The more players are with this staff the worse they play. They flash their rookie year and then get worse the more they run through this scheme. I dont read or visit Jaguars site because it doesn't help my Fandom. Discussions here help me stay connected and sadly traffic is down here as well. It is just that disappointing of a franchise.
This franchise is clogged and needs roto rooter
If you're going to look at just one stat I think it's comfortably adjusted ANY/A or adjusted ANY/A+. QBR and passer rating are in fact trash by themselves.
(10-27-2020, 01:54 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]If you're going to look at just one stat I think it's comfortably adjusted ANY/A or adjusted ANY/A+. QBR and passer rating are in fact trash by themselves.
Strongly disagree. That is just a slightly fancier version of Passer Rating that factors in sacks with zero context applied. QBR is way better than ANY/A.
(10-27-2020, 10:19 AM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 09:39 AM)Talented Kalamari Wrote: [ -> ]We can respectfully disagree. I appreciate the subtle jab there though.
I do throw the occasional jab, but not in this case. QBR is a very complex assessment and difficult to understand compared to a simpler stat like Passer Rating. With QBR, a completion for a 5 yard gain is valued more on 3rd and 3 to the get the 1st down versus 3rd and 12. Run after catch is factored in, so Minshew's nice TD throw in the end zone against LA is valued more than his check down pass to Robinson, where the running back made an amazing play and ran it in on his on merit for the TD. ESPN protects its intellectual property and does not release their full algorithm for it, only telling you what is considered in the evaluation. Contrast that with Passer Rating, where anyone with basic math skills can calculate it from the stat line. Not at shot at you... in this case, anyway. lol
You make some insightful points.. I will reconsider my position on the stat. Going to give it another chance. Very good posts you had there.
(10-27-2020, 02:18 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]I love contrived stats.
Translation: "I don't understand complicated things"
(10-27-2020, 02:17 PM)Talented Kalamari Wrote: [ -> ]You make some insightful points.. I will reconsider my position on the stat. Going to give it another chance. Very good posts you had there.
Thanks man.
(10-27-2020, 02:28 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 02:18 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]I love contrived stats.
Translation: "I don't understand complicated things"
Bwahahahaha...nice one dufus. You obviously have no idea what I do for a living. And I really don't care.
'Complicated things'....bwahahahaha.
(10-27-2020, 02:52 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]
Bwahahahaha...nice one dufus. You obviously have no idea what I do for a living. And I really don't care.
'Complicated things'....bwahahahaha.
Strong reply. I feel intellectually inferior now... particularly with the cliff-hanging "what I do for a living" and cerebral "bwahahahaha" comments. Intellectually intimidating.
(10-27-2020, 02:56 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 02:52 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]
Bwahahahaha...nice one dufus. You obviously have no idea what I do for a living. And I really don't care.
'Complicated things'....bwahahahaha.
Strong reply. I feel intellectually inferior now... particularly with the cliff-hanging "what I do for a living" and cerebral "bwahahahaha" comments. Intellectually intimidating.
Sorry, do you need my resume?
Sorry, it was just my initial reaction when you were trying to call QBR something complicated. It was quite funny.
I'm surprised you aren't 'intellctually challenged' seeing as you think a contrived stat like QBR is a 'complicated thing'.
(10-27-2020, 03:48 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 02:56 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ]Strong reply. I feel intellectually inferior now... particularly with the cliff-hanging "what I do for a living" and cerebral "bwahahahaha" comments. Intellectually intimidating.
Sorry, do you need my resume?
Sorry, it was just my initial reaction when you were trying to call QBR something complicated. It was quite funny.
I'm surprised you aren't 'intellctually challenged' seeing as you think a contrived stat like QBR is a 'complicated thing'.
Sure... send me your resume. Does it read: "Wile E. Coyote - Super Genius" ???
OK. If you think QBR is simple, please explain how its calculated. I will wait. Explain Minshew's grade Sunday against the Chargers, and how you got to that number. Show your work. After you do that, I will give you a detailed explanation of his Passer Rating for the same game. Deal? Of course, you won't. Because you are clueless how to calculate QBR. Because its complicated... even for a "genius" like you.
(10-27-2020, 05:22 PM)MoJagFan Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 05:14 PM)JagFan81 Wrote: [ -> ]I think we may need a plan B
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-nfl-draft
I guess he doesn't want to be a Jag, Jet or Falcon
Hes got a lot of options ahead of him. He will go #1 whatever draft he is in so that's not as big a concern as it would for other players. I think he may wait to see who's getting the #1 pick and if it's a place he thinks can work. If not then have another year at Clemson. Hes holding the cards.
Meh. Being good in college does not always translate to being a good NFL QB. People wanting the #1 pick in the draft just want to be the #1 loser. If the team can't win on the field then some fans root for the team to "win" draft selection. News flash... most #1 overall picks really aren't all that great, especially a QB. The last one selected that will be inducted to the HOF was drafted in 1998. Since then there have been some "good" players selected #1, but nobody special.
Khan is not the man
Doug is not the man
Caldwell is not the man....
Maybe we should start there?
(10-27-2020, 07:11 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Meh. Being good in college does not always translate to being a good NFL QB. People wanting the #1 pick in the draft just want to be the #1 loser. If the team can't win on the field then some fans root for the team to "win" draft selection. News flash... most #1 overall picks really aren't all that great, especially a QB. The last one selected that will be inducted to the HOF was drafted in 1998. Since then there have been some "good" players selected #1, but nobody special.
I want to be the number 1 loser! I want NOTHING to hold this coaching staff and front office here. I also want everything to entice a good coach to come here. Number 1 pick is a win win win for us next year.
While I don’t think Minshew is a franchise QB- the whole team would play better under new direction.
(10-27-2020, 01:23 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 12:57 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]QBR takes a legitimate problem but way way way overcomplicates the solution.
For instance, why shouldn't the QB get credit for YAC. The QB chose to throw the ball to the guy who was open enough to get YAC. The QB presumably hit the guy in stride to set up good YAC.
YAC is not the problem.
And then the garbage time argument. If the QB had hit his marks in the first and second quarters, there would be no garbage time. His bad play in the first half gets averaged with the better play in the second half, so as long as we are looking at complete games, what's the issue?
I would rate QB's much more simply.
I'd just make 3 adjustments to the old passer rating:
1) Pass yards on 3rd and 4th down count as 0 unless the play results in a 1st down.
2) QB sacks count as pass attempts, and yards lost to sacks count against pass yards
3) passer rating counts interceptions more than touchdowns. That's usually backwards; most interceptions don't change the game much. So make touchdown passes worth more positive points than interceptions are negative, but, an interception returned for a touchdown or an interception that allows the other team to run out the clock, cancels out a touchdown.
I will preface this by saying there is no one perfect stat. But what you are saying here is Minshew's two touchdown passes against the Chargers should be viewed equally? I strongly disagree there, and that is the strength of the QBR over Passer Rating. Minshew dropping a dime to Conley was a GREAT pass, his dump off to Robinson was ALL Robinson... you or I could have made that throw. Context matters.
Regarding "most interceptions don't change the game much".... WHAT?!?! Turnovers are one of the biggest determinants of wins and losses in football. Now SOME interceptions aren't as big a deal as others... like throwing a bomb to the end zone at the end of a half or game where you don't care much if it gets picked off. QBR takes that into account... Passer Rating does not. Context matters.
Is QBR complicated? Absolutely. But so is evaluating quarterback play. QBR takes into account more information and provides a better evaluation than the simplified Passer Rating. Context matters.
I definitely don't think the two touchdown passes should be equal.
One was 28 yards, one was 9 yards.
Yards divided by attempts and sacks is part of the sum.
I get that it's not perfect.
But the reason I don't trust QBR is I can't verify it using the play by play account of the game.
I suppose they could add things to the play by play like, the time the QB had to throw, if he was running, which side he was running to, which hashmark he was standing next to when he threw it, which hashmark the receiver was on when he caught it, but...
Why?
At that point I'll just watch the game myself.
(10-27-2020, 06:16 PM)JagFan81 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 05:22 PM)MoJagFan Wrote: [ -> ]I guess he doesn't want to be a Jag, Jet or Falcon
Hes got a lot of options ahead of him. He will go #1 whatever draft he is in so that's not as big a concern as it would for other players. I think he may wait to see who's getting the #1 pick and if it's a place he thinks can work. If not then have another year at Clemson. Hes holding the cards.
Yeah, but the chance of injury looms large. If you can go #1 overall in the current draft, it's hard to make a case for a gamble on another year.
(10-27-2020, 09:10 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I definitely don't think the two touchdown passes should be equal.
One was 28 yards, one was 9 yards.
Yards divided by attempts and sacks is part of the sum.
I get that it's not perfect.
But the reason I don't trust QBR is I can't verify it using the play by play account of the game.
I suppose they could add things to the play by play like, the time the QB had to throw, if he was running, which side he was running to, which hashmark he was standing next to when he threw it, which hashmark the receiver was on when he caught it, but...
Why?
At that point I'll just watch the game myself.
You CAN verify it by the play by play account of the game. That is actually what QBR does... looks at each play individually within the context of the game, instead of just the sums or averages like Passer Rating does. You can verify more with QBR than Passer Rating. QBR takes into account down and distance, area of the field, score, time, situation, yards after catch, opponent, etc. for each play. All the things on the long form of the stat sheet instead of reducing metrics to sums and averages. More information provides better context and a more realistic assessment. Of course, watching the game and providing a coach's evaluation is better... but who has time for that with all 32 teams? Next best thing is QBR to get a real comparison.
Your other comment about one TD being 28 yards and one being 9 is too simplistic. What if Robinson had that same 1 yard dump off pass at the 50 yard line (that you or I could have throw to him) and he took it 50 yards to the house? With your logic, that would be twice as good a play by Minshew as the 28 yard dime he threw to Conley... how does that make sense? It doesn't. A shovel pass in the red zone that goes to the house is basically a handoff by the QB, but he gets credit for a TD pass using Passer Rating, whereas QBR accounts for that. Reductionist methods attempt to take complex things and simplifying them; but in doing so, they lose context and accuracy. The QBR gives a version closer to a coach's grade, while Passer Rating just looks at the sum of completions, attempts, yards, TD's and INT's without context. Passer Rating is too reduced or simplified to be very accurate. That being said, there is usually a positive correlation between the two stats, but I'd typically go with QBR when there is a difference, particularly when looking at more data (i.e. a season or several games versus a single game).
(10-27-2020, 09:39 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ] (10-27-2020, 09:10 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I definitely don't think the two touchdown passes should be equal.
One was 28 yards, one was 9 yards.
Yards divided by attempts and sacks is part of the sum.
I get that it's not perfect.
But the reason I don't trust QBR is I can't verify it using the play by play account of the game.
I suppose they could add things to the play by play like, the time the QB had to throw, if he was running, which side he was running to, which hashmark he was standing next to when he threw it, which hashmark the receiver was on when he caught it, but...
Why?
At that point I'll just watch the game myself.
You CAN verify it by the play by play account of the game. That is actually what QBR does... looks at each play individually within the context of the game, instead of just the sums or averages like Passer Rating does. You can verify more with QBR than Passer Rating. QBR takes into account down and distance, area of the field, score, time, situation, yards after catch, opponent, etc. for each play. All the things on the long form of the stat sheet instead of reducing metrics to sums and averages. More information provides better context and a more realistic assessment. Of course, watching the game and providing a coach's evaluation is better... but who has time for that with all 32 teams? Next best thing is QBR to get a real comparison.
Your other comment about one TD being 28 yards and one being 9 is too simplistic. What if Robinson had that same 1 yard dump off pass at the 50 yard line (that you or I could have throw to him) and he took it 50 yards to the house? With your logic, that would be twice as good a play by Minshew as the 28 yard dime he threw to Conley... how does that make sense? It doesn't. A shovel pass in the red zone that goes to the house is basically a handoff by the QB, but he gets credit for a TD pass using Passer Rating, whereas QBR accounts for that. Reductionist methods attempt to take complex things and simplifying them; but in doing so, they lose context and accuracy. The QBR gives a version closer to a coach's grade, while Passer Rating just looks at the sum of completions, attempts, yards, TD's and INT's without context. Passer Rating is too reduced or simplified to be very accurate.
Bortles also threw 28 yard touchdown passes that Allen Robinson would have to stop and jump for.
Does QBR tell any difference between a touchdown pass like that and the one Minshew threw on Sunday?