Is the NFL close to starting QB saturation?

[Ivan]

That's because you're a fan of one of these teams. Cleveland fans would be very happy with lots of others.

Good point

 

[Ring 6]

And threw 18 int and went 5-11

That doesn't change the fact that the dude said bortles never sniffed stats that wee significantly lower than what he actually put up.

 

[Simpelton]

Also for teams used to mortal quarterbacks, 35-18 isn't a bad TD-INT ratio, it's almost exactly 2-1. And while quarterbacks play a big role in wins and losses, putting a team's W-L squarely on the QB with no qualifications is complete balderdash.

 

[rochrist]

Also for teams used to mortal quarterbacks, 35-18 isn't a bad TD-INT ratio, it's almost exactly 2-1. And while quarterbacks play a big role in wins and losses, putting a team's W-L squarely on the QB with no qualifications is complete balderdash.

If you can't throw 35 TDs without throwing 18 picks, you should probably throw less. 18 interceptions is a lot of turnovers to recover from in a season and will actually be a big contributor to that W-L.

 

[Nehalem]

If you can't throw 35 TDs without throwing 18 picks, you should probably throw less. 18 interceptions is a lot of turnovers to recover from in a season and will actually be a big contributor to that W-L.

Pretty sure Brady went 28-14 in td-ints and the Pats went 14-2 and won a Super Bowl

 

[Bradyking12]

Pretty sure Brady went 28-14 in td-ints and the Pats went 14-2 and won a Super Bowl

Brady didn't throw 14 picks

 

[Ring 6]

If you can't throw 35 TDs without throwing 18 picks, you should probably throw less. 18 interceptions is a lot of turnovers to recover from in a season and will actually be a big contributor to that W-L.

???
Not scoring TDs makes you not have interceptions? Don't see that one.

 

[Ring 6]

Brady didn't throw 14 picks

2004

 

[Ring 6]

Here is the thing with trying to use stats to judge football players. You can't.

Bortles 2015 vs Brady 2004

Bortles had 4428 yards Brady had 3692

Bortles had 35 TDs Brady had 28

Bortles had 18 ints Brady had 14 but Bortles threw many more passes, and both had 3.0% int rates.

Brady had a slightly higher completion percent, 60.8 to 58.6

QB rating 92.6 to 88.2, very close.


Bortles team allowed 448 points.
Brady's team allowed 260

Brady was 14-2
Bortles was 5-11

Seems statistically very close. You could put each of 201-2006 brady into those number comparison and it would look similar.

What isn't taken into account:

Are bortles numbers increased because his d sucked and he was playing from behind.

Are bortles numbers increased because he played poorly leading to trailing a lot and getting garbahe time points?

Are bortles numbers increased by carrying his team to comebacks and close games that his crappy defense blew.

what were game situations? Would Brady have put up better or worse stats without Dillon? Would bortles have done better with any kind of running game (sure he would have but would that show up statistically or reduce the throws, and therefore yards and TDs?) How much does the quality of receivers have to do with it?

Bortles OL sucked. Clearly that made his job harder but did the pressure and sacks and poor run blocking out him in a position to throw more, probably trailing and pad his stats?
Each of these factors could be argued in support of either player being better statistically.

You just can't judge football players with stats.

 

[rochrist]

???
Not scoring TDs makes you not have interceptions? Don't see that one.

I'm not saying don't score TDs, I'm saying if you're throwing 18 picks, you're taking chances that you shouldn't be taking if you want to win.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm not saying don't score TDs, I'm saying if you're throwing 18 picks, you're taking chances that you shouldn't be taking if you want to win.

When your defense allows 484 points you don't have much choice.
Again his int % was exactly the same as Tom Brady's in 2004.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Stafford is 5-46 against winning teams


Mariota is still underrated and a lot closer to Carr than most think.

I rewatched Oakland's games and they have a very calculated, conservative offense. And Carr also has the luxury of playing behind a great oline and 2 great WR'S. Oakland's passing efficiency wasn't that far off from KC.


Mariota, very quietly, had a very good year and he's gunna really break out these next 2 years. Tennessee only had 3 WR sets 42% of the time last year. That # will change with all the new weapons he has.

 

[Ring 6]

Stafford is 5-46 against winning teams


Mariota is still underrated and a lot closer to Carr than most think.

I rewatched Oakland's games and they have a very calculated, conservative offense. And Carr also has the luxury of playing behind a great oline and 2 great WR'S. Oakland's passing efficiency wasn't that far off from KC.
View attachment 17540

Mariota, very quietly, had a very good year and he's gunna really break out these next 2 years. Tennessee only had 3 WR sets 42% of the time last year. That # will change with all the new weapons he has.

You can't just make those kind of assumptions though. If and when Mariotta is asked to run a more open and aggressive offense he has to become a different QB than the one who ran a conservative one.

And your take on the raiders and chiefs is off the mark imo.

 

[rochrist]

When your defense allows 484 points you don't have much choice.
Again his int % was exactly the same as Tom Brady's in 2004.

Different rules in 2004. And how many of those 484 points were due to throwing 18 picks.

Additionally, I'd say that int % isn't as important as absolute magnitude. Also, you might note that Brady has NEVER thrown more than 14 in a season.

 

[Ring 6]

Different rules in 2004. And how many of those 484 points were due to throwing 18 picks.

Additionally, I'd say that int % isn't as important as absolute magnitude. Also, you might note that Brady has NEVER thrown more than 14 in a season.

we aren't comparing Brady to bortles. Brady is an example to give context.

The argument wasn't bortles is brady. The argument was originally bortles never sniffed mariottas numbers when in fact he destroyed them.
Then it became ints, which were at the same rate as a guy who led a team to 14-2.

Not sure why you think throwing 3% of 600 passes is different than 3% of 450 and (remember in the guy who said you can't use stats to judge football players ) a lot of those picks bortles threw were because he had to play aggressively because he was always behind.

If the 04 pats allowed 260 based on 14 picks I don't think you can call 484 the result of 18 picks.

I think it's pretty clear that bortles was a second year QB in a horrible team with little talent and QB play probably turned a 2 win team into a 5 win team.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

You can't just make those kind of assumptions though. If and when Mariotta is asked to run a more open and aggressive offense he has to become a different QB than the one who ran a conservative one.

And your take on the raiders and chiefs is off the mark imo.

It's not my take. There stats I'm passing along, not my opinion.



I'm not saying it's the gospel or anything. Just that the perception that's out there about Carr is wrong.

Go watch Oakland's games. Check downs on any pressure, calculated strikes downfield behind a great oline. He makes the O work for sure but again the perception out there isn't reality.

Regarding Marcus only Marino posted a higher ANY/Y at a younger age. ANY/Y is basically a more accurate QB rating. And his red zone stats are absolutely incredible.

Also Oakland was 8-1 last year in single score games last year. All teams regress save for a few Colts teams.

That said I think Lynch and their offensive style are a perfect match.

 

[rochrist]

we aren't comparing Brady to bortles. Brady is an example to give context.

The argument wasn't bortles is brady. The argument was originally bortles never sniffed mariottas numbers when in fact he destroyed them.
Then it became ints, which were at the same rate as a guy who led a team to 14-2.

Not sure why you think throwing 3% of 600 passes is different than 3% of 450 and (remember in the guy who said you can't use stats to judge football players ) a lot of those picks bortles threw were because he had to play aggressively because he was always behind.

If the 04 pats allowed 260 based on 14 picks I don't think you can call 484 the result of 18 picks.

I think it's pretty clear that bortles was a second year QB in a horrible team with little talent and QB play probably turned a 2 win team into a 5 win team.

Allright, I'm not in on the Bortles thing. But as to the int percentage, to take the argument to extreme lengths to show the point, %3 of 1000 passes would be 30 ints. 3% of 2000 passes would be 60. The point is at some point, the percentage takes a back seat to the sheer number.

 

[Ring 6]

Allright, I'm not in on the Bortles thing. But as to the int percentage, to take the argument to extreme lengths to show the point, %3 of 1000 passes would be 30 ints. 3% of 2000 passes would be 60. The point is at some point, the percentage takes a back seat to the sheer number.

That's what a percentage is.
If you ask a QB to throw 20 times a game and he throws 10 ints a season but ask another to throw 30 times a game and he throws 15 that isn't worse. Actually it's better.

 

[Ring 6]

It's not my take. There stats I'm passing along, not my opinion.

View attachment 17541

Well you are cherry picking stats to imply they are meaningful to the discussion.

Raiders scored 46 offensive TDs chiefs scored 34. That implodes the comparison you are making.

I'm not saying it's the gospel or anything. Just that the perception that's out there about Carr is wrong.

Go watch Oakland's games. Check downs on any pressure, calculated strikes downfield behind a great oline. He makes the O work for sure but again the perception out there isn't reality.

I've watched a ton of raider games. What are you looking for? You want him to not check down and make a play when there is pressure? You want him to not choose the right times to take a shot downfield. It sounds like you think good QB decision making is a negative.

Regarding Marcus only Marino posted a higher ANY/Y at a younger age. ANY/Y is basically a more accurate QB rating. And his red zone stats are absolutely incredible.

Not sure how an obsire formula limited to 22 years or younger when few QBs even play at 22 means wjat you think it does.

Also Oakland was 8-1 last year in single score games last year. All teams regress save for a few Colts teams.

Huh? You are taking about players especially Carr making plays on a football field not the odds of flipping a coin. To say making exceptional clutch plays is a negative because that means they have to not make plays so the revert to the mean makes no sense.

That said I think Lynch and their offensive style are a perfect match.

I expect lynch to be done by week 9 either by injury or ineffectiveness. By far the most overrate move of the off season. He has little left in the tank.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Well you are cherry picking stats to imply they are meaningful to the discussion.

Raiders scored 46 offensive TDs chiefs scored 34. That implodes the comparison you are making.

I've watched a ton of raider games. What are you looking for? You want him to not check down and make a play when there is pressure? You want him to not choose the right times to take a shot downfield. It sounds like you think good QB decision making is a negative.


Not sure how an obsire formula limited to 22 years or younger when few QBs even play at 22 means wjat you think it does.


Huh? You are taking about players especially Carr making plays on a football field not the odds of flipping a coin. To say making exceptional clutch plays is a negative because that means they have to not make plays so the revert to the mean makes no sense.


I expect lynch to be done by week 9 either by injury or ineffectiveness. By far the most overrate move of the off season. He has little left in the tank.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]


Andy lol.

Andy I'm simply adding some context to the Carr discussion. I think he's a very good QB.

And I absolutely think Mariota is as good if not better. Esp when you look at everything (Experience in the league, team their surrounded with, their overall impact etc)

And again I'm just pointing out out that Oakland is due to regress if you believe in this trend save the Colts

2015 Denver Broncos (9-3 in close games, 12-4 record to 9-7 in 2016)

2015 Carolina Panthers (6-1 in close games, 15-1 record to 8-8 in 2016)

2014 Green Bay Packers (5-0 in close games, 12-4 record to 10-6 in 2015)

2014 Detroit Lions (6-1 in close games, 11-5 record to 7-9 in 2015)

2012 Houston Texans (5-0 in close games, 12-4 record to 2-14 in 2013)

2012 Atlanta Falcons (7-2 in close games, 13-3 record to 4-12 in 2013)

2011 Oakland Raiders (7-2 in close games, 8-8 record to 4-12 in 2012)

2010 Atlanta Falcons (7-2 in close games, 13-3 record to 10-6 in 2011)

2009 San Diego Chargers (6-1 in close games, 13-3 record to 9-7 in 2010)

2009 Indianapolis Colts (7-0 in close games, 14-2 record to 10-6 in 2010)

2008 Miami Dolphins (7-2 in close games, 11-5 record to 7-9 in 2009)


As far as Lynch is concerned no one knows exactly how hes feeling today. Which is all that matters.

Seattles olines were borderline awful at times and average most.

Oakland has a great line and their running style suits him fine. And it's not like they don't have plenty of other weapons.