The QB is not the whole team! - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

The QB is not the whole team!

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby buffalobillsrul2002 » Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:23 pm

Vick is certainly a competent NFL QB. What people forget is that one rushing yard is equal to one passing yard. Therefore, Vick's feet add about 1000 yards to his passing stats. If you do that, Vick ends up in the top 10 of the league in passing yards.

I've never liked Td/TO ratio. TD's are extremely fluky from year to year. If you get the yards, the TD will come. Also, for REAL football it doesn't really matter if you throw a pass to the 1, and then your RB pounds in. The QB did %99 of the work. Fantasy football is bad in some ways because it gives the last yard 60 times the value of any other yard on the field.

Another importatn statistic that is often overlooked are sacks taken.

Just because I was curious, for a few weeks I tracked NFL QBs. I came up with a different QB rating.

My rating was:

(Passing Yards + Rushing Yards - Yards Lost on Sacks- 40* # of TO)/ (Pass attempts+rush attempts+ times sacked)

40 was an arbitrary number given out because i figured that the average amount of "yards lost" because of a turnover is about 40.
I'd like to try and figure out some statistical information on this, but you'd have to factor in the team's net punting average, INT returns, etc. and it would get very time-consuming.


Under this rating, Vick came in somewhere around 12-14 most weeks. Meaning, he is a good NFL QB stats-wise. Give him some real receivers and I think he could be really good, somewhere in the top 5-8 in the league.
buffalobillsrul2002
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant


Posts: 635
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby eaglesrule » Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:32 pm

deacon wrote:
eaglesrule wrote:comparing vick to randall is an insult to randall. randall was a much better passer than vick, and came darn close to 1000 rush yards himself, but his passing numbers to go with it were better.

As far as vick goes, yes, he can make plays others can't, but he has far too many 150 passing, 100 rush games, that in the grand scheme of things, simply don't help the team THAT much.

With most elite qbs, you can generally expect 280-300 yards of offense.
Even if vick gets plays others do with their feet, he is sacrificing about 30 yards of field position per game.


What exactly are you basing your comments on? Certainly not facts! Let's look at some facts:

Although I don't know what you consider 'elite' QBs I will assume the most prolific QBs of todays game will qualify.

Brady has had exactly 3 games this year with 280-300yds passing. The Patriots are 2-1 in those games

P. Manning has had 8 games with 280-300yds passing. The Colts are 4-4 in those games.

Hasslebeck has not had a game this year with 280-300 yds passing.

C. Palmer has had exactly 2 games with 280-300yds passing. The Bengals are 1-1 in those games.

So the facts show that even the best of the best QBs (P. Manning) only have 280-300yds passing about half of the time (16 game season) and even then it in no way gaurantees a win!

Winning is more than about stats! Kurt Warner has had the most 300+ yd passing games in the previous 2 years but I don't see him winning many games.

That 'sacrificing about 30yds of field position per game' is so absurd I don't even know how to respond to that.


Well, if you are only using one year for comparison, then I apologize. I did kind of eyeball it a bit, and sorry for that. I think the point in general is still pretty salient.

I would argue that by definition, Vick is not elite. He isn't better than brady, peyton, brees, mcnabb, palmer, which puts him in the 82nd percentile. That is not elite, that's "good" to "average." And that's being generous, because there are strong arguments for bulger and especially hasselbeck being better as well. I'd say in general, all of those guys generate more total offense than vick does, and most of them have a better won/loss pedigree. so vick hasn't accrued more than 250 yards in 10 games, and the team lost 9 times and missed the playoffs. If he is so helpful, how is his team on a backward slide.


I think we can all agree that 250 total yards from the qb is generally somewhat middling, but expected. I realize stats don't tell the whole story here, and vick does generate wins from his ability. Vick has 10 games below the 250 yard baseline, to go with over 20 turnovers. Because of his dependance on the run, he also generates losses, because the idea of him leading a team back into a game is pretty absurd too, because he is too dependant on his running to make up the yards that he doesn't accrue through the air.

everyone seems to argue for him that he "wins" games, but he doesn't do so at an impressive rate compared to other qbs people consider the best, he actually seems like he is the bottom half of that category relative to the rest of the elite. So from where i sit, he doesn't win that many games, he doesn't reach usual benchmarks for Qb passing, and he turns it over way too much because of his style.

Granted, I was suprised at how little the elite guys get north of 250 yards over the course of a season, but we also had down years and injuries as well. And at at any rate, while its not about stats overall, it is about winning games, and vick seems to do this less, and I think his depressed passing totals lead to the "opportunity cost" of missed field position. Why is it, other than injury that most every other scrambling qb learned to scramble for the pass, rather than the yards?

Because while you benefit to some degree, you benefit more by doing it to pass, and that is what I was ultimately, if ineloquently was getting at with my field position argument.

but your point is duly noted.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby eaglesrule » Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:36 pm

buffalobillsrul2002 wrote:Vick is certainly a competent NFL QB. What people forget is that one rushing yard is equal to one passing yard. Therefore, Vick's feet add about 1000 yards to his passing stats. If you do that, Vick ends up in the top 10 of the league in passing yards.

I've never liked Td/TO ratio. TD's are extremely fluky from year to year. If you get the yards, the TD will come. Also, for REAL football it doesn't really matter if you throw a pass to the 1, and then your RB pounds in. The QB did %99 of the work. Fantasy football is bad in some ways because it gives the last yard 60 times the value of any other yard on the field.

Another importatn statistic that is often overlooked are sacks taken.

Just because I was curious, for a few weeks I tracked NFL QBs. I came up with a different QB rating.

My rating was:

(Passing Yards + Rushing Yards - Yards Lost on Sacks- 40* # of TO)/ (Pass attempts+rush attempts+ times sacked)

40 was an arbitrary number given out because i figured that the average amount of "yards lost" because of a turnover is about 40.
I'd like to try and figure out some statistical information on this, but you'd have to factor in the team's net punting average, INT returns, etc. and it would get very time-consuming.


Under this rating, Vick came in somewhere around 12-14 most weeks. Meaning, he is a good NFL QB stats-wise. Give him some real receivers and I think he could be really good, somewhere in the top 5-8 in the league.


good post. Although being 12-14 is hardly "good" its closer to average if there are 32 teams. He is more like a C to C plus than a B.

And maybe his receivers don't catch because there is no rapport, since he takes off so much. How much longer are bad receivers going to be blamed? Don't they have three first rounders at this point? maybe if he scrambled until they got open, there would be bigger passing numbers.

Granted, they dropped tons of passes, and it is a chicken or the egg argument. I jus tthink vick gets too much of a free ride.

Incidentally, I'd love to see mike martz go to that team, what would he conjure up for vick?
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby WickedSmaat » Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:53 pm

eaglesrule wrote:
buffalobillsrul2002 wrote:Vick is certainly a competent NFL QB. What people forget is that one rushing yard is equal to one passing yard. Therefore, Vick's feet add about 1000 yards to his passing stats. If you do that, Vick ends up in the top 10 of the league in passing yards.

I've never liked Td/TO ratio. TD's are extremely fluky from year to year. If you get the yards, the TD will come. Also, for REAL football it doesn't really matter if you throw a pass to the 1, and then your RB pounds in. The QB did %99 of the work. Fantasy football is bad in some ways because it gives the last yard 60 times the value of any other yard on the field.

Another importatn statistic that is often overlooked are sacks taken.

Just because I was curious, for a few weeks I tracked NFL QBs. I came up with a different QB rating.

My rating was:

(Passing Yards + Rushing Yards - Yards Lost on Sacks- 40* # of TO)/ (Pass attempts+rush attempts+ times sacked)

40 was an arbitrary number given out because i figured that the average amount of "yards lost" because of a turnover is about 40.
I'd like to try and figure out some statistical information on this, but you'd have to factor in the team's net punting average, INT returns, etc. and it would get very time-consuming.


Under this rating, Vick came in somewhere around 12-14 most weeks. Meaning, he is a good NFL QB stats-wise. Give him some real receivers and I think he could be really good, somewhere in the top 5-8 in the league.


good post. Although being 12-14 is hardly "good" its closer to average if there are 32 teams. He is more like a C to C plus than a B.

And maybe his receivers don't catch because there is no rapport, since he takes off so much. How much longer are bad receivers going to be blamed? Don't they have three first rounders at this point? maybe if he scrambled until they got open, there would be bigger passing numbers.

Granted, they dropped tons of passes, and it is a chicken or the egg argument. I jus tthink vick gets too much of a free ride.

Incidentally, I'd love to see mike martz go to that team, what would he conjure up for vick?


You can't discredit being in the top half, almost top third of all NFL QBs. And that's only if you're basing this off of a strict curve that you give him a C-C+. I bet if we were to look deeper into the numbers, that factor that should matter is the difference Vick is from the top to the bottom of the league. That's when you should grade him. But that's also not to say he'd even drop a grade after evaluation.
-Wicked
WickedSmaat
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 8165
Joined: 1 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Singing songs of satisfaction toooooo the wooooooorld..... (the world).

Postby buffalobillsrul2002 » Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:53 pm

eaglesrule wrote:good post. Although being 12-14 is hardly "good" its closer to average if there are 32 teams. He is more like a C to C plus than a B.

And maybe his receivers don't catch because there is no rapport, since he takes off so much. How much longer are bad receivers going to be blamed? Don't they have three first rounders at this point? maybe if he scrambled until they got open, there would be bigger passing numbers.

Granted, they dropped tons of passes, and it is a chicken or the egg argument. I jus tthink vick gets too much of a free ride.

Incidentally, I'd love to see mike martz go to that team, what would he conjure up for vick?


I'd say 12-14 is closer to good than average. 15-18 would be average out of 32.

Plus, the difference between Manning and Vick is much less than the difference betweeen Gradkowski(or Walter) and Vick. Point of me saying this is, I'll call a sligthly better-than-average QB "good", because he's closer to the top than he is to the bottom.

I'll agree that some of the receiving problems could be due to Vick scrambling too much. If the receivers struggled to get open (which they sometimes do), I completely understand that. However, I think that a professional receiver should be able to catch the ball on the scramble plays, because catching is a basic skill at that point (very little timing, etc. is involved).

On the coaching point, I think that Vick could be a coach savior as much as he could be a coach killer. If you brought in an imaginitive coach that changed or created a new offense to fit Vick, then I think he and the team could be very successful.

Another point, I've kind of wondered what would happen if the Falcons signed a bunch of QB/WR/RB guys. Putting Vick, Randle El, and Robinson in the same backfield would be impossible for teams to defend.
buffalobillsrul2002
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant


Posts: 635
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 4:26 hours
(and 38 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact