he has been awful. 793914[/snapback] Is this before or after motorcycle accident/appendectomy? He may not be the same ever again after these incidents and maybe these stats are truly representative of his possible decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I wouldn't rather have had Ben in his lousy two games that earned him that god awful rating. Are you trying to argue that he played better than his QB rating this season indicates or that he IS better than his QB rating indicates. Your problem is that QB rating is a summary statistic, not a predictive statistic. Big Ben is probably better than his 34 QB Rating, but his play the last two games certainly isn't. That 34.3 rating only applies to the last two games, in which he has been awful. 793914[/snapback] It's still a dumb rating regardless. Stats as a whole are often misleading and this is the worst stat. It doesn't take into consideration sacks and fumbles, which are just as important as INTs. It rewards certain kinds of plays that are bad plays. It especially rewards efficiency in mediocre quarterbacks to playmakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Is this before or after motorcycle accident/appendectomy? He may not be the same ever again after these incidents and maybe these stats are truly representative of his possible decline. 793920[/snapback] That is also possible. Either way, I am comfortable saying that Roethlisberger's 34.3 passer rating IS indicative of his play this year. All in all, I think QB rating is not a bad tool. It certainly isn't the worst of the generally accepted statistics. I do not know the formula off-hand, but I do know that it at least tries to account for a wide range of parameters to give a balanced view of performance. However, not knowing the formula, I cannot say if it takes down/distance/situation/etc into account. That information is CONTEXT and it is CRITICAL to any statistic being worthwhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I wouldn't rather have had Ben in his lousy two games that earned him that god awful rating. Are you trying to argue that he played better than his QB rating this season indicates or that he IS better than his QB rating indicates. Your problem is that QB rating is a summary statistic, not a predictive statistic. Big Ben is probably better than his 34 QB Rating, but his play the last two games certainly isn't. That 34.3 rating only applies to the last two games, in which he has been awful. 793914[/snapback] It'll be interesting to see how Roethlisburger plays this coming week, after the bye week rest. I only watched him in the CIN game...he moved well in and out of the pocket, but struggled in passing. After the nice opening drive, he was 10 for 25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 That is also possible. Either way, I am comfortable saying that Roethlisberger's 34.3 passer rating IS indicative of his play this year. All in all, I think QB rating is not a bad tool. It certainly isn't the worst of the generally accepted statistics. I do not know the formula off-hand, but I do know that it at least tries to account for a wide range of parameters to give a balanced view of performance. However, not knowing the formula, I cannot say if it takes down/distance/situation/etc into account. That information is CONTEXT and it is CRITICAL to any statistic being worthwhile. 793929[/snapback] No, down and distance have no part in the formula. In fact, it rewards plays like 10 yard passes on 3rd and 13 that precede punts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 That is appalling. It's not like staying under does you any favors. You can't roll those savings into the next season and be $13M over the cap... Yes, you can. I don't know if the Patriots will make use of the methods, but it is a fairly standard process. You essentially write NLTBE incentives into contracts, and they count against the cap in the current year, and once they're not met, you're credited with that amount on the following year's cap. ...but not using that money while watching McGinnest, Vinatieri, Branch, and Givens walk just seems idiotic. The thing is, none of those the guys are lighting it up for their new teams. McGinest is old, Vinatieri is proving to be too injury-prone for how how much money he's getting (recall that he had injury issues in his last few years with the Pats as well), Givens is already complaining about not getting the ball enough in Tennessee, and I don't care what Branch does, giving a 5'8" WR $13 million a year with a 1st rounder on the table would never be a good decision. I can't believe they haven't given Charles Rogers a look...He can be trouble, and has been injured, but that's a former #2 overall who is young and unemployed. No one's giving Rogers a look. The guy's a train wreck. Injury-prone + locker room cancer = avoid at all costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Yes, you can. I don't know if the Patriots will make use of the methods, but it is a fairly standard process. You essentially write NLTBE incentives into contracts, and they count against the cap in the current year, and once they're not met, you're credited with that amount on the following year's cap. The thing is, none of those the guys are lighting it up for their new teams. McGinest is old, Vinatieri is proving to be too injury-prone for how how much money he's getting (recall that he had injury issues in his last few years with the Pats as well), Givens is already complaining about not getting the ball enough in Tennessee, and I don't care what Branch does, giving a 5'8" WR $13 million a year with a 1st rounder on the table would never be a good decision. No one's giving Rogers a look. The guy's a train wreck. Injury-prone + locker room cancer = avoid at all costs. 793984[/snapback] So basically you're happy that the Pats aren't spending that cash and trying to put the best possible product on the field? Are you getting a percentage or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 So basically you're happy that the Pats aren't spending that cash... I don't recall saying that. I do recall noting, however, that the team shouldn't waste money on older, injury-prone, or marginal players. ...and trying to put the best possible product on the field? more expensive != best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I don't recall saying that. I do recall noting, however, that the team shouldn't waste money on older, injury-prone, or marginal players.more expensive != best 794035[/snapback] Yeah, you generally have to spend money to attract FAs. Sure the Pats might not have wanted to re-sign some of their older vets but are you really telling me that there was nobody out there in FA that could have helped the Pats? Come on, you can't really apologize for every move the Pats make (or don't make). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 All kidding aside, Brady really doesn't have any receivers. If you've got a great QB, why don't you give him the tools to finish the job, rather than cheapingn out with Doug Gabriel and Reche Caldwell? The Pats are $13M under the salary cap. If you're not going to pay Branch, pay SOMEBODY.Well, their loss! :P 793854[/snapback] Because, I think they honestly believe that they can ride the tails of Brady and Maroney to the playoffs....Also, Ben Watson who was supposed to be Brady's favorite target going into the season, hasn't really proven to be a top 3 TE like a Gates or Gonzalez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 You essentially write NLTBE incentives into contracts, and they count against the cap in the current year, and once they're not met, you're credited with that amount on the following year's cap. 793984[/snapback] I understand, and I have seen examples of teams using this little loophole. I'm just not sure I follow how it helps the Patriots this year or next. I understand that if a team is at cap limit this year, inclusive of contracts written with NLTBE incentives, they will earn salary credits for the following season on all incentives that weren't earned. However, if the Patriots are $13M under the cap this year, which I'm assuming includes the NLTBE incentives you speak of, they will only earn credits on next year's cap for those incentives which are not met. It's not like they get an extra $13M to play with next year. They could do the same thing with the NLTBE's this year, earning the same credits on incentives not earned for next year, and still spend $10M+ more this season. It seems like a voluntary disadvantage, which is strange considering the thin depth at WR and LB. No one's giving Rogers a look. The guy's a train wreck. Injury-prone + locker room cancer = avoid at all costs. 793984[/snapback] Believe me, I know CR is a mess. But you know as well as I do what type of league the NFL is. Many players with character issues and shady histories have gotten 2nd, 3rd, and 4th chances in the league. Look at Green Bay and their pickup of Robinson. I guess Rogers is missing the production to warrant an opportunity, but it's hard to believe he's not worth a sniff from somebody, just on NCAA and draft pedigree alone. "I think his release from Detroit has helped him gain some perspective, blah blah blah..." You know the routine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 All kidding aside, Brady really doesn't have any receivers. If you've got a great QB, why don't you give him the tools to finish the job, rather than cheapingn out with Doug Gabriel and Reche Caldwell? The Pats are $13M under the salary cap. If you're not going to pay Branch, pay SOMEBODY.Well, their loss! :P 793854[/snapback] Well, nobodies or not, they took good advantage of the B'gals lack of pressure on Brady and beat the cincy dbs on a regular basis this past Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Debating the rating system always reminds me of this: The rating is a Passer Rating, not a QB rating. Thus - any debate about its utility in assessing QBs is valid - as all it does is help you assess their ability to pass the football. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Jake Delhomme, Byron Leftwich, Daunte Culpepper, Drew Bledsoe, Brad Johnson, Brett Favre, Steve McNair, Matt Hasselbeck, Mike Vick, and Jake Plummer. What do they have in common? They all have poorer QB ratings after a quarter of the season than our own JP Losman. Just thought that was interesting. 793779[/snapback] Yeah and 7 of the 12s teams have better records. Only one has a worse record. If JP had done things a little better like not getting the safety against NE or not fumbling away a TD vs the Jets, we may be 4-0. There's lies, there's damn lies, and there's statistics. It is kind of interesting though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Sure the Pats might not have wanted to re-sign some of their older vets but are you really telling me that there was nobody out there in FA that could have helped the Pats? Come on, you can't really apologize for every move the Pats make (or don't make). Look, I'm like every fan - I love big splashes in free agency. When the Pats signed Colvin and Harrison on consecutive days in the '03 off-season, I went nuts. But at the same time, I recognize that the Patriots' front office has a very specific mode for evaluating players, both in terms of how they fit into the team concept, and how valuable they are in monetary terms. If there had been a "big splash" type player in the FA market who they felt could help the team and could be signed for a dollar amount close to their value assessment, I'm confident that they would've signed him. Evidently, there was not. In any case, I doubt that the Patriots are $13 million under the cap because Belichick and Pioli forgot to spend all the money available to them. If they're not using it, I assume there's a method behind the madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLuca1967 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Jake Delhomme, Byron Leftwich, Daunte Culpepper, Drew Bledsoe, Brad Johnson, Brett Favre, Steve McNair, Matt Hasselbeck, Mike Vick, and Jake Plummer. What do they have in common? They all have poorer QB ratings after a quarter of the season than our own JP Losman. Just thought that was interesting. 793779[/snapback] Your not saying David Carr is the best QB in football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMIEBUF12 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 That is also possible. Either way, I am comfortable saying that Roethlisberger's 34.3 passer rating IS indicative of his play this year. All in all, I think QB rating is not a bad tool. It certainly isn't the worst of the generally accepted statistics. I do not know the formula off-hand, but I do know that it at least tries to account for a wide range of parameters to give a balanced view of performance. However, not knowing the formula, I cannot say if it takes down/distance/situation/etc into account. That information is CONTEXT and it is CRITICAL to any statistic being worthwhile. 793929[/snapback] i dont think big ben was all that great last season................yes he won a superbowl,but he basically handed off to willie parker and the bus most of the time...and the superbowl the steelers definately didnt win because of big ben but in spite of big ben......go bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Debating the rating system always reminds me of this: The rating is a Passer Rating, not a QB rating. Thus - any debate about its utility in assessing QBs is valid - as all it does is help you assess their ability to pass the football. Carry on. 794105[/snapback] If by pass the football you mean that the ball actually leaves their hands (in a forward pass that is) then that is correct. It has nothing to do with sacks or fumbles as others pointed out. To me those seem relevant stats when it was an attempted pass play. IMO thats why DF (couldn't hold a candle to JK mind you) was so much better than RJ. Heres the actual formula from NFL.com. The NFL rates its passers for statistical purposes against a fixed performance standard based on statistical achievements of all qualified pro passers since 1960. The current system replaced one that rated passers in relation to their position in a total group based on various criteria. The current system, which was adopted in 1973, removes inequities that existed in the former method and, at the same time, provides a means of comparing passing performances from one season to the next. It is important to remember that the system is used to rate pass-ers, not quarterbacks. Statistics do not reflect leadership, play-calling, and other intangible factors that go into making a successful professional quarterback. Four categories are used as a basis for compiling a rating: • Percentage of completions per attempt • Average yards gained per attempt • Percentage of touchdown passes per attempt • Percentage of interceptions per attempt The average standard, is 1.000. The bottom is .000. To earn a 2.000 rating, a passer must perform at exceptional levels, i.e., 70 percent in completions, 10 percent in touchdowns, 1.5 percent in interceptions, and 11 yards average gain per pass attempt. The maximum a passer can receive in any category is 2.375. For example, to gain a 2.375 in completion percentage, a passer would have to complete 77.5 percent of his passes. The NFL record is 70.55 by Ken Anderson (Cincinnati, 1982). To earn a 2.375 in percentage of touchdowns, a passer would have to achieve a percentage of 11.9. The record is 13.9 by Sid Luckman (Chicago, 1943). To gain 2.375 in percentage of interceptions, a passer would have to go the entire season without an interception. The 2.375 figure in average yards is 12.50, compared with the NFL record of 11.17 by Tommy O'Connell (Cleveland, 1957). In order to make the rating more understandable, the point rating is then converted into a scale of 100. In rare cases, where statistical performance has been superior, it is possible for a passer to surpass a 100 rating. For example, take Steve Young's record-setting season in 1994 when he completed 324 of 461 passes for 3,969 yards, 35 touchdowns, and 10 interceptions. The four calculations would be: • Percentage of Completions — 324 of 461 is 70.28 percent. Subtract 30 from the completion percentage (40.28) and multiply the result by 0.05. The result is a point rating of 2.014. Note: If the result is less than zero (Comp. Pct. less than 30.0), award zero points. If the results are greater than 2.375 (Comp. Pct. greater than 77.5), award 2.375. • Average Yards Gained Per Attempt — 3,969 yards divided by 461 attempts is 8.61. Subtract three yards from yards-per-attempt (5.61) and multiply the result by 0.25. The result is 1.403. Note: If the result is less than zero (yards per attempt less than 3.0), award zero points. If the result is greater than 2.375 (yards per attempt greater than 12.5), award 2.375 points. • Percentage of Touchdown Passes — 35 touchdowns in 461 attempts is 7.59 percent. Multiply the touchdown percentage by 0.2. The result is 1.518. Note: If the result is greater than 2.375 (touchdown percentage greater than 11.875), award 2.375. • Percentage of Interceptions — 10 interceptions in 461 attempts is 2.17 percent. Multiply the interception percentage by 0.25 (0.542) and subtract the number from 2.375. The result is 1.833. Note: If the result is less than zero (interception percentage greater than 9.5), award zero points. The sum of the four steps is (2.014 + 1.403 + 1.518 + 1.833) 6.768. The sum is then divided by six (1.128) and multiplied by 100. In this case, the result is 112.8. This same formula can be used to determine a passer rating for any player who attempts at least one pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrizyy Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 I understand, and I have seen examples of teams using this little loophole. I'm just not sure I follow how it helps the Patriots this year or next. I understand that if a team is at cap limit this year, inclusive of contracts written with NLTBE incentives, they will earn salary credits for the following season on all incentives that weren't earned. However, if the Patriots are $13M under the cap this year, which I'm assuming includes the NLTBE incentives you speak of, they will only earn credits on next year's cap for those incentives which are not met. It's not like they get an extra $13M to play with next year. They could do the same thing with the NLTBE's this year, earning the same credits on incentives not earned for next year, and still spend $10M+ more this season. It seems like a voluntary disadvantage, which is strange considering the thin depth at WR and LB. Believe me, I know CR is a mess. But you know as well as I do what type of league the NFL is. Many players with character issues and shady histories have gotten 2nd, 3rd, and 4th chances in the league. Look at Green Bay and their pickup of Robinson. I guess Rogers is missing the production to warrant an opportunity, but it's hard to believe he's not worth a sniff from somebody, just on NCAA and draft pedigree alone. "I think his release from Detroit has helped him gain some perspective, blah blah blah..." You know the routine. 794067[/snapback] actually it's exactly like they have an extra 13 million to play with next year. Using the incentives is basically a way to shift cap money forward. This off-season was a pathetic year for free agents. You really think teams are getting their money's worth out of guys like Givens and Randle-El? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Debating the rating system always reminds me of this: The rating is a Passer Rating, not a QB rating. Thus - any debate about its utility in assessing QBs is valid - as all it does is help you assess their ability to pass the football. Carry on. 794105[/snapback] Yes, so what we need is a handoff rating so that we can average the two and get a more complete evaluation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Is this before or after motorcycle accident/appendectomy? He may not be the same ever again after these incidents and maybe these stats are truly representative of his possible decline. 793920[/snapback] ok im tired of hearing about his damn motercycle accident. the guy broke his jaw so what. players have played with a broken jaw. if he wasnt a product of a great system no one would care. hes really showing what hes made off with alot of those other guys gone. 34.3 passer rating is no fluke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Yes, so what we need is a handoff rating so that we can average the two and get a more complete evaluation. 794593[/snapback] Or you could even use what they say in the rating formula itself to qualifiy the rating. It is important to remember that the system is used to rate pass-ers, not quarterbacks. Statistics do not reflect leadership, play-calling, and other intangible factors that go into making a successful professional quarterback. Four categories are used as a basis for compiling a rating: • Percentage of completions per attempt • Average yards gained per attempt • Percentage of touchdown passes per attempt • Percentage of interceptions per attempt Not to mention it doesn't bother to add sacks, yards lost by such, or fumbles. Oh and the scrambling ability of some QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted October 4, 2006 Author Share Posted October 4, 2006 Your not saying David Carr is the best QB in football? 794443[/snapback] Of course not. I merely pointed out an interesting statistic -- one upon which a great deal of money could have been won if a person had predicted the current rankings prior to the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 BTW, what was JP's rating today? Just checking. Again ratings do not take into account the competition, fumbles, etc.etc.etc... Don't read too much into them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 You know, it wouldn't be that hard to get a more accurate QB rating, taking into account all of VABills' objections - add sacks as both an attempt and negative yardage, count fumbles as an attempt and an interception, etc. The question, I guess, is if you have to count running as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 BTW, what was JP's rating today? Just checking. Again ratings do not take into account the competition, fumbles, etc.etc.etc... Don't read too much into them. 799104[/snapback] So you're saying Losman was better than his rating today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzer32 Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Was this before today's games? I'm sure that will change after today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 So you're saying Losman was better than his rating today? 799112[/snapback] Actually his rating was a 34 or so. He was actually worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts