NFL Passer rating and QB's: better or easier today?

[PatriotSeven]

Is it just me or does it seem as if recently we are seeing more and more high NFL passer ratings over 100+, perfect passer ratings and great passing statistics in general?

I didn't actually put it all together on a statistical spreadsheet, but just a quick scan on ESPN.com's passing stats page reveals that over the past 10 years we have had a pretty noticeable increase in NFL passer rating stats as a whole.

It's not so much the fact that we are getting 5-6 QB's a year with passer ratings over 100 for the season, rookies included, but more evident is the the increase in amount of quarterbacks that are over the 80.0 mark in the NFL.

Nick Foles is currently listed with a 80.3 average, but he is the 25th worse rating in the league. Last year it was Andy Dalton at 20th. By comparison in seasons prior to 2007, the numbers were noticeable lower. David Garrard was listed as 16th in the league with an 80.5 in 2006, Chris Simms at 19th in 2005, and Byron Leftwich at 18th in 2004. In 2003 it was Jeff Garcia at 15th.

It always fluctuated a bit year to year but as a whole it appears that there's at least about 5 QB's today that are passing over 80.0 more than in the early 2000's. Likewise we are regularly getting multiple QB's with passer ratings over 100.

Are we really getting better passers or is this simply a direct result of the rules changes that benefit the passing game which makes it easier to score higher?

 

[DocHoliday]

The rules and more college teams are going pass heavy, which is producing super talented QBs

 

[Buchanty]

The change in rules moved the pendulum in favor of the passing game considerably. When first introduced it favored the accurate passers like Brady, Manning and to a degree Warner. Teams adapted their defenses and scouted for more accurate passers to align themselves with the increased dependency on passing.

The one begat the other, but both are true.

 

[dales804]

I voted for "Both." Mainly, the rule changes have made it easier to pass in this league but I do think there's an influx of talent at the QB position, too.

 

[PatriotSeven]

I just am not sure if the NFL passer rating is as good a measure as it was before. It was quite hard for passers to consistently put numbers at around 100 or above, and if you were consistently up there, it usually meant you were an elite passer with a strong ability to read defenses and an understanding of the game and were doing it against some very tough defenses.

With so many rookies coming straight out of college and making it look easy, what before only a few achieved, for me it has to be more about the rules changes making it easier for quarterbacks to complete passes to their receivers. Today it seems defenses have been stripped of a lot of their powers.

Of course something should also be said about the spread option and dual rush quarterbacks. I think the rule changes has also helped this style offense succeed, which in turn, helps quarterbacks put up more impressive passing statistics. But again, it goes back to the demise of NFL defenses.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

My first reaction to this thread was that this is obviously driven by rules changes over the years, but I decided to check that out. I have concluded that there is little doubt that it is so driven.

The bottom line is that until 1974, Receivers could basically be mugged or, as Darryl Stingley learned, worse as they ran downfield (the contact rules were changed after his tragic injury). Rules to protect the QB have changed so dramatically that, as was observed by one of the commentators during last night's game, any hit on a QB while or after the ball is released (and, in many cases before it is released) are now likely to draw a flag and a momentum changing penalty.

Yes, I am aware that many Division I teams have moved to "Pro" systems. In addition, conditioning, coaching, formal and informal redshirting (i.e., five years of College plus one or more "extra" years in HS) have led to QB's like RGIII, Andrew Luck and Russell Wilson arriving ready to make a major impact in the league from day one; Johnny Football seems to have taken that to a whole new level, but time will tell. While these factors have all definitely played a role, it seems to me that the evolution of the game in this direction is primarily a result of the rules changes over the last 40 years.

Going back to 1974, here are the rule changes that have gradually transformed the game into an Offense/Pass/Quarterback friendly game. I've probably missed a few, so please add them.

1974: For those of us who remember, a year of sweeping changes that included the following that loosened up the offense in general and the passing game in particular: ...roll-blocking and cutting of wide receivers was eliminated; the extent of downfield contact a defender could have with an eligible receiver was restricted; the penalties for offensive holding, illegal use of the hands, and tripping were reduced from 15 to 10 yards...

1977: Rule changes were adopted to open up the passing game and to cut down on injuries...Defenders were permitted to make contact with eligible receivers only once...

1978: The NFL continued a trend toward opening up the game. Rules changes permitted a defender to maintain contact with a receiver within five yards of the line of scrimmage, but restricted contact beyond that point. The pass-blocking rule was interpreted to permit the extending of arms and open hands.

1979: NFL rules changes emphasized additional player safety [Darryl Stingley effect]...instructed officials to quickly whistle a play dead when a quarterback was clearly in the grasp of a tackler.

1995: ...A receiver knocked out of bounds by a defensive player can now return to the field to make a play...

1996: The five-yard contact rule will be enforced more stringently. Hits with the helmet or to the head by the defender will be flagged as personal fouls and subject to fines. This is being done to protect the offense, particularly the quarterback.

2002: It is illegal to hit a quarterback helmet-to-helmet anytime after a change of possession.

2006: ...Defenders are prohibited from hitting a passer in the knee or below unless they are blocked into him ["Carson Palmer rule"]

2007: Forward passes that unintentionally hit an offensive lineman before an eligible receiver will no longer be an illegal touching penalty, but deliberate actions are still penalized...A completed catch is now when a receiver gets two feet down and has control of the ball. Previously, a receiver had to make "a football move" in addition to having control of the ball for a reception...

2008: The "force-out" rule on catches made near the sidelines has been eliminated. A receiver now must come down with the ball and both feet in bounds for a pass to be ruled complete; previously, passes would be ruled complete if the receiver was pushed by a defender while in the air and the official judged that he would have come down in bounds had he not been pushed. [only rule change that I could find in the last 40 years that made things tougher for the receiver]

2009: Multiple safety-related rules changes affecting all players, following on Congressional Hearings on player safety...specifically for QB's, a defensive player on the ground may no longer lunge or dive at the quarterback's lower legs. ["Tom Brady Rule"]

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I just am not sure if the NFL passer rating is as good a measure as it was before. It was quite hard for passers to consistently put numbers at around 100 or above, and if you were consistently up there, it usually meant you were an elite passer with a strong ability to read defenses and an understanding of the game and were doing it against some very tough defenses.

With so many rookies coming straight out of college and making it look easy, what before only a few achieved, for me it has to be more about the rules changes making it easier for quarterbacks to complete passes to their receivers. Today it seems defenses have been stripped of a lot of their powers.

Of course something should also be said about the spread option and dual rush quarterbacks. I think the rule changes has also helped this style offense succeed, which in turn, helps quarterbacks put up more impressive passing statistics. But again, it goes back to the demise of NFL defenses.

What is your view on ESPN's alternative rating system? I think it has a lot of merits.

 

[PatriotSeven]

What is your view on ESPN's alternative rating system? I think it has a lot of merits.

I think it has a strong merit and I understand how it works and certainly seems to line up better with what I consider to be the best quarterbacks.

However, it is more than a passer rating. It is a quarterback rating which is nice and needed to be done. I never understood for example why quarterbacks shouldn't be held accountable for lost fumbles and only for interceptions when they are equally as bad. Likewise rushing quarterbacks should have their rushing touchdowns and yardage accounted for.

Having said that, I have a problem with them not releasing all the data that goes into the equation in a way that we can all take a look at it, like the NFL does with the passer rating. We can break down the passer rating into its categories like completion %, interception %, td %, yardage, etc...

ESPN needs to release the raw data in order for it to be considered trustworthy enough. I have a feeling they are still tinkering with the formula. Which is fine, but I still want to see the raw data. Especially the "clutch plays" data.

PS: Nice breakdown and research above. What's worse is the unreal amount of great, legal defensive plays getting flagged on top of all that. Like Reggie Nelson's play against the Cowboys. What a fantastic, textbook hit. It must be very demoralizing for defenders to see flags on a call like that. I was sick to my stomach when I saw it this morning. It was frustrating for me to watch that, let alone for those guys.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

Both, rules help but people seem to forget QBs are trained to lead the team and score by throwing, not manage the game by handing it off 40 times.

 

[Mainefan]

When I was a kid and a fan of the Cleveland Browns of Paul Brown's day, Otto Graham was considered the best quarterback in the league (late 1940s, early 1950s). His completion average over his career was 55.8% and only once did his QB rating surpass 100, with 107 in 1947. In that year, he threw 25 touchdowns. After that, his very best was 20, in 1952. His best year for yards per game was 1952, when he threw for an average of 234 yards and that year, he threw for a total of 2816 yards.

Of course, in those days, the season was 12 games long, which would have affected total yards and number of touchdowns, but not rating, completion average or average yards per game.

It is accurate, I think, to say that today's quarterbacks are taller, stronger and have even better arms. But the defenses are also faster and stronger. There's no reason to assume that quarterback athleticism has improved any faster than the athleticism of players at every other position, and yet today's quarterbacks typically complete more than 60% of their passes. Tom's average is 63.9 and his per game average yardage is 251, a figure Graham never hit. Also, he's had an over 100 rating five times, compared to Graham's one.

Today's game does bear a passing resemblance to the professional football of the pre-superbowl era, but only a passing resemblance--which is why comparisons are difficult, if not impossible.

 

[PatriotSeven]

When I was a kid and a fan of the Cleveland Browns of Paul Brown's day, Otto Graham was considered the best quarterback in the league (late 1940s, early 1950s). His completion average over his career was 55.8% and only once did his QB rating surpass 100, with 107 in 1947. In that year, he threw 25 touchdowns. After that, his very best was 20, in 1952. His best year for yards per game was 1952, when he threw for an average of 234 yards and that year, he threw for a total of 2816 yards.

Of course, in those days, the season was 12 games long, which would have affected total yards and number of touchdowns, but not rating, completion average or average yards per game.

It is accurate, I think, to say that today's quarterbacks are taller, stronger and have even better arms. But the defenses are also faster and stronger. There's no reason to assume that quarterback athleticism has improved any faster than the athleticism of players at every other position, and yet today's quarterbacks typically complete more than 60% of their passes. Tom's average is 63.9 and his per game average yardage is 251, a figure Graham never hit. Also, he's had an over 100 rating five times, compared to Graham's one.

Today's game does bear a passing resemblance to the professional football of the pre-superbowl era, but only a passing resemblance--which is why comparisons are difficult, if not impossible.

There's no question that defenses were allowed to contribute more 40-50 years ago and I also agree that players have gotten better on both sides of the ball. I find it more interesting that it seems there has been a significant impact even in the past few years, and certainly over the past decade since Brady and Peyton entered this league.

If a quarterback had a season average NFL passer rating of around 100 a decade ago it was usually truly something special and they set themselves apart from the pack. Today, not so much. I feel it carries less weight today.

 

[dales804]

When I was a kid and a fan of the Cleveland Browns of Paul Brown's day, Otto Graham was considered the best quarterback in the league (late 1940s, early 1950s). His completion average over his career was 55.8% and only once did his QB rating surpass 100, with 107 in 1947. In that year, he threw 25 touchdowns. After that, his very best was 20, in 1952. His best year for yards per game was 1952, when he threw for an average of 234 yards and that year, he threw for a total of 2816 yards.

Of course, in those days, the season was 12 games long, which would have affected total yards and number of touchdowns, but not rating, completion average or average yards per game.

It is accurate, I think, to say that today's quarterbacks are taller, stronger and have even better arms. But the defenses are also faster and stronger. There's no reason to assume that quarterback athleticism has improved any faster than the athleticism of players at every other position, and yet today's quarterbacks typically complete more than 60% of their passes. Tom's average is 63.9 and his per game average yardage is 251, a figure Graham never hit. Also, he's had an over 100 rating five times, compared to Graham's one.

Today's game does bear a passing resemblance to the professional football of the pre-superbowl era, but only a passing resemblance--which is why comparisons are difficult, if not impossible.

Good post. Not going back to the 50s but I remember when TB12 would throw for 3700 yards, 25TDs and a 90+ rating and thinking he had a fantastic year. Now he gets to that point in about week 12. Times have changed, and quickly.

 

[PatriotSeven]

Good post. Not going back to the 50s but I remember when TB12 would throw for 3700 yards, 25TDs and a 90+ rating and thinking he had a fantastic year. Now he gets to that point in about week 12. Times have changes, and quickly.

Yep. Not to mention, I remember when Peyton got his first couple of perfect passer ratings. It was a BIG deal back then and the talk of Sports Center. This year we had RG3 and Alex Smith and probably a few others do it and we barely hear a small blip about it so the public seems to at least somewhat be aware about this as well.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I'd also note that offensive styles have changed dramatically. You don't have to be a great passer to have a really good passer rating when you're throwing short dump offs/screens which then rack up YAC. These types of passes are much more prevalent since the introduction of the West Coast Offense.

 

[Mainefan]

That's a good point.

Tom Brady's yards-per-attempt average, over his career, is 7.5. Graham's was 9.0. In his best year, 2007, Brady's average was 9.4. In Graham's best year, 1953 his average was 10.6. (In that year, by the way, he had 11 touchdowns and 9 interceptions.) Over his nine year career, his record was 57 games won, 13 lost and 1 tie.

 

[PatsFanUpNorth]

The most importants components of the Passer rating is the % completion and the TD-INT ratio.

Take Joe Montana. He was considered the best ever by most accounts based on a new offense philosophy that saw him completed 63% of his pass attempts and a TD-to-INT ratio of 273-139 --> 1.96. In the '80s, that was unheard of...

Montana is currently 11th of the % completion list. The next guys before his era on the list are Ken Stabbler (38th - tied with Ryan Fitzpatrick), Danny White (41st - tied with David Carr) and Ken Anderson (47th - tied with Chad Henne). Montana was way above all of them.

As for the TD-Ratio, Montana at 1.96 is way over his competition. The next guy before his era is Roger Staubach (1.40 - tied with Matt Hasselbeck). Montana again is way in front of them. Today, Montana is still 9th on this list (tied with Tony Romo and Jeff Garcia) but really far from Tom Brady (2.73) or Aaron Rodgers (3.50 - sick!!!).

Here's why:

- Shorter passes in all game plans usually more efficient than rushes (makes the INT % dive)
- Less rushes by the RBs
- More TD passes in the red zone when teams used to rush a lot (spiking the TDs %)
- More agressive play calling
- Rules that facilitates the passing game
- More high tech preparation (video/training/etc.)

 

[thenepatsrule]

Wait till the HGH testing rule is passed and then ppl like Clay Mathews , Ray "axe" Lewis ,T Suggs etc will no longer be a threat to the offense and the numbers will be even higher

 

[lamafist]

The NFL passer rating is a function of Completion %, Yards/attempt, TD/attempt and INT/attempt.

The two biggest drivers behind the rapid rise in passer rating in recent years are cmp% and TD%. INT% has also improved steadily, though much less steeply. Meanwhile, YPA has remained surprisingly static.

This suggests to me that, as other posters have suggested, the recent rate of passer rater inflation has largely been due to changes in NFL schemes and strategies. NFL offenses have by and large moved towards efficiency-based passing games, using higher percentage, lower yield passes to move down the field steadily. TD% are going up dramatically as outside running plays in the redzone are replaced by inside slants, snap hitches and WR screens.

Meanwhile, there don't seem to be the sudden and lasting spikes in these stats to suggest that rules changes have had as much of an effect as conventional wisdom would have it. While there was the expected appreciable bump in passing in 2004, it was pretty much a one year outlier, followed by a regression to the previously improving mean as either defenses adjusted and/or the refs dialed it back a bit.

 

[CheeseMonkeys]

The rule changes have certainly had an affect on the offensive production in the NFL.

I also believe it's a trial and error thing. The NFL has been around for a long time and quarterbacks/ offensive schemes are becoming more innovative. It also helps that recievers are bigger and faster than they were in the old days.

 

[lamafist]

An observation that occurred to me as I looked at passing stats over NFL history:

People talk about the offensive-leaning trends in the post-70's NFL as though they represented a dramatic departure from the leagues overall sensibility and tradition, when, in truth, it's more like the 70's were the anomaly, and that the NFL of the 80's to the present were actually a return to form of sorts.

Offenses, particularly in the passing game, started improving steadily the mid-40's, a trend that continued through both the 50's and 60's, including in the pre-merger AFL, when suddenly, in the early 70's, there was a dramatic 10-year offensive dark ages, before enjoying a renaissance in the 80's. Interestingly, the sudden downturn in NFL offense seems to correspond strongly with the 1970 AFL-NFL merger, though I can't quite figure out why that should be.