Manziel won't throw at Combine

[jrry32]

Absolutely. Don't really consider the top QB's as franchise QB's. Bortles would be my pick out of any of them. He's a big man with a big arm.

Bridgewater is a lesser version of RGME and Manziel is a Pre-Madonna, not my style.

Bridgewater isn't really at all like RGIII. He's more like Sam than he is RGIII. A lot of people have compared him to Sam(especially in terms of demeanor) but I don't really agree with the overall comparison.

 

[Boffo97]

Sorry, he has a QBR of 40. I was 3 points off.... my bad. 40, for the record, is not a good QBR. I still don't fully understand it, but I know 40 is not good. Especially when Russell Wilson's is 65.8. That's 25 points different.

As for the Dilfer... it's subjective. I like the guy. He entertains me. And I like the word "dime".

Basically, every time I hear the word "dime" I think of a hot girl. So when Dilfer talks I'm probably off in dream land.


But thank you for your constructive criticism. You added a lot to the conversation.

From what I've heard of QBR, it's very problematic. ESPN doesn't reveal the exact formula for it, but apparently has someone assign value to each play (so there's a subjective portion) and it seems to rate mobile QBs higher just because they're mobile.

I heard earlier this system it ranked either Andrew Dalton or Jay Cutler higher than Peyton Manning, which was just plain silly.

Old fashioned quarterback rating is a flawed system, but more realistic, I think. And Sam does much better in that system.

 

[jrry32]

Sorry, he has a QBR of 40. I was 3 points off.... my bad. 40, for the record, is not a good QBR. I still don't fully understand it, but I know 40 is not good. Especially when Russell Wilson's is 65.8. That's 25 points different.

I doubt he's criticizing your accuracy. I think he's pointing out that most people consider QBR to be a joke. It's formula isn't known and it's results are pretty laughable.

I'll show you:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=330905007
83.6 QBR for Manning
http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331027013
96.2 QBR for Pryor

That's right. On ESPN's QBR scale, Pryor's 88 passing yards, 0 passing TDs, 2 Ints, 25.7 passer rating game is better than Peyton Manning's 462 yards, 7 passing TD, 0 Int, 141.1 passer rating game because Pryor had 106 rushing yards and a TD.

It's a really bad stat. It's over-inflates the numbers for running QBs. Which is nuts. And it puts too much emphasis on certain things. It's a really poor metric.

He has the "IT factor" that you cannot teach. Plus, he is an incredibly good teammate with a solid work ethic AND communication/motivation skills (as we saw in the bowl game).

What is an "It Factor"?

As far as the bowl game goes, a lot of people mistake yelling at a guy as leadership. Manziel may have been trying to lead but he wasn't doing it the right way with Mike Evans when they showed them. Great leaders know how to alter their style for individual people. With a hothead like Evans, you don't grab him and start yelling in his face. That's not productive. He's going to get more mad and tune you out.

With a guy like Evans, you let him simmer down some and then you calm him down and get him focused. It's the more stoic people that you want to get fired up by yelling at them. Those are the guys that respond to that. When they start to get down, you get them pumped up. You get them emotional.

 

[OnceARam]

From what I've heard of QBR, it's very problematic. ESPN doesn't reveal the exact formula for it, but apparently has someone assign value to each play (so there's a subjective portion) and it seems to rate mobile QBs higher just because they're mobile.

I heard earlier this system it ranked either Andrew Dalton or Jay Cutler higher than Peyton Manning, which was just plain silly.

Old fashioned quarterback rating is a flawed system, but more realistic, I think. And Sam does much better in that system.

Yeah, there is subjectivity based on film review. Each play is reviewed. Each throw is determined whether it's catchable, etc. It's definitely flawed.

The issue with the regular QB rating system is that it doesn't take into account fumbles and sacks (or lost yardage). Obviously, sacks and fumbles aren't souly the responsibility of QB's. That said, great QBs (Dan Marino, etc) don't get sacked as much because they are able to read defenses, make quick decisions and have a quick release. So it's not all on the OL either.

But I agree with your overall point. It's tough to put a definite # value on how good a QB is. And it has been especially tough with Bradford given the musical chairs all around him.

It's frustrating.

 

[OnceARam]

I doubt he's criticizing your accuracy. I think he's pointing out that most people consider QBR to be a joke. It's formula isn't known and it's results are pretty laughable.

I'll show you:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=330905007
83.6 QBR for Manning
http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331027013
96.2 QBR for Pryor

That's right. On ESPN's QBR scale, Pryor's 88 passing yards, 0 passing TDs, 2 Ints, 25.7 passer rating game is better than Peyton Manning's 462 yards, 7 passing TD, 0 Int, 141.1 passer rating game because Pryor had 106 rushing yards and a TD.

It's a really bad stat. It's over-inflates the numbers for running QBs. Which is nuts. And it puts too much emphasis on certain things. It's a really poor metric.



What is an "It Factor"?

As far as the bowl game goes, a lot of people mistake yelling at a guy as leadership. Manziel may have been trying to lead but he wasn't doing it the right way with Mike Evans when they showed them. Great leaders know how to alter their style for individual people. With a hothead like Evans, you don't grab him and start yelling in his face. That's not productive. He's going to get more mad and tune you out.

With a guy like Evans, you let him simmer down some and then you calm him down and get him focused. It's the more stoic people that you want to get fired up by yelling at them. Those are the guys that respond to that. When they start to get down, you get them pumped up. You get them emotional.

LOL! I never saw that stat on Prior. It was obviously a statistical anomaly though as his career number is 33. QBR is by no means perfect and definitely rewards the runners over the pocket passers. However, it is used in gambling. And let's face it, the real money is in Vegas... and those guys don't make shit up for no reason.

Speaking of the IT factor; it's also subjective. I think he has it. We can agree about it all day and it's not going to matter or change anything so there's really no point. I think we can agree on that.

In terms of leadership style; they won the bowl game. So it's hard to argue that what he did didn't work. Remember it's not just about Evans. His actions, as the QB, create a ripple effect and extend to the horses upfront, the defense and the other skilled players.

Also, he touched his facemask. He didn't grab and pull. There is a huge difference. Because if you grab and pull you immobilize, and Evans wasn't immobilized.

Had Johnny gone that far I would totally agree with you. But from what I saw (again, subjective) it looked like it was within reason.

I had a position coach in college grab my facemask and throw me to the ground once. That was f'ed up... Luckily I've repressed most of that memory. It didn't hurt, but wow... wow... wow... was I upset. But, in a power imbalance type situation like that, I didn't feel like I had any recourse. This was in 2000, before everything got PC. If it happened today I would file a complaint, but when I played that just didn't happen. The coaches (and older players for that matter) did whatever the hell they wanted. Hurting the younger guys seemed to be popular. Luckily I blew a knee and got the hell out of there.


Anyway, we're really in subject water with the IT factor. It's harder to argue against QBR, at least when we're talking about differences that can be measured in standard deviations between QBs.

 

[jrry32]

Nah. I mean what is the "It Factor"? What is it specifically?

 

[OnceARam]

Nah. I mean what is the "It Factor"? What is it specifically?

It is the ability to improvise.

 

[jjab360]

It is the ability to improvise.

So just so we're being clear here, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady don't have the it factor?

 

[OnceARam]

So just so we're being clear here, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady don't have the it factor?

Oh come on jjab360!!! I didn't say that. And of course those guys have the IT factor. And yes, they can improvise. Improvisation doesn't have to be done with the feet. It can also be done with the MIND. And both of those guys can move their mind faster than your good to average QB can - because the game has slowed down for those guys. They see the entire field. They know where every player is... But they've also been doing it for years. In today's NFL I don't know if guys are going to be given those years to develop.

I wasn't making an argument just for running QBs. Although I seem to be moving in that direction in terms of preference.

 

[jjab360]

Oh come on jjab360!!! I didn't say that. And of course those guys have the IT factor. And yes, they can improvise. Improvisation doesn't have to be done with the feet. It can also be done with the MIND. And both of those guys can move their mind faster than your good to average QB can - because the game has slowed down for those guys. They see the entire field. They know where every player is... But they've also been doing it for years. In today's NFL I don't know if guys are going to be given those years to develop.

I wasn't making an argument just for running QBs. Although I seem to be moving in that direction in terms of preference.

I was just messing with ya for the most part, lol. My point was that I think explaining it like that is better than calling it the it factor. The it factor is so vague and indefinite, so many people mean different things when they say it.

 

[OnceARam]

I was just messing with ya for the most part, lol. My point was that I think explaining it like that is better than calling it the it factor. The it factor is so vague and indefinite, so many people mean different things when they say it.

LOL! You got me bro. And you're right. Not explaining what the hell I'm talking about leads to issues. Especially on forums.