|
This is what someone else said about QB rating....but I think it applies here in an effort to further thwart the stoning of Vick's efforts as an athlete (not dog owner) by the inflamed passions of the mob.
...is that the formula overemphasizes Completion Percentage. While Completion % in and of itself makes up 25% of the rating's calculation, the use of Yards per Attempt rather than Yards per Completion adds to the weight of Completion %, since incomplete passes are penalized under yds/attempt. Thus, many critics feel that the Passer Rating formula automatically is skewed in favor of quarterbacks who play in a West Coast scheme that favors many high-percentage (but low-yardage) pass plays.
- Vick cannot play the West Coast scheme, its not his style.
The simplest complaint may be that the weighting of each category is, on the whole, arbitrary. There is no evidence to suggest that Completion %, Yards/Attempt, Touchdown %, and Interception % are of equal value (25% each) in terms of an offense's efficiency (or if those stats, in that combination, have any correlation to scoring, or winning, at all). The system also does not account for changing offensive conditions in the NFL over time; for example, when the formula was devised, a score of 66.6 was supposed to represent an average quarterback. And in 1970 , the average passer scored a 65.6, a figure almost perfectly in line with the rating-creators' vision. But in 1980 , the average was 73.7; in 1992, the average quarterback had a rating of 75.3; and in 2004, a record-setting year for passers, the league's mean passer rating was 82.8. The great Johnny Unitas finished his hall of fame career with only a 78.2 rating. At least part of the reason for the increase in passer ratings is that the NFL has consistently made rule changes favoring the offense. Thus, scores must be interpreted with care when doing cross-era analysis.
|
Threaded Mode