I'm Worried About The Vikings

[ivo610]

I don't think the quarterback is everything.

Sure it's a passing league, but look at those stats. Newton - 400 yards, still lost. Chad Henne, 400 yards, didn't even come close to winning. Brees, 400 yards and lost.

And if anyone is still wanting to talk about the Patritots look at how many passing yards they gave up tonight. NOTHING HAS CHANGED!!!!

It is everything. Its just that passing yards arent everything. its being efficient with what you do.

Tom Brady - 121.6 QB rating
Chad Henne - 93.6 Qb rating

Kevin Kolb - 130.0 QB rating
Cam Newton - 110.4 QB rating

Aaron Rodgers - 132.1 QB rating
Drew Brees - 112.5 QB rating

Phillip Rivers - 85.0
Donavan McNabb - 47.9

 

[PackersRS]

Really, Ivo? You're worried? Hasn't history shown us everything we need to know about the Vikings? You honestly think they'll stick to a build through the draft philosophy? Specially now that they've signed Peterson through forever?

Do you have any doubts that soon enough they'll once again, like with Walker and Favre, mortgage their future so they can win a SB with Peterson?

 

[Krymestone]

hey kitten i know you're in philly so i have a random question for you - do you ever go to the continental downtown?

 

[ivo610]

Really, Ivo? You're worried? Hasn't history shown us everything we need to know about the Vikings? You honestly think they'll stick to a build through the draft philosophy? Specially now that they've signed Peterson through forever?

Do you have any doubts that soon enough they'll once again, like with Walker and Favre, mortgage their future so they can win a SB with Peterson?

The more I think about it the less I worry. Of course they will draft luck though. I mean he will be a big draw for LA next season. But then they wont be in the NFC north either. So yeah, no worries.

 

[Croak]

The more I think about it the less I worry. Of course they will draft luck though. I mean he will be a big draw for LA next season. But then they wont be in the NFC north either. So yeah, no worries.

There's a lot of talk that the Colts will be in the market for Luck.

 

[Bogart]

It is everything. Its just that passing yards arent everything. its being efficient with what you do.

Tom Brady - 121.6 QB rating
Chad Henne - 93.6 Qb rating

Kevin Kolb - 130.0 QB rating
Cam Newton - 110.4 QB rating

Aaron Rodgers - 132.1 QB rating
Drew Brees - 112.5 QB rating

Phillip Rivers - 85.0
Donavan McNabb - 47.9

And out of all those quarterbacks throwing high numbers, only 2 of them won.

 

[PackersRS]

The more I think about it the less I worry. Of course they will draft luck though. I mean he will be a big draw for LA next season. But then they wont be in the NFC north either. So yeah, no worries.

Seahawks are ahead of the curve with TJax. The Vikings lost to the Chargers. The Seahawks lost to an Alex Smith-led 49ers...

 

[PackersRS]

And out of all those quarterbacks throwing high numbers, only 2 of them won.

Wow, that's really wrong.

Ivo posted the QB ratings of 4 matches, and in all the matches the guy that had the best QB rating, not yards, won.

If you look at the last SBs disputed, I'm pretty sure in 90% of them the team with the best QB rating won the game. Too lazy to look at that now, though. A hand anyone?

 

[Bogart]

3 of them won, my bad I was wrong, just a little bit off.

Passing yards are not everything, nor is just the quarterback.

In the last 3 Super Bowls, the team that also made the most turnovers won.

 

[Pat4DaPack]

Some of those skilled players with Andrew Luck, that could be scary.

 

[Kitten]

hey kitten i know you're in philly so i have a random question for you - do you ever go to the continental downtown?

Nope, sorry. I actually live in south Jersey now, 5 minutes outside of Philly. I list Philly as my city because to me, it's home. It's where most of my family came from.

 

[ivo610]

3 of them won, my bad I was wrong, just a little bit off.

Passing yards are not everything, nor is just the quarterback.

In the last 3 Super Bowls, the team that also made the most turnovers won.

Wait who didnt win with the better rating? Did you see a different game than me?

 

[ivo610]

Never said passing yards were that important. IT IS about passing efficiency though. Your QB plays better than the other one? very high probability your team will win. This league is about passing offense and passing defense. Everything else doesnt come close.

 

[TJV]

I'm not worried about the Vikings. I have confidence in their consistency. The one year they won the NFL Championship (the last one) the heavily favored Vikings lost to the Chiefs by 16 points in Super Bowl IV. So they've never won it all and I have confidence they'll find a way to repeat that again and again.

- - - - - -
I was listening to Mike & Mike this morning and they talked briefly about ESPN's new QBR – another statistical formula designed to rate the play of QBs. One of 'em mentioned it attempts to fix some of the flaws with QB rating, for example by reducing the impact of "padding stats" once the game is decided. They also mentioned it looks like a better indicator of success than QB rating for week one. That's obviously an extremely small sample and I haven't spent two minutes looking at the composition of QBR or how it differs from QB rating. BTW, I know the reputation of ESPN here and among fans generally and I mostly share that opinion. But that won't cause me to dismiss QBR out of hand because of its source. Phrases like "a stopped clock is right twice a day" come to mind. And you know, once out of 100 times when you hear, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" it's actually true.

Here are the top 8 QBRs from week 1:

1. 91.2 Ryan Fitzpatrick
2. 91.1 Aaron Rodgers
3. 88.6 Tom Brady
4. 87.4 Mathew Stafford
5. 79.6 Joe Flacco
6. 75.7 Cam Newton
7. 75.0 Rex Grossman
8. 71.6 Drew Brees

Here’s the list of 33 QBs from week one who qualified to be rated.

 

[ivo610]

I'm not worried about the Vikings. I have confidence in their consistency. The one year they won the NFL Championship (the last one) the heavily favored Vikings lost to the Chiefs by 16 points in Super Bowl IV. So they've never won it all and I have confidence they'll find a way to repeat that again and again.

- - - - - -
I was listening to Mike & Mike this morning and they talked briefly about ESPN's new QBR – another statistical formula designed to rate the play of QBs. One of 'em mentioned it attempts to fix some of the flaws with QB rating, for example by reducing the impact of "padding stats" once the game is decided. They also mentioned it looks like a better indicator of success than QB rating for week one. That's obviously an extremely small sample and I haven't spent two minutes looking at the composition of QBR or how it differs from QB rating. BTW, I know the reputation of ESPN here and among fans generally and I mostly share that opinion. But that won't cause me to dismiss QBR out of hand because of its source. Phrases like "a stopped clock is right twice a day" come to mind. And you know, once out of 100 times when you hear, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" it's actually true.

Here are the top 8 QBRs from week 1:

1. 91.2 Ryan Fitzpatrick
2. 91.1 Aaron Rodgers
3. 88.6 Tom Brady
4. 87.4 Mathew Stafford
5. 79.6 Joe Flacco
6. 75.7 Cam Newton
7. 75.0 Rex Grossman
8. 71.6 Drew Brees

Here’s the list of 33 QBs from week one who qualified to be rated.

Their QBR is as garbage as everything else they put out. And this is coming from some guy who has some issues with the QB rating system (should be uncapped, unfair to compare QBs from different generations).

 

[ivo610]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6834507/nfl-peyton-manning-top-two-qbr-seasons

For those looking to pick away at this thing.

 

[Krymestone]

Nope, sorry. I actually live in south Jersey now, 5 minutes outside of Philly. I list Philly as my city because to me, it's home. It's where most of my family came from.

go there sometime. the food and atmosphere's good.

half my family's from philly and i was born there. tony luke's ftw.

 

[Kitten]

go there sometime. the food and atmosphere's good.

half my family's from philly and i was born there. tony luke's ftw.

Sweet, another Philly cat on here! We'll give that place a go next time we are in Philly!

 

[Kitten]

I'm not the biggest fan of the QBR or any rating system for that matter. I find them to be subjective, inconsistent and inaccurate. Subjective because if you gave 5 "experts" the same parameters, you'd land up with 5 different results; inconsistent because results will vary based on subjectivity and inaccurate based on both inconsistency and subjectivity. Basically, I think most of these ratings are bogus and I don't put much into them.

Here are the top 8 QBRs from week 1:

1. 91.2 Ryan Fitzpatrick
2. 91.1 Aaron Rodgers
3. 88.6 Tom Brady
4. 87.4 Mathew Stafford
5. 79.6 Joe Flacco
6. 75.7 Cam Newton
7. 75.0 Rex Grossman
8. 71.6 Drew Brees

Here’s the list of 33 QBs from week one who qualified to be rated.

But this is an interesting list for week 1. There are names on there that we may not of expected to see. Fitzpatrick, Stafford, Flacco, Newton, and Grossman. If these guys can stay consistent throughout the season, we may have a NFL season that none of us saw coming. That is if you put any faith in QBR and how far you will project things based on week one. Interesting list nonetheless.

 

[Raptorman]

Their QBR is as garbage as everything else they put out. And this is coming from some guy who has some issues with the QB rating system (should be uncapped, unfair to compare QBs from different generations).

Why is it garbage? I want to hear your reasoning. It values the QB passes more efficiently than just yardage and TD's. It shows that a pass like Rodgers made between two defenders for a TD has more value than the 5 yard pass Brady made that Welker ran the other 94 yards in for a TD. Brady gets credit for a 99 yard TD pass but Rodgers was a more difficult pass.

So tell us what's wrong with it.

 

[ivo610]

Why is it garbage? I want to hear your reasoning. It values the QB passes more efficiently than just yardage and TD's. It shows that a pass like Rodgers made between two defenders for a TD has more value than the 5 yard pass Brady made that Welker ran the other 94 yards in for a TD. Brady gets credit for a 99 yard TD pass but Rodgers was a more difficult pass.

So tell us what's wrong with it.

LOL sensitive over comments about the great espn?

ok, I listed their "list" so people could think for themselves and pick it apart, but ill do that for you.

ESPN states "The Total Quarterback Rating is a statistical measure that incorporates the contexts and details of throws and what they mean for wins."

Interesting.... because when I look at the list they have Dan Orlovsky in 2008 having a higher ranking than Tony Romo, Ben Roethlisburger, Brett Favre, and Joe Flacco. Weird thing is, I dont remember the lions winning a single game that year. Not 1. but hey this is meant to factor in winning right?

I bet Steeler fans during the SB when it got close against the Cardinals were saying "maaaan if we only had Dan Orlovsky behind center we would have a better shot at winning this thing."

 

[Croak]

Sweet, another Philly cat on here! We'll give that place a go next time we are in Philly!

Personally, I like the cheesesteaks at Little Pete's near Rittenhouse square. If I want a big meal, I go to Bookbinders. (I know this way off topic, but what the heck.)

 

[cheesehurdler]

The algorithms for the QB rating are complex, but thankfully not enough for a math buff to get confused over. There are 4 variables, A,B,C, and D, based on the passer's stats, and the QB rating is computed from that.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Yeah, I know, math and all that good stuff, but my point is this: There is a definitive formula for computing the passer rating, and it's constructed from about 6 algorithms. ESPN's Total QBR is claimed (by ESPN, of course) to have over 60,000 algorithms to accurately measure the "intangibles" of an NFL quarterback. None of these supposed algorithms are known by anybody except the ESPN staff, so we don't even know how it works or if it's accurate or not. Or, maybe there is no formula, possibly a council of ESPN NFL judges ordered to give a number from 0 to 100 of every QB in the league. Who knows?

 

[ivo610]

one of the biggest issues with the QB rating is that it is capped. Not all "perfect games" (158.3) are equal. ESPN did nothing to address this.

Has anyone that doesnt get a check from ESPN taken this thing seriously?

PFF rankings> anything from ESPN

 

[PackersRS]

The problem with QBR and any other rating system is that it cannot calculate how many times Tom Brady changed the play or found the mismatch before the defense could adjust, play that in almost any other QB's hand would have resulted in failure.

However, the law of averages have a play in it. While this week Fitzpatrick had a better rating than Brady despite Brady playing better than Fitzpatrick, in their career average, the rating is not even close.

What those rating systems allow you to do is to know in a fairly accurate measure how the QB played. If a QB posts 130 QB rating there's no way he played a bad game. It doesn't necessarily means he played better than his opponent, who had a 120 QB rating, though.

Those systems have a margin of error, if you will, that decreases with the extension of the sample size.

I tend to look at those QB rating systems as measuring how much water you have in a cup, without any ruler. You can tell if it's more than half, less than half, etc... You can't tell exactly how many lts are in there.