Who invented qbr

So far, Manning and Brady are still way ahead. It would have been similar. Everything was new once. No one would think about it not counting now since its established, but when it first came about if things like Pro Football Talk were around people would be giving the thumbs up to comments bashing it. Why not let things play out and see if the TQBR becomes legit or becomes a glowing hockey puck gimmick?

Save us, Cam! They are so obsessed with themselves, they have to make their own way to grade a QB, so then they can say oh this QB is great cause we are ESPN, and we say so. The QB is only as good as the men that surround him, ask a great QB what made him great, bet he says his teammates. You must be logged in to leave a comment.

Not a member? Register now! This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Getty Images. If anybody could screw this up, its the guys at ESPN. I hate ESPN. They put together a meaningless stat to help defend who they suck up to. Vindication for Eli Manning, baby! Trent Dilfer helped design it? Are interceptions going to be considered a positive thing now? Great idea and definitely should be a success. Can someone please do this now for the world golf rankings…they are such a disaster!!

My eyes are open and ears are perked. Something new to tell me Eli Manning throws a lot of picks. I like. This average is further adjusted to account for the strength of opponent. Performance against a stronger defense that tends to allow low adjusted EPA per play is adjusted upwards while performance against a weaker defense is adjusted downwards.

The degree of adjustment is in direct proportion to the strength of the opponent. Lastly, the resulting adjusted EPA per play is transformed to a 0 to scale, where 50 is average. The result can be thought of as a percentile. Think of QBR as an attempt to rate a quarterback by difficulty. A quarterback gets more credit for success in more difficult situations, and less credit for success in less difficult situations.

It tries to reward QBs for making the clutch throws downfield versus an easy swing pass on second down. Passer Rating is the official NFL measure of quarterback performance, and its calculation is much simpler than the QBR , as it depends only on aggregate statistics rather than an analysis of each play a quarterback is involved in. Additionally, passer rating double counts completion percentage, favoring quarterbacks who tend to throw screens and other short passes.

It ignores sacks, fumbles, designed runs and scrambles. Steelers always seem to have good backup qbs. This seems like a very Trent Dilfer-eque performance…. This reminds me of the cold-fusion hype from a few years back. Peyton Manning last Sunday vs. Kansas City 2. Rich Gannon in Super Bowl 38 vs. Tampa Bay 3. Ryan Leaf vs. Tony Eason in Super Bowl 20 vs. Chicago 5. Peyton Manning in Super Bowl 48 vs. I am a big fan of these articles bashing QBR, as they are high on the humor value. Maybe they can invent RBR, Running Back Rating, which will confirm for us that a game played by a third-string backup where he went 12 carries for 29 yards with 1TD and 2 fumbles is actually the greatest game ever played by a running back.

QBR is a form of mind control. The power elite are testing to see if a system so stupid that it rates Charlie Batch as the greatest QB of all time actually gains enough public support that it can overtake QB rating as the primary statistic.

If this happens, they know that the sheeple have been dumbed down sufficiently enough that they can move forward with the next phase of their operation. From to Charlie Batch started 9 games for the Steelers and won 6 of those games.

Five of those starts came after he was 35 years old. Thats admirable production from an old timer. Also think he finished a couple games for Big Ben and maybe Byron Leftwich, and sealed some wins, but not sure. The stat only goes back a couple of years. Eventually ESPN got on his bandwagon and invented the stat. But ESPN bought him out during the offseason and have buried his work into theirs.

I think I cracked the code! You must get like 20 bonus points if the ball makes contact with Aqib Talib but only 10 points if he intercepts it. ESPN is a glitch, and complete garbage. Who made these clowns out to be an accurate source for ratings to begin with? Did they win a raffle? Was there a vote? Fantasy fools and their geekball stats are pointless, useless and make pro-football a worse place by existing. He scored a I am watching this game now to grade it with my system greatestqb.

I will hopefully post the result and a write up tomorrow sometime, so look for it in the near future. In my opinion, the ESPN score has to be some kind of written recorded error and not the actual score that Batch received because no type of system would give that game the highest grade. It just seems impossible that one could. I think it is derived from play by play data.

If they were watching the games, they would see the errors made and it would effect the QBR of the QB. You can see that article under the regular season tab at greatestqb. The arrogance of these people, telling us that what we see with our eyes, and understand with years of observation about what constitutes good play from the QB position, is flawed.

They have the magic formula for great QB play, pay no attention to the fact that the results it spews out are absurd to anyone that actually watches the games. That was your best work, MDS. One of the very first posts at Football Perspective measured how various passing stats were correlated with wins.

One of the main conclusions from that post was that passer rating, because of its heavy emphasis on completion percentage and interception rate, was not the ideal way to measure quarterback play. The simplest way to remember this is that 4th quarter kneeldowns are highly correlated with wins. That said, it at least makes sense to begin with a look at how various statistics have correlate with wins.

Games where the quarterback had fewer than 20 plays were excluded, but the quarterback was still included if he otherwise had 14 such games. The next step was to sum the weekly quarterback data on various metrics, including wins, and create season data. If two variables move in the same direction, their correlation … Continue reading This is to be expected; after all, Total QBR is based off Expected Points Added on the team level, which generally tracks wins and losses.

The second most correlated statistic with wins was Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt, my favorite non-proprietary quarterback metric. In another unsurprising result, passing yards had almost no correlation with wins, while pass attempts had a slight negative correlation as any Game Scripts observer would know.