Tannehill = dead last in Total Quarterback Rating?

Why would you pay attention to QBR

Hard to argue with them if you watched the games. Of course it will be blamed on the OL, running backs, and defense.

"Disgustipate wrote:

Why would you pay attention to QBR

I normally don't. But when someone on another board mentioned Tannehill's horrific ranking in Total QBR, I thought it was surprising. I'm not familiar with the Total QBR details, so I'm trying to figure out what it means. Like maybe it means that he's good in garbage time & meaningless throws, but terrible in clutch situations? Or maybe they're blaming Tannehill for a lot of the sacks he's taken?

Been trying to figure it all out myself

Figures lie and liars figure.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure about 32nd, but I do know from what I'm watching that imo he hasn't been getting it done when he needs to, that's when he's coming up small.

He's 18th in the standard QB rating and 32nd in the QBR, and I'd probably rank him around the standard QB rating.

QBR has just about always hated Tannehill. Last year, he was a top 12-15 QB by almost any measure, but I think that they had him around 25th. Its a stupid, and biased, piece of garbage.

But Carson Palmer and Ryan Fitzbeard are top 3 and Hoyer is Top 10.

Sounds legit. :shifty:

"normaldude wrote:

I normally don't. But when someone on another board mentioned Tannehill's horrific ranking in Total QBR, I thought it was surprising. I'm not familiar with the Total QBR details, so I'm trying to figure out what it means. Like maybe it means that he's good in garbage time & meaningless throws, but terrible in clutch situations? Or maybe they're blaming Tannehill for a lot of the sacks he's taken?

Sounds a lot like you've already determined what you want it to mean.

I don't put a lot of value into ESPN's rating system personally. There's a lot of flaws in it when you look at it's outcomes IMO. It isolates one player far too much in a game dependent on 11 people. For example, it will give the QB a higher rating for a ball thrown downfield if the WR makes a crazy stupid catch that's one in a million for a gain of 48 yards, but it won't give that QB the same rating for a pass completed on say, a slant route 8 yards downfield that was perfectly placed allowing the WR to pile up another 40 yards after the catch for that same 48 yard total. Neither play happens without the QB, neither play happens without the WR, so why would it have a different effect on the player we're trying to rate... the QB.

I get what it's trying to accomplish, I just don't think it does a very good job of it. However, it does just what ESPN wants it to do. It generates a way for them to say they can compare QB's accurately, but, it just doesn't. There's too much focus on trying to statistically determine the impact of one player IMO. Passer rating, is a more accurate snapshot IMO of the QB's effect on the entire offensive unit. Maybe it gives too much credit at times like the scenario above with a big YAC play, but you can't have the YAC without the throw. I guess you could, if it was a bad throw that leads that WR into a tackler, but the WR makes a crazy play to break the tackle then take off, but again... The same type of scenario can happen the opposite way.

As for sacks, especially those in clutch time, I don't like the way again it penalizes the QB. They will consider a 3rd and 15 with the game on the line clutch, and if we give up instant pressure, and the QB gets sacked before he finishes the drop back, that's a big negative according to the statistic on the QB, but really, what could he do?

To me, it's too open for interpretation, QBR is too subjective.

The fact that Tannehill ranks dead last, I guess you could say is a concern, for sure. I guess that's if you put that kind of value into the system. Brian Hoyer however is ranked 9th overall. In what world, can you say that Brian Hoyer is a better QB, based on QBR than the other 20 some odd on that list below him? He's had a better effect on the Texans, than Tannehill has on Miami? I'm not so sure of that... Derek Carr? Big Ben? Newton? All worse than Hoyer? Ok.. A few years back, Tebow, over Aaron Rodgers? Ok...

I just don't buy it. I do however buy into the thought that Tannehill hasn't done enough to help us win at times, but to say he's the worst in the league in that regard... That's just inaccurate.

"brandon27 wrote:

I don't put a lot of value into ESPN's rating system personally. There's a lot of flaws in it when you look at it's outcomes IMO. It isolates one player far too much in a game dependent on 11 people. For example, it will give the QB a higher rating for a ball thrown downfield if the WR makes a crazy stupid catch that's one in a million for a gain of 48 yards, but it won't give that QB the same rating for a pass completed on say, a slant route 8 yards downfield that was perfectly placed allowing the WR to pile up another 40 yards after the catch for that same 48 yard total. Neither play happens without the QB, neither play happens without the WR, so why would it have a different effect on the player we're trying to rate... the QB.

- If a QB completes a 5 yd pass, and the WR heroically breaks 3-5 tackles for some crazy 60 yd TD, I'm not sure that's the same as a QB perfectly hitting a deep ball in stride.

- And if it's 3rd & 9, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that's great. But if it's 3rd & 15, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that sucks.

In any case, there are flaws in the traditional "passer rating". I'm just not familiar enough with ESPN's "Total QBR" system to get a handle on what it actually means, if anything.

I don't like tannehill but he is not 32nd.Hell they have fitz rated ahead of brady.That tells you all you need to know right there.

IMO QBR is a much better QB rating system than the flawed QB rater traditionally used.

QBR takes into account "context" which the QB rating system does not.

My biggest knock on Tannehill is that he doesn't "contribute" to wins.

"normaldude wrote:

- If a QB completes a 5 yd pass, and the WR heroically breaks 3-5 tackles for some crazy 60 yd TD, I'm not sure that's the same as a QB perfectly hitting a deep ball in stride.

- And if it's 3rd & 9, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that's great. But if it's 3rd & 15, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that sucks.

In any case, there are flaws in the traditional "passer rating". I'm just not familiar enough with ESPN's "Total QBR" system to get a handle on what it actually means, if anything.

I had posted the following in a previous thread. I reccommend following the hyperlinks to become more familiar with it if interested:

It is definitely complex and there is no perfect rating system. Stats are only reliable incorporating the context in which they were accumulated. What I like about QBR is it won't significantly skew a QBs stats positively by throwing a 1 yard TD pass to a wide-open TE when the team is down by 30 points with 1:00 left in the 4th quarter or negatively when a QB throws an interception that was on target when the team is down by 5 with 1:00 left in the 4th quarter. It will take into account runs, fumbles (regardless of which team recovers) and all the little things QB rating doesn't take into account. It also assigns responsibility to all players on the team participating in the play...QB, OL, WR, etc...which on the surface I would think the Tannehill fan base would like b/c the main argument I perceive to be is his poor play doesn't take into account the OL, WR, etc...Of course, the more context that is taken into account Tannehill's rank drops. The other factor it ways heavily is "clutch."

I recommend this read to get familiar with QBR:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/68...terback-rating

Also this one from Football Outsiders:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

What I like about it is QBR would factor in all the variables for these scenarios whereas QB rating would totally ignore the context:

QB A:
Team is being blown out 35-3 in the 4th quarter with 10 minutes left and the ball at their own 20 yard line.

1st and 10...QB hits WR for a 5 yard completion.
2nd and 5...QB holds the ball too long behind adequate protection, fumbles the ball as he is hit and O Lineman recovers football for a 8 yard loss.
3rd and 13...QB dumps ball off 2 yards pass the line of scrimmage and WR is tackled 3 yards short of 1st down.
4th and 3...team punts.

QB B:
Context...team is down by 5 points with 45 seconds left and the ball is at the opponents 15 yard line.

1st and 10...QB avoids pass rush on all out blitz, scrambles outside and throws ball away when WRs are covered avoiding a sack the average QB would take.
2nd and 10...QB is on target to WR in endzone and WR drops easy catch.
3rd and 10...QB is on target for 13 yards resulting in a 1st down.
1st and goal at the 2 yard line...QB runs the ball in for a TD and team WINS ballgame.

According to the standard QB rating system the following ratings would be given for those series completely void of context:

QB A = 97.9 QB rating
QB B = 47.9 QB rating

QBR would take all that into account and be assured that QB B would be closer to 100 (top of the scale) and QB A would be closer to 10 or so (bottom of scale).

Of course, QBR doesn't have a simple calculator online to plug in att, comp, yards, td passes, interceptions and get that magical number. QBR requires ESPN workers watching video to assign responsibility and algorithms based on 10 years of detail analysis to what leads to winning games done to determine the rating when it was originally set up. ESPN has also made modifications to the algorithms along the way to improve it.

QBR is constantly laughed at in the media. No one understands it.

Ryan Firzpatrick is having a better season than Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady according to this thing.

Then they have Brian Hoyer rated higher than Big Ben, Carr, and Matt Ryan.

Lol. I think I'll stick to the old reliable passer rating.

"gunn34 wrote:

Hard to argue with them if you watched the games. Of course it will be blamed on the OL, running backs, and defense.

So that means you think Tannehill is the worst quarterback in the NFL? Not even his biggest haters will say that.

"Rocky Raccoon wrote:

So that means you think Tannehill is the worst quarterback in the NFL? Not even his biggest haters will say that.

Definitely not a perfect system, there is none. Being last in QBR doesn't necessarily mean worst. It reflects where a QB ranks in terms of his play contributing to a team winning, or not.

An argument can certainly be made that Tannehill has done the least amount to contribute to his team wining this year.

"AdamC13 wrote:

Definitely not a perfect system, there is none. Being last in QBR doesn't necessarily mean worst. It reflects where a QB ranks in terms of his play contributing to a team winning, or not.

An argument can certainly be made that Tannehill has done the least amount to contribute to his team wining this year.

The system is way too wacky. I honestly didn't even know they still used it until a few weeks ago when some of the national media guys were trying to figure out why Firzpatrick was rated above Brady. As far as I can remember there has always been controversy surrounding their system. I'm sure there are bits and pieces of it that make sense, but overall I think it's severely flawed and confusing. That's just my opinion though.

"Fin-O wrote:

Figures lie and liars figure.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Figures don't lie but liars figure.

I think the QBR is a perversion of the truth. As cbrad has pointed out before, the formula isn't open source. There's some truth there though, but it's perverted.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"cuchulainn wrote:

But Carson Palmer and Ryan Fitzbeard are top 3 and Hoyer is Top 10.

Sounds legit. :shifty:

damn i hope we sign hoyer next year then!

"normaldude wrote:

- If a QB completes a 5 yd pass, and the WR heroically breaks 3-5 tackles for some crazy 60 yd TD, I'm not sure that's the same as a QB perfectly hitting a deep ball in stride.

- And if it's 3rd & 9, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that's great. But if it's 3rd & 15, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that sucks.

In any case, there are flaws in the traditional "passer rating". I'm just not familiar enough with ESPN's "Total QBR" system to get a handle on what it actually means, if anything.

In your scenario, I'd probably agree with you. That's not the scenario I presented though. I said a jump ball, that's a David Tyree style catch. It's just too subjective of a rating system IMO.

I think there's flaws in both systems. However, I think there's more in ESPN's QBR because it's too subjective to someone's opinion on what type of play the QB deserves more credit for than another.

All you have to do is look at some of the QB's high on that list, Brian Hoyer is a great example. What's he really done to be considered a good QB for his team? Many would argue, if Houston had a real QB, they'd be a much better team. QB is really what's holding them back. Yet, here's the QBR rating saying both Mallett and Hoyer are better QB's than our own. I mean, if that's not a flawed system, I don't know what is. Even the strongest of Ryan Tannehill haters can't possibly agree that Tannehill has been worse for us than Hoyer or Mallett have been (or were in Mallett's case lol) for Houston. Can you honestly say Hoyer would be a better QB for this team than Ryan Tannehill given the way he's played? Again, even for the flaws that many perceive Tannehill has, you can't possibly think that Hoyer or Mallett would be a better fit for us given what they've shown. That really says all that needs to be said about QBR IMO.

If ESPN was more open about how it all comes together, maybe we could be more accepting of it, given what we "know" though, I'm not sure that's possible.

Well with all due respect both Hoyer and Fitzpatrick are having slightly better years than Tannehill at the moment. We still have eight games to go, so things could change. Tannehill could catch fire, but I doubt it in this offense with Lazor calling the shots. It's frustrating because I think Tannehill has superior upside, he just hasn't tapped into it yet for whatever reason(s).
I'm not familiar with QBR, but the actual QB rating numbers have been around ever since i've watched football. Things have gone all analytical which I really have no desire to keep up with. The original rating, overall stats, and the way the Quarterback plays on the field (based on me watching them) is honestly all I need to know about them. It's as simple as that. Analytics (while useful) aren't the all seeing, all knowing. It's like the dreaded PER in basketball that fanboys always crutch on when debating a players impact/value.

This ranking for Tannehill doesn't sway my opinion of him any differently. I still think he's a talented player dealing with impossible circumstances. He's definitely had a down year as of right now, but he's way too young and still way too raw to give up on.

Tannehill defenders will state that Tannehill needs a much better offensive line, a strong running game, his receivers to never drop a ball, and a top ten defense. If he has all these things, they say Tannehill will then be able to show he is a much better QB than he has shown in the last three and a half years.

Of course if you gave the worst starting QB in the NFL those things, he would probably get his team into the playoffs. Tannehill is what he is. A very average starting QB who can play at a high level during segments of a game but just doesn't sustain this high level of play for the majority of most games.

When he goes against the better defenses, he seems to struggle and that is the reason the Dolphins have remained a below 500 team during the 56 games he has been their starting QB.

Tannehill sucks, but they also Ryan Fitzpatrick as a better QB than Brady

"AdamC13 wrote:

IMO QBR is a much better QB rating system than the flawed QB rater traditionally used.

QBR takes into account "context" which the QB rating system does not.

My biggest knock on Tannehill is that he doesn't "contribute" to wins.

I agree there is some interesting stuff with the QBR, but I think it does need some tweaking, but I think you would agree that the standard QB rating is closer than the QBR in regards to Tanne.