The models are not always perfect and can be very deceiving. For example, Brees and Mannings QBR and stats are deceiving because they have mostly played in domes at least half the season. When a QB has to play in a snow storm with high wind gusts, that QB is going to have a crap stat line and league bottom QBR for that game. The eye test is important and context is too(which is not taken into account in the QBR model).
We just have to look at Brady in 2019, who looked clearly in the decline with no weapons, to Brady in 2020 with weapons looks close to peak Brady.
Ultimately the best rating for a QB is win/loss, 4th quarter comebacks, playoff appearances, and SB.
Brady has made the playoffs 18 of 19 years as the starting QB and SB 9 possibly 10 in those appearances.
You are jumping into a discussion like
@XLIX did. My point was that the QB ratings are math models that are more credible than one individual's observation. We can get emotionally involved in the game and think someone looked better than they actually were (or looked worse than they actually were). Of course the math models are not perfect, but are a good double check on what we saw with our eyes.
In the case of Cam this year I almost always thought he looked worse than his QB ratings indicated. When I see a guy who bounces footballs or has no touch it looks ugly to me, but Cam did OK some games if you look at the final QB rating. My point is that if you look at the QB ratings after the game it helps calibrate your impression. In the case of Heinicke the rating says we was below average. 59% completion, 1 TD, 1 INT, 7 YPA is not good.
@PatsWSB47 says he watched the game and saw Heinicke's performance as great and all the sports writers agree with him. I think the QB rating system is helpful because I thought Heinicke looked OK, but the numbers do not back that up. He throws a pick in Q1 and we tend to forget about Q1 picks, for instance, so we can have a more favorable impression than the numbers.
@XLIX wants to argue about how good or bad the ratings are, just like you, so you should talk to him. I could not care less. My point was that "seeing" and saying Heinicke was great and we should bring him into camp is not backed up by the stats or QB ratings. And I would take the QB ratings over someone's subjective opinion.
Some people have a hard time saying the guy looked good but the QB rating is below average, so the guy might not be as good as I thought. Since the Pats released him from our practice squad, I believe the Pat's coaches evaluation and the QB rating.
Heinicke is a great story, probably a nice guy, and I think everything indicates a below average QB, but some PatsFans posters' "eyes" see differently. Given that discrepancy I chose to believe the coaches and the QB rating. You can think differently. You can get upset. Do whatever you want, just don't think I was arguing that math models are perfect or I have any interest in debating algorithms.
