Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   ESPN calls NFL passer rating "the most useless stat in football" while using their own made-up, jabberwockian QBR to prove that Andrew Luck is a better quarterback than RG3   (espn.go.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid, QBR, Andrew Luck, passer rating, ESPN, NFL, Michael Wilbon, NFL passer rating, Bruce Arians  
•       •       •

1679 clicks; posted to Sports » on 26 Oct 2012 at 2:27 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



202 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-10-26 10:36:11 AM  
Warning to everyone else: Rick Reily.
 
2012-10-26 10:38:17 AM  
So basically it comes down the Luck being on the shiattier team.
 
2012-10-26 10:56:43 AM  
RGIII won't be playing in the NFL in a few years if he continues to play like he's in college.
 
2012-10-26 11:18:24 AM  
Well, the QB rating isn't nearly as informative as the patented Delhomme Rating.
 
2012-10-26 11:32:30 AM  
There is no way that Washington would rather have Andrew Luck.
 
2012-10-26 11:55:10 AM  

IAmRight: Warning to everyone else: Rick Reily.


Thank you. No clicking for me.
 
2012-10-26 12:01:35 PM  
Rick Reily... nothing like paying a guy $3 million for hard-hitting pieces like "Why doesn't Jay Cutler smile?"
 
2012-10-26 12:09:24 PM  

Ricardo Klement: There is no way that Washington would rather have Andrew Luck.



Today, agreed.  But the dude is playing like he wants to have a 3-year career.  He's freaking amazing, and the most exciting player in football today.  But he has to be better coached and a lot more careful.
 
2012-10-26 12:13:00 PM  
God these farking assholes just won't stop pushing their pet proprietary stat. Whatever the flaws of passer rating, "QBR" is 10 times worse, not to mention nobody actually knows how it's calculated. I cringe every time they pull that shiat up on SportsCenter, in between their reading of athletes' Twitter postings. 

Oh and also found this
Link
ESPN analysts Trent Dilfer, Jon Gruden and Ron Jaworski were also involved in setting up the new rating system. 
Sound great.
 
2012-10-26 12:20:35 PM  
If Luck came out of college last year, people would have been crowing about how Cam Newton is better than Luck. And look at Cam now.

RGIII appears to be very talented, but quit crowning him as God of Quarterbacks already. He has played less than half a season.
 
2012-10-26 12:28:35 PM  

Aarontology: So basically it comes down the Luck being on the shiattier team.


How many Reggie Waynes does Griffin have?

How many Reggie Waynes does Andrew Luck have?
 
2012-10-26 01:13:48 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: I cringe every time they pull that shiat up on SportsCenter, in between their reading of athletes' Twitter postings.


It's actually apparently moved on to reading Twitter posts of reporters who interviewed people about others' Twitter postings (and take it way too seriously).

/Lions' Dominic Raiola is apparently really pissed that Richard Sherman changed his Twitter name to Optimus Prime this week since they're taking on Megatron and the Lions
 
2012-10-26 01:16:44 PM  

downstairs: Ricardo Klement: There is no way that Washington would rather have Andrew Luck.


Today, agreed.  But the dude is playing like he wants to have a 3-year career.  He's freaking amazing, and the most exciting player in football today.  But he has to be better coached and a lot more careful.


Part of the problem is that the O-line sucks and has for decades. That's why even Luck would be dead in a few years. Fewer than Griffen, who can at least run for his life from a few sacks a game.
 
2012-10-26 01:38:22 PM  
Passes which travel 11 or more yards in the air:

Andrew Luck: 41-86 (47.7%) 2 TD 6 INT
Robert Griffin: 25-42 (59.5%) 2 TD 0 INT

So yeah...Griffin throws deep less often than Luck. He also throws deep much better than Luck.
 
2012-10-26 01:53:08 PM  

Harv72b: So yeah...Griffin throws deep less often than Luck. He also throws deep much better than Luck.


Maybe. But the Redskins have a good rushing attack, which makes for more open WRs deep.

/not saying Luck is better
//just not saying RGIII far exceeding his performance
///remember, the Colts already have more wins than they did last year and the Redskins started last year 3-0 with Rex Grossman
////I would say RGIII has been better so far, but this opinion is probably affected by the hype
 
2012-10-26 01:59:46 PM  

IAmRight: Maybe. But the Redskins have a good rushing attack, which makes for more open WRs deep.


A significant part of that is Griffin himself, though. ;)

Way too early to say one is better than the other, but Griffin has performed better thus far.
 
2012-10-26 02:07:42 PM  
What's most important is that we've all come to the necessary conclusions after seven games.
 
2012-10-26 02:15:55 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: RGIII appears to be very talented, but quit crowning him as God of Quarterbacks already. He has played less than half a season.


So has Luck.
 
2012-10-26 02:37:18 PM  

Harv72b: A significant part of that is Griffin himself, though. ;)


Potentially. Luck is a good runner himself, however - if he were black then people would talk about his running and effectiveness. Just like people would talk more about Griffin's passing if he were white.

Okay, so I was checking out the records...here's a fun fact, since I know you like pointless trivia - the Redskins are in last place...and they're the only team in their division that is outscoring their opponents on the season. Oh...it's because ESPN has eliminated the Giants and has Dallas twice. Never mind.

/hopefully you check it out before it gets fixed, I'm too lazy to screenshot
 
2012-10-26 02:38:17 PM  
Well, it's refreshing that there's one person who isn't on the RG3 bandwagon. Matthew Berry practically fellated the guy in his love/hate fantasy column a few days ago.
 
2012-10-26 02:38:55 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: AdolfOliverPanties: RGIII appears to be very talented, but quit crowning him as God of Quarterbacks already. He has played less than half a season.

So has Luck.


The hype about RGIII seems pretty close to the hype for Newton last year.
 
2012-10-26 02:39:05 PM  
He's black in the NFL.

Let me pick a black guy who won a super bowl.

Remember that guy?

Ya he played for the Redskins.

And nobody gave a shiat...except that he was black in the NFL.
 
2012-10-26 02:39:29 PM  
Okay, so I clicked it from the preview screen and it was already fixed. Just so you know I wasn't making it up.

i46.tinypic.com
 
2012-10-26 02:39:36 PM  

kronicfeld: Aarontology: So basically it comes down the Luck being on the shiattier team.

How many Reggie Waynes does Griffin have?

How many Reggie Waynes does Andrew Luck have?


Yeah I don't think either is on a quantifiable worse team. Colts are a lot of untested players with left overs from the manning era, and the redskins are a bunch of rookies at key positions and ailing defense. Really hard to argue which one is worse, but now both teams can build around their draft pick. I think RG3 will play conservatively when his team gets somewhat of a defense/gains passer experience.
 
2012-10-26 02:39:58 PM  

IAmRight: the Redskins are in last place...and they're the only team in their division that is outscoring their opponents on the season


The Giants are up almost 70 points on their opponents on the year.
 
2012-10-26 02:40:15 PM  
Passer rating has a very strong correlation with winning. I don't see how it's the most useless stat in football. If anything passing yards is - there's a very weak correlation, if any, with the number of passing yards and winning.
 
2012-10-26 02:40:47 PM  

GAT_00: The Giants are up almost 70 points on their opponents on the year.


Read the rest of the post before responding.
 
2012-10-26 02:45:32 PM  
racist
 
2012-10-26 02:47:00 PM  
No discussion of Stephen A saying nubian on live TV? Okay.
 
2012-10-26 02:49:50 PM  

SkittlesAreYum: Passer rating has a very strong correlation with winning. I don't see how it's the most useless stat in football. If anything passing yards is - there's a very weak correlation, if any, with the number of passing yards and winning.


Passer rating tells who won the game better than any other stat, besides points.
Passing yards tells the winner 50% of the time (aka coin-flip)

QBR says than Dan Orlovsky (Mr. RanBackwardsOutEndZone) was better than Ben Rothelisberger winning a superbowl. Seasonal comparison. Both happened that year.

ESPN is a joke for NFL coverage.
 
2012-10-26 02:52:12 PM  

IAmRight: Okay, so I clicked it from the preview screen and it was already fixed. Just so you know I wasn't making it up.


I trust ya on stuff like that. ;)

IAmRight: Potentially. Luck is a good runner himself, however - if he were black then people would talk about his running and effectiveness. Just like people would talk more about Griffin's passing if he were white.


I really want to argue against this point, but sadly I think it's at least partially true. Luck is probably on par with most other quarterbacks in terms of scrambling ability, though (20 runs for 115 yards), while Griffin is one of the most explosive runners in the league (he's actually 13th in the NFL rushing standings, with the next-closest non-RB (Cam Newton) 195 yards behind him at 27th). So regardless of whether it's a black/white thing to the person doing the talking, the numbers do lend some truth to the topic.

Then when you combine the running ability with the passing numbers so far, well...most teams would rather have RG3 under center than Luck right now. Interesting to see where they stand 3-4 years down the road.
 
2012-10-26 02:52:16 PM  
Um...no. QB Rating actually tends to reflect on-field performance very well. ESPN's version, "QBR", on the other hand, is a whole lot of stupid that seems to be the result of a few interns playing in SPSS for 10 minutes and shiatting out some approach that was never documented. It is garbage and the numbers completely fly in the face of actual performance.
 
2012-10-26 02:53:02 PM  

IAmRight: GAT_00: The Giants are up almost 70 points on their opponents on the year.

Read the rest of the post before responding.


You hadn't posed the screenshot yet, so I had no way of knowing the Giants weren't listed.
 
2012-10-26 02:53:39 PM  
Also, it was real big of ESPN to disable comments on that piece. They KNOW it's flamebait horsesh*t.
 
2012-10-26 02:54:42 PM  
IND QB GP16 GS16 3-13-0 326-575 56.7% 3739yards 26TD 28INT

Peyton Manning's rookie year.

Pro-tip: Don't rate a QB off his rookie year. Particularly when the team was goddamned awful the year before.
 
2012-10-26 02:54:58 PM  

thecpt: Yeah I don't think either is on a quantifiable worse team. Colts are a lot of untested players with left overs from the manning era, and the redskins are a bunch of rookies at key positions and ailing defense. Really hard to argue which one is worse, but now both teams can build around their draft pick. I think RG3 will play conservatively when his team gets somewhat of a defense/gains passer experience.


Not up on the Colts, but the Skins have a poor pass protect (their run blocking is pretty good, though) and only one receiver. Griffin has to run to live. He's been much smarter about his runs lately, they're limiting it to reminding opponents that he has to be watched, which is very effective at freezing linebackers, and slowing down the rush so they keep containment. Which of course then gives him time to look downfield. He's very exciting to watch; reminds me of Vick in his first incarnation (pre-dog). Overall the Skins suck. They could go 5-11 again, with this defense.
 
2012-10-26 02:55:10 PM  

BunkyBrewman: RGIII won't be playing in the NFL in a few years if he continues to play like he's in college.


He is an extremely good passer, but if he has the talent to run, it would be stupid not to flaunt it while he can. He can get more pocket-friendly as he ages. See: John Elway and Steve Young.
 
2012-10-26 02:55:38 PM  

bionicjoe: ESPN is a joke shill for NFL coverage.


FTFY.
 
2012-10-26 02:56:41 PM  

Ricardo Klement: There is no way that Washington would rather have Andrew Luck.


If the Bears could have either one, I'd want RG3. There wouldn't even be the briefest moment of hesitation. Anyone who says otherwise is f*cking blind, or is Rick Reilly.
 
2012-10-26 02:57:11 PM  

chopit: Well, it's refreshing that there's one person who isn't on the RG3 bandwagon. Matthew Berry practically fellated the guy in his love/hate fantasy column a few days ago.


Matthew Berry is concerned entirely with his fantasy value. Actual contribution to his team's ability to win games is not something he cares about (other than him being a Redskins fan, I guess). RG3 is an excellent fantasy QB by any standard.
 
2012-10-26 02:58:22 PM  

GAT_00: You hadn't posed the screenshot yet, so I had no way of knowing the Giants weren't listed.


IAmRight: Redskins are in last place...and they're the only team in their division that is outscoring their opponents on the season. Oh...it's because ESPN has eliminated the Giants and has Dallas twice. Never mind.

 
2012-10-26 03:00:05 PM  

Harv72b: Luck is probably on par with most other quarterbacks in terms of scrambling ability, though (20 runs for 115 yards), while Griffin is one of the most explosive runners in the league (he's actually 13th in the NFL rushing standings, with the next-closest non-RB (Cam Newton) 195 yards behind him at 27th). So regardless of whether it's a black/white thing to the person doing the talking, the numbers do lend some truth to the topic.


Not to mention that he posted the same 40 time as Cam Newton but no one's talking about him being a dual-threat QB. (and the bias probably starts earlier, since Luck was probably less likely to be pushed into being a dual-threat QB)

GAT_00: You hadn't posed the screenshot yet, so I had no way of knowing the Giants weren't listed.


No, but I referred to it in the very next sentence.
 
2012-10-26 03:00:50 PM  

IAmRight: No, but I referred to it in the very next sentence.


So I'm half brain-dead today.
 
2012-10-26 03:01:28 PM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: If the Bears could have either one, I'd want RG3. There wouldn't even be the briefest moment of hesitation. Anyone who says otherwise is f*cking blind, or is Rick Reilly.


I got burned at the stake 4 wks ago when I said that on here. RG3 is just impressive to watch, whereas with cutler...meh
 
2012-10-26 03:03:48 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: the Skins have a poor pass protect (their run blocking is pretty good, though) and only one receiver


I'm not sure we have that many.
 
2012-10-26 03:05:29 PM  
Say what you will about Reilly, his face is not nearly as punchable as that of Skip Bayless.
 
2012-10-26 03:05:36 PM  

kronicfeld: I'm not sure we have that many.


Santana m....no, pierre gar....no, fred....no..... Alfred Morris?
 
2012-10-26 03:06:00 PM  
doesn't luck run a 40 just as fast as griffin? (rg3 is stupid branding)

griffin needs to play like he is playing against nfl defenses, and not bad college d or he's going to be a drooling vegetable in 5 years.
 
2012-10-26 03:07:56 PM  

Harv72b: Passes which travel 11 or more yards in the air:

Andrew Luck: 41-86 (47.7%) 2 TD 6 INT
Robert Griffin: 25-42 (59.5%) 2 TD 0 INT

So yeah...Griffin throws deep less often than Luck. He also throws deep much better than Luck.


Damn 86 attempts. Luck doesn't like to keep the Dragon caged does he?
 
2012-10-26 03:09:34 PM  

SuperT: doesn't luck run a 40 just as fast as griffin? (rg3 is stupid branding)

griffin needs to play like he is playing against nfl defenses, and not bad college d or he's going to be a drooling vegetable in 5 years.


As his offense gets better, especially his oline, he will run less,.
 
Displayed 50 of 202 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report