Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
An insult to JT and GT
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AE 87" data-source="post: 153973" data-attributes="member: 195"><p>I agree that they look at Total Yards, Comp, TD's etc, as [USER=360]@Techster[/USER] highlighter earlier. However, I don't think it's a simple statistical formula weighted toward passing but rather how those stats reflect the overall impact of the one player on the team's success. </p><p></p><p>As it turns out, that's also what ESPN tries to determine with it's Total QBR (<a href="http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2011/08/espn-introduces-the-total-quarterback-rating/" target="_blank">Link</a>)</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Total QBR is based on all of a quarterback’s plays (rushing, passing, sacks, fumbles, interceptions, penalties, etc.), and it calculates the per-play net impact of the quarterback on the ability to score. Each play is weighted by the situation (i.e., down and distance, field position, time during the game) and its importance to the game’s outcome. For example, a completed five-yard pass on 3rd-and-3 would increase a quarterback’s QBR more than a five-yard completion on 3rd-and-15 because the former continues the drive and thus improves the team’s chance of scoring. Also, plays in closely contested games carry a greater value than plays in less competitive situations.</p><p>I think there's a difference between the NFL and NCAA formulas and that there have been modifications since 2011, but that's all I know.</p><p></p><p>Still, looking at the 9 QB's who won the Heisman over the last 11 years (2005 and 2009 went to running backs), the winner of the Heisman trophy was also #1 in total QBR in 2007, 2008, and 2012-2014. In 2004, Matt Leinart won the Heisman while #7 in QBR. Interestingly, while USC did finish #1 at 13-0, Auburn finished 13-0 also, and Jason Cambell had a higher QBR. In 2006, Troy Smith won the Heisman while #4 in QBR. WV's Pat White was #1 in QBR, but they finished #10 in the AP. In 2010 Cam Newton won at #3 in QBR while Auburn was #1 even though Andrew Luck was #1 in QBR while Stanford finished at #4. Perhaps 2011 is the most interesting. RG III won the Heisman while #4 in QBR and Baylor finishing at #13. Russell Wilson (#1 QBR) led Wisc to #10; Kellen Moore (#2 QBR) led BSU to #8, and Andrew Luck (#3 QBR) led Stanford to #7 in the AP. Only Boise State and Stanford had been in the top 10 after weeks 11, 12, and 13. Russell Wilson was probably hurt by Montee Ball also being a contender from Wisconsin. Kellen Moore and Andrew Luck had bad losses at bad times to sour voters, iirc.</p><p></p><p>Regardless, I still think that determined by stats as informed by stats along with team record and the pizzazz factor in big games. I find it interesting that QBR seems to do a decent job at measuring that. In 2014, Justin Thomas was #4 in Total QBR, 83.7, behind Mariota 90.9, JT Barrett, 86.7, and Nick Marshall 85.2. By comparison RG III's Total QBR was 82.5 in 2011. So, even with Justin playing within the system this past year, he got his Total QBR stat and ranking within range of Heisman winners.</p><p></p><p>So, while I respect the difference of opinion that you, [USER=26]@ATL1[/USER], [USER=145]@CobbTech[/USER], and [USER=360]@Techster[/USER] offer, I don't think you need to suggest that those who disagree are just emotional and too sensitive. There simply has not been an option QB in contention over the last several years to compare, and the statistic that does seem to work (5 of last 7 QBs, 8 yrs) can actually work in JT's favor.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AE 87, post: 153973, member: 195"] I agree that they look at Total Yards, Comp, TD's etc, as [USER=360]@Techster[/USER] highlighter earlier. However, I don't think it's a simple statistical formula weighted toward passing but rather how those stats reflect the overall impact of the one player on the team's success. As it turns out, that's also what ESPN tries to determine with it's Total QBR ([URL='http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2011/08/espn-introduces-the-total-quarterback-rating/']Link[/URL]) [INDENT]Total QBR is based on all of a quarterback’s plays (rushing, passing, sacks, fumbles, interceptions, penalties, etc.), and it calculates the per-play net impact of the quarterback on the ability to score. Each play is weighted by the situation (i.e., down and distance, field position, time during the game) and its importance to the game’s outcome. For example, a completed five-yard pass on 3rd-and-3 would increase a quarterback’s QBR more than a five-yard completion on 3rd-and-15 because the former continues the drive and thus improves the team’s chance of scoring. Also, plays in closely contested games carry a greater value than plays in less competitive situations.[/INDENT] I think there's a difference between the NFL and NCAA formulas and that there have been modifications since 2011, but that's all I know. Still, looking at the 9 QB's who won the Heisman over the last 11 years (2005 and 2009 went to running backs), the winner of the Heisman trophy was also #1 in total QBR in 2007, 2008, and 2012-2014. In 2004, Matt Leinart won the Heisman while #7 in QBR. Interestingly, while USC did finish #1 at 13-0, Auburn finished 13-0 also, and Jason Cambell had a higher QBR. In 2006, Troy Smith won the Heisman while #4 in QBR. WV's Pat White was #1 in QBR, but they finished #10 in the AP. In 2010 Cam Newton won at #3 in QBR while Auburn was #1 even though Andrew Luck was #1 in QBR while Stanford finished at #4. Perhaps 2011 is the most interesting. RG III won the Heisman while #4 in QBR and Baylor finishing at #13. Russell Wilson (#1 QBR) led Wisc to #10; Kellen Moore (#2 QBR) led BSU to #8, and Andrew Luck (#3 QBR) led Stanford to #7 in the AP. Only Boise State and Stanford had been in the top 10 after weeks 11, 12, and 13. Russell Wilson was probably hurt by Montee Ball also being a contender from Wisconsin. Kellen Moore and Andrew Luck had bad losses at bad times to sour voters, iirc. Regardless, I still think that determined by stats as informed by stats along with team record and the pizzazz factor in big games. I find it interesting that QBR seems to do a decent job at measuring that. In 2014, Justin Thomas was #4 in Total QBR, 83.7, behind Mariota 90.9, JT Barrett, 86.7, and Nick Marshall 85.2. By comparison RG III's Total QBR was 82.5 in 2011. So, even with Justin playing within the system this past year, he got his Total QBR stat and ranking within range of Heisman winners. So, while I respect the difference of opinion that you, [USER=26]@ATL1[/USER], [USER=145]@CobbTech[/USER], and [USER=360]@Techster[/USER] offer, I don't think you need to suggest that those who disagree are just emotional and too sensitive. There simply has not been an option QB in contention over the last several years to compare, and the statistic that does seem to work (5 of last 7 QBs, 8 yrs) can actually work in JT's favor. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
An insult to JT and GT
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top