The rule of 26-27-60 for finding a reliable QB in the draft

[Patspsycho]

It Is What It Is » The Rule of 26-27-60, and trying to apply it to this year’s quarterback class

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I've always thought of 26-27-60 as a formula made up by somebody with too much off-season time on his hands.

But, I have it from more reliable sources that, if you click your heels together three times while repeating "There's no place like Canton" each time, you magically are transported to the sixth round where Auntie Em tells you to draft the first QB remaining, in alphabetical order.

 

[Calciumee]

I've always thought of 26-27-60 as a formula made up by somebody with too much off-season time on his hands.

But, I have it from more reliable sources that, if you click your heels together three times while repeating "There's no place like Canton" each time, you magically are transported to the sixth round where Auntie Em tells you to draft the first QB remaining, in alphabetical order.

He was the first QB alphabetically his combine number was 1!

 

[PatsFanSince74]

He was the first QB alphabetically his combine number was 1!

There! My source was right!

 

[Patspsycho]

I've always thought of 26-27-60 as a formula made up by somebody with too much off-season time on his hands.

But, I have it from more reliable sources that, if you click your heels together three times while repeating "There's no place like Canton" each time, you magically are transported to the sixth round where Auntie Em tells you to draft the first QB remaining, in alphabetical order.

That'd be true except if you take a look at the list of QB's who qualify and those who don't. I'd say that it has more hits than misses.

It'd be interesting to see what happens with Cam Newton who only has 1 out of those 3 attributes.

 

[jah]

I always get Gabbert and Mallett confused, but after doing some research on Gabbert, I think he has he best chance of being successful in the league.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

>>>There are several candidates who just miss the cut in one of the categories: Ryan Mallett (26-29-58 percent) has the requisite Wonderlic score and college starts, but falls short when it comes to completion percentage. Nevada’s Colin Kapernick (40-51-58 percent) just misses when it comes to accuracy as well.<<<<<

The completion percentage could also be a reflection on the quality of his receivers. If they catch 1 more pass out of 50 , it ups his percentage to 60%...

Anybody who watched any Arkansas' games last year knows that they dropped many a perfectly or well thrown pass by Mallett.....and it's KaEpernick, not Kapernick

 

[RayClay]

So, smarter, more successful and more experienced has an edge? Who would have guessed?

Leaves out the two most successful QBs of the era too.

 

[Patspsycho]

So, smarter, more successful and more experienced has an edge? Who would have guessed?

Leaves out the two most successful QBs of the era too.

Brady actually has all those three attributes- just didn't have the requisite number of starts (only 25 in college).

 

[RayClay]

Brady actually has all those three attributes- just didn't have the requisite number of starts (only 25 in college).

I understand, but that's why I'd call that an observation rather than a rule. It's logical that qbs with those attributes would be more successful, other things equal.

Maybe rule of thumb, which is not quite the same thing.

Something to measure prospects against.

Marino is probably the most successful dumbbell, other than rings (15 wonderlick) while Rottenburger sure acts stupid, but is big and mobile which seems to make up for it.

I guess Jim Kelly and Bradshaw hit 15 too, so there's an offset for big strong/dumb.

 

[randomk1]

The 26-27 are probably good starting points but I find the 60% completion percentage interesting. Can you really measure a QB's accuracy based on his completion percentage? There are so many variables i kind of think that's bull****.There's so much more to completing passes than just accuracy.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

That'd be true except if you take a look at the list of QB's who qualify and those who don't. I'd say that it has more hits than misses.

It'd be interesting to see what happens with Cam Newton who only has 1 out of those 3 attributes.

If you define "hits" broadly, then you are right, as is the case in the 11 names cited (the Brees to Stafford list). Those guys are all capable of starting for an NFL team, but only three of the eleven have produced a championship, one time each, and they have only appeared in four SB's combined.

Brady, Favre, McNabb and Roethlisberger, who fail the test, have appeared in 10 SB's and won six.

If you look at the test, it says that a guy started for all of two seasons or all/much of three college seasons (typical college schedule is 12 games, but some play 13 or 14 with conference and BCS post season games). It says that he completed a lot of passes (60% when the average for an SB era HOF QB is 57.1%). It says that he scored above average on the Wonderlic Test.

(The Rule assumes that the QB played in a competitive conference, where holding the job for two or three years and completing a bunch of passes are meaningful accomplishments.)

The problem with it is that it depends on hindsight. There are too many significant exceptions to the rule to make it a "baseline" indicator in real time and it is too unable to predict who will truly excel to make it a "topline" indicator.

I guess it could give you pause if you're thinking of giving big bucks to a guy who flunked it, but it could also lead you to overlook a Brady or a Favre. So, of what real use is it, other than in hindsight?

 

[randomk1]

Brett Favre don't need no Wonderlic or whatever ya'll call it...he throws on his gut instinct.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I've always thought of 26-27-60 as a formula made up by somebody with too much off-season time on his hands.

But, I have it from more reliable sources that, if you click your heels together three times while repeating "There's no place like Canton" each time, you magically are transported to the sixth round where Auntie Em tells you to draft the first QB remaining, in alphabetical order.

That makes more sense than a 6th-rounder nobody wanted going to the HOF

I think people get too caught up in the numbers without understanding what they are trying to communicate. It isn't meant to reduce scouting to a math problem. But a kid who does well in an intelligence test, starts a lot of games (27 implies at least 2 full seasons as a starter), and the ability to complete a high percent of passes is probably a good QB prospect.

The 26-27 are probably good starting points but I find the 60% completion percentage interesting. Can you really measure a QB's accuracy based on his completion percentage? There are so many variables i kind of think that's bull****.There's so much more to completing passes than just accuracy.

Agreed, there are a ton of variables to consider, especially type of offense and talent level around the QB. 60% isn't a guarantee the kid is good so much as it may be a warning sign if he can't hit that. But if a kid isn't really close to 60%, he probably isn't playing much either.

Looking at the NFL's top 10 passers last season, all of them hit 60% or better in their college careers in multiple seasons. Then again, so have many busts like Brian Brohm and JaMarcus Russell. So it's not really a significant indicator like you mentioned. But I would be very concerned if a prospect couldn't get close to that. Jake Locker, I'm looking at you.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I'd be interested in knowing what the recent Pats QBs ratings were, Brady aside.

Obviously Cassel had ?,0,? as his rating; and Hoyer had ?,14,59. It is rumored that both Cassel and Hoyer are cerebral, but I don't know what their Wonderlic scores were.

Does anyone know?

 

[Patspsycho]

If you define "hits" broadly, then you are right, as is the case in the 11 names cited (the Brees to Stafford list). Those guys are all capable of starting for an NFL team, but only three of the eleven have produced a championship, one time each, and they have only appeared in four SB's combined.

Brady, Favre, McNabb and Roethlisberger, who fail the test, have appeared in 10 SB's and won six.

If you look at the test, it says that a guy started for all of two seasons or all/much of three college seasons (typical college schedule is 12 games, but some play 13 or 14 with conference and BCS post season games). It says that he completed a lot of passes (60% when the average for an SB era HOF QB is 57.1%). It says that he scored above average on the Wonderlic Test.

(The Rule assumes that the QB played in a competitive conference, where holding the job for two or three years and completing a bunch of passes are meaningful accomplishments.)

The problem with it is that it depends on hindsight. There are too many significant exceptions to the rule to make it a "baseline" indicator in real time and it is too unable to predict who will truly excel to make it a "topline" indicator.

I guess it could give you pause if you're thinking of giving big bucks to a guy who flunked it, but it could also lead you to overlook a Brady or a Favre. So, of what real use is it, other than in hindsight?

That's more or less what I think of it- it's just something interesting to discuss. Naturally there's no absolute models for determining what pick will be boom or bust.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Assuming the Pats go QB shopping, post third round, it would seem that Kaepernik and Gregory would be on their list. Gregory definitedly is a Brian Sipe type, but Kaepernik could eventually develop inotto a starter with all the credentials that you seek in a starter.