Week 15 Quick Reads

December 19, 2016, 10:25 pm ET

Week 15 Quick Reads

Photo: USA Today Sports Images

by Vincent Verhei

The average quarterback in the NFL in 2016 is completing 63.1 percent of his passes, while throwing an interception just 2.2 percent of the time. Both would be the best marks for quarterbacks in league history. Our average 2016 passer is also averaging 7.20 yards per pass -- down a bit from 2014 (7.21) and 2015 (7.25), but otherwise better than every season since 1960*. He is throwing a touchdown on 4.2 percent of his passes, which is lower than the 5-plus percent rates of the '50s and '60s, but higher than the sub-4 percent rates of the early '90s. By any objective measure, the NFL has never had better overall passing than it has in recent seasons.

* NOTE: This sentence was originally published with slightly incorrect data. It has been fixed.

Why is it, then, that so many critics of the NFL say the biggest problem in the league is the proliferation of bad quarterbacks? CBS analyst Bart Scott, a former linebacker with the Ravens and Jets, has said as much publicly: "It's either the haves or have-nots, and listen, there's never been so many bad quarterbacks in the NFL -- ever." Scott actually said that in November of 2015, but it still applies this season. Scott specifically cited Blaine Gabbert as an example of a terrible starting quarterback, and though Gabbert has since been rightfully returned to the bench, his replacement Colin Kaepernick has hardly fared any better. The league still has enough Blake Bortles- and Ryan Fitzpatrick-types (to say nothing of the messes in Los Angeles and Houston) that any random NFL game seems likely to feature at least one quarterback who needs to be replaced.

So we have these two viewpoints, which seem to conflict with each other and yet both seem to be valid. So which is more accurate, the objective viewpoint, or the subjective?

Fortunately we have DVOA, a tool that is uniquely qualified to measure this sort of thing. One of the key features of DVOA is that it compares each quarterback to the average baselines of that specific season. For example, Eli Manning has completed 63.4 percent of his passes this year. That would have been the highest such rate in the NFL in 1990, but this year it is just 18th. As such, Manning is punished more for his incompletions this year than he would have been 26 years ago.

We have DVOA data for quarterbacks going back to 1989. Typically in that timespan, about 30 percent of all quarterbacks in a given season have had a DVOA of -10.0% or worse, and about 30 percent have had a DVOA of 10.0% or higher, with the remaining 40-ish percent falling in the middle. Looking at the data for each of those seasons, though, we find a changing trend that has been subtle, but very consistent:

Good, Bad, and Average QB Distribution, 1989-2016
Year	Bad QBs (DVOA Worse Than -10%)	Average QBs (DVOA between -10% and 10%)	Good QBs (DVOA Better Than 10%)	Total
1989	8	15	8	31
1990	9	10	10	29
1991	8	14	11	33
1992	10	8	12	30
1993	9	14	11	34
1994	6	18	8	32
1995	10	8	13	31
1996	7	16	12	35
1997	7	17	9	33
1998	11	10	13	34
1999	8	20	11	39
2000	13	17	10	40
2001	6	18	7	31
Year	Bad QBs (DVOA Worse Than -10%)	Average QBs (DVOA between -10% and 10%)	Good QBs (DVOA Better Than 10%)	Total
2002	10	15	11	36
2003	9	18	9	36
2004	13	11	12	36
2005	9	15	12	36
2006	9	15	11	35
2007	15	11	12	38
2008	7	16	11	34
2009	14	7	13	34
2010	8	15	11	34
2011	11	13	11	35
2012	13	13	12	38
2013	14	14	11	39
2014	8	20	9	37
2015	12	18	7	37
2016*	13	12	10	35
AVERAGE	9.9	14.2	10.6	34.7
* 175 passes needed to qualfy in 2016

The trend may not be obvious in that table, but if you read it very closely, you'll note that the numbers of quarterbacks in the "good" column have stayed about the same, while the numbers in the "bad" column have been generally growing. From 1989 to 2003, there were at least as many good quarterbacks as bad 14 times in 15 seasons. The one year in that span when bad quarterbacks outnumbered good was in 2000 -- a unique year, as we shall get to shortly.

[ad placeholder 3]

Since that 2003 season, though, things have changed. There have been more bad quarterbacks than good in eight of the 13 seasons since then, and four of the last five (both of these statistics include 2016, the numbers for which obviously are not final). The worst differential was set last season, when there were 12 bad quarterbacks and only seven good ones. With 13 bad passers and 10 good, 2016 would tie 2000, 2007, and 2013 as next-worst seasons on record when it comes to lousy quarterback differential.

So no, your eyes have not been deceiving you. In recent seasons, there really have been more bad quarterbacks across the NFL, with fewer good quarterbacks to balance them out. It's not crystal-clear exactly when this trend began, but it's probably not coincidental that the league expanded from 28 teams to 30 in 1995, then again to 31 in 1999, and finally to 32 in 2002. As pro football has grown, the NFL (and NCAA) have failed to produce a talent pool to grow along with it.

It is interesting to note what has happened in the Super Bowl after those seasons heavily slanted towards bad quarterback play:

In 2000, the Ravens had an all-time great defense that was capable of carrying Trent Dilfer to a championship over another mediocre quarterback in Kerry Collins.

[ad placeholder 4]

In 2007, a record-setting Patriots offense was upset by a Giants team known more for its defense than for its offense.
The Seahawks' win over Denver in 2013 was hardly an upset like the Giants' win, but it was similar in that a record-setting offense was clearly outplayed by the opposing defense.
Finally, in 2015, we had a Super Bowl that was somewhat similar to that 2000 game, with an all-defense, no-offense champion (Denver) beating a more balanced opponent (Carolina).

That's a pretty random and obscure pattern, but should it hold true, it might be good news for Pittsburgh, Seattle, Baltimore, Denver, and the Giants -- this year's remaining Super Bowl contenders who are strongest on defense.

Quarterbacks
Rk	Player	Team	CP/AT	Yds	TD	INT	Sacks	Total DYAR	Pass DYAR	Rush DYAR	Opp
1.	Drew Brees	NO	37/48	389	4	0	3	187	187	0	ARI	With three minutes to go in the third, Brees got the ball in a tie game. That didn't last long -- he completed eight passes in a row on the drive, for 65 total yards, and Tim Hightower finished the drive with a 3-yard touchdown to put New Orleans ahead. Arizona came back and tied the game on their next drive, but no worries -- Brees was perfect again, completing five passes in a row, each for a first down, for 68 more yards and another go-ahead score. Between the two drives, that's 13 straight completions for 133 yards and two go-ahead scores in less than 15 minutes of game time.	2.	Matt Ryan	ATL	17/23	286	2	0	1	176	176	0	SF	Ryan completed 74 percent of his passes, which is outstanding, but what's even more impressive is that he made those completions count. About 55 percent of all completions have gone for a first down this year. Only of of Ryan's completions, though, came up short of the sticks -- and that was a 4-yard gain on second-and-7. Put another way: The all-time record for passing first downs in a game is 29, set by the Giants against Cincinnati in 1985. It took them 40 completions and 62 attempts to get there. Ryan had half as many first downs on barely 40 percent as many completions and barely one-third as many attempts.												3.	Andrew Luck	IND	21/28	250	2	0	0	159	162	-3	MIN	Late in the first quarter, when the Colts led just 3-0, they had a first-and-goal at the 3 and a chance to open a big lead. Luck then threw incompletions on first, second, and third down, and the Colts kicked a field goal. However, a Minnesota penalty took that field goal off the board, and the Colts added a rushing touchdown shortly thereafter. That sequence seemed to get all the bad football out of Luck's system -- from that point forward, he went 15-of-17 for 188 yards and two touchdowns.												4.	Matt Moore	MIA	13/18	236	4	1	1	122	122	0	NYJ	It was feast or famine for Moore on third downs, with four conversions in nine attempts. The four conversions went for 71 total yards and three touchdowns, plus a 17-yard gain on third-and-6. The failures, though, consisted of three incomplete passes, one sack, and one interception. Another note of weirdness: Moore had only two passes on second down, a 7-yard completion, and an incomplete pass.												5.	Dak Prescott	DAL	32/36	279	0	0	3	114	99	14	TB	Prescott's lob to Dez Bryant downfield just before halftime was notable. Not for what it achieved -- it was incomplete -- but for what followed. That was the last incompletion Prescott threw all day. He completed each of his last 12 passes, for 90 total yards.												6.	Ben Roethlisberger	PIT	21/35	286	1	0	1	112	112	0	CIN	Roethlisberger hit a barrage of deep balls against Cincinnati, going 6-of-11 for 172 yards, with a 12th deep throw resulting in a DPI for 16 more yards.												7.	Matt Barkley	CHI	30/43	362	2	3	1	103	103	0	GB	One of Barkley's interceptions came on a Hail Mary at the end of the first half, so we count that as an incompletion for DVOA and DYAR purposes. That was not the only deep failure Barkley had on the day though -- he threw seven passes that traveled more than 20 yards past the line of scrimmage, with only one caught by the Bears (a 34-yard catch by Cameron Meredith), but three caught by the Packers.												8.	Carson Palmer	ARI	28/40	320	2	0	1	101	101	0	NO	Palmer was nearly perfect in short yardage. With 5 yards or less to go for a first down, he went 6-of-7 for 51 yards and six conversions, including a touchdown.	9.	Tom Savage	HOU	23/36	260	0	0	0	95	96	-1	JAC	10.	Cam Newton	CAR	22/37	300	2	0	2	68	77	-10	WAS	11.	Russell Wilson	SEA	19/26	229	3	1	2	57	60	-3	LARM	12.	Tom Brady	NE	16/32	188	0	0	2	48	48	0	DEN	Brady's first seven dropbacks resulted in six incompletions and a fumble-sack. Somehow the game was still tied at 3 at that point, and from there Brady played much better. He was second-worst in first-quarter DYAR this week, but ninth-best after that.
Rk	Player	Team	CP/AT	Yds	TD	INT	Sacks	Total DYAR	Pass DYAR	Rush DYAR	Opp
13.	Matthew Stafford	DET	24/39	273	0	1	1	45	44	1	NYG	Stafford had almost no luck in scoring range. Inside the Giants' 30 he went 3-of-8 for 9 yards with an interception and a sack. His only first down came on a 6-yard DPI.	14.	Philip Rivers	SD	17/30	206	2	1	3	42	42	0	OAK	Each of Rivers' first six dropbacks of the second half resulted in a completion for a first down, gaining 74 total yards in the process. But Rivers wouldn't pick up any first downs after that, going 2-of-6 for 9 yards with an interception and two sacks.												15.	Eli Manning	NYG	20/28	201	2	0	2	40	40	0	DET	16.	Kirk Cousins	WAS	32/47	315	0	1	1	22	15	7	CAR	17.	Tyrod Taylor	BUF	17/24	174	1	0	1	20	30	-10	CLE	The Bills got the ball with about eight minutes left in the third quarter, up 17-10 in what was still anyone's game. From that point forward, Taylor went 7-of-7 for 69 yards, with five first downs.												18.	Aaron Rodgers	GB	19/30	252	0	0	4	19	22	-3	CHI	19.	Andy Dalton	CIN	16/27	157	0	1	1	15	7	8	PIT	The Bengals were ahead 20-9 at halftime in this game, then still led 20-12 after the Steelers kicked a field goal on the first drive of the second half. From that point forward, Dalton went 6-of-11 for just 41 yards and only two first downs, with a sack.												20.	Marcus Mariota	TEN	19/32	241	0	1	1	14	14	0	KC	21.	Robert Griffin	CLE	17/28	196	0	0	5	0	-8	8	BUF	Griffin and the Browns hardly even tried to test the Bills deep until this game was out of reach. Only one of his first-half passes traveled more than 7 yards past the line of scrimmage: a 59-yard bomb to Corey Coleman on the last play of the half. Then he threw only three deep passes in the second half, even though the Browns were down by at least 14 points the entire time.												22.	Joe Flacco	BAL	16/29	206	2	1	3	-4	-4	0	PHI	Flacco was Griffin in reverse. He threw only four deep passes, all in the first half. Three were incomplete; the fourth was a 34-yard touchdown to Steve Smith.
Rk	Player	Team	CP/AT	Yds	TD	INT	Sacks	Total DYAR	Pass DYAR	Rush DYAR	Opp
23.	Colin Kaepernick	SF	20/33	183	2	0	2	-7	-5	-2	ATL	Kaepernick's last pass of the first half was a 5-yard touchdown to Rod Streater. He wouldn't pick up another first down until the middle of the fourth quarter. In between, he went 3-of-9 for 19 yards with a sack.	24.	Derek Carr	OAK	19/30	213	1	1	2	-7	-13	6	SD	25.	Case Keenum	LARM	5/9	32	0	0	0	-16	-16	0	SEA	All of Keenum's dropbacks came with Los Angeles down by 21 points in the fourth quarter. His only first down was a 16-yard completion to Brian Quick on second-and-5.												26.	Ryan Fitzpatrick	NYJ	5/10	31	0	1	0	-22	-20	-2	MIA	All of ~~Keenum's~~ Fitzpatrick's dropbacks came with ~~Los Angeles~~ the Jets down by 21 20 or more points in the fourth quarter. His only first down was a ~~16-yard~~ 13-yard completion to ~~Brian Quick~~ Bilal Powell on ~~second-and-5~~ first-and-10.												27.	Jameis Winston	TB	17/35	247	2	3	4	-50	-54	4	DAL	Winston's last pass of the third quarter was a 10-yard touchdown to Cameron Brate that put Tampa Bay ahead 20-17. In the fourth quarter, he went 3-of-12 for 19 yards with one first down, two interceptions, and three sacks, and the Bucs lost 26-20. Winston was sixth among all quarterbacks through three quarters this week, but last by a huge margin in the fourth.												28.	Blake Bortles	JAC	12/28	92	0	1	2	-71	-67	-5	HOU	Apparently Bortles' magic garbage time powers do not activate when the Jaguars are actually ahead. When Bortles first got the ball in the fourth quarter, the Jaguars were up 20-11. Fifteen minutes later, he had gone 2-of-9 for 17 yards with as many first downs (one) as interceptions, and the Jaguars had lost 21-20. These are the kinds of performances that get coaches fired.												29.	Jared Goff	LARM	13/25	135	0	0	4	-73	-73	0	SEA	The new kickoff rules this year mean that teams will start a lot of drives at their own 25. Within his own 25, Goff went 4-of-8 for 23 yards with one first down and three sacks.												30.	Alex Smith	KC	15/28	163	0	1	1	-76	-66	-10	TEN	31.	Carson Wentz	PHI	22/42	170	0	1	1	-77	-92	15	BAL	Red zone passing: 2-of-9 for 8 yards and no first downs. (He did pick up a first down on a 13-yard DPI.) So of course, on a potential game-winning two-pointer, they passed and failed.	32.	Sam Bradford	MIN	32/42	291	0	1	5	-84	-84	0	IND	Third/fourth downs: 5-of-9 for 21 yards with three conversions and a sack.												33.	Brock Osweiler	HOU	6/11	48	0	2	0	-91	-91	0	JAC	Osweiler only threw two passes that traveled more than 8 yards downfield. Both were intercepted.												34.	Bryce Petty	NYJ	20/36	235	1	2	3	-100	-100	0	MIA	In the third quarter, Petty went 4-of-10 for 15 yards with no first downs and a sack.	35.	Trevor Siemian	DEN	26/40	282	0	1	4	-104	-105	1	NE	Almost all of Siemian's negative value came on third and fourth downs, where he went 6-of-12 for 51 yards with one interception, one sack, and only two conversions.

Five Best Running Backs by DYAR (Total)
Rk	Player	Team	Runs	Rush Yds	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	Total DYAR	Rush DYAR	Rec DYAR	Opp
1.	Ryan Mathews	PHI	20	128	1	1/1	5	0	80	79	1	BAL	One of the best games you'll ever see by a running back who had a fumble. But Mathews had six 10-yard runs and eight first downs against Baltimore's mighty run defense. The Ravens have now given up 29 10-yard runs on the year. Mathews has 20 percent of them.	2.	LeSean McCoy	BUF	19	153	2	3/3	16	0	64	65	-1	CLE	McCoy's success rate against Cleveland was a mind-boggling 79 percent. He had ten total first downs, and five runs that gained at least 10 yards (including 20- and 24-yarders), while getting hit for no gain just once.	3.	Devonta Freeman	ATL	20	139	3	2/2	16	0	52	37	15	SF	Freeman had a fumble too. He also had 11 runs of 6 yards or more, including gains of 20 and 34 yards, and eight first downs.	4.	Jordan Howard	CHI	17	90	1	4/4	23	0	51	42	9	GB	Howard's five first downs on the ground -- including gains of 11, 13, and 13 yards -- all came in the second half. He was hit for no gain just once. He added another first down as a receiver.	5.	Derrick Henry	TEN	9	58	2	0/0	0	0	46	46	0	KC	Henry's success rate against Kansas City was 89 percent. He had six first downs in only nine carries, including gains of 11, 14, and 15 yards.

Five Best Running Backs by DYAR (Rushing)
Rk	Player	Team	Runs	Rush Yds	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	Total DYAR	Rush DYAR	Rec DYAR	Opp
1.	Ryan Mathews	PHI	20	128	1	1/1	5	0	80	79	1	BAL	2.	LeSean McCoy	BUF	19	153	2	3/3	16	0	64	65	-1	CLE	3.	Ty Montgomery	GB	16	162	2	2/3	1	0	39	51	-11	CHI	Montgomery ran for seven first downs against Chicago, including gains of 13, 26, 36, and 61 yards.	4.	Derrick Henry	TEN	9	58	2	0/0	0	0	46	46	0	KC	5.	Jordan Howard	CHI	17	90	1	4/4	23	0	51	42	9	GB

Worst Running Back by DYAR (Total)
Rk	Player	Team	Runs	Rush Yds	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	Total DYAR	Rush DYAR	Rec DYAR	Opp
1.	Kenneth Farrow	SD	15	39	0	2/3	14	0	-60	-37	-23	OAK	Odds are most of you have never heard of Kenneth Farrow until right now. But with Melvin Gordon out with a hip injury and Danny Woodhead, Branden Oliver, and even quasi-runner Dexter McCluster all on IR, the Chargers have been forced to use the undrafted rookie out of Houston as their primary runner. Against Oakland, Farrow only ran for one first down, his longest carry gained only 6 yards, and he had a fumble. He also had a fumble on one of his two catches.

Worst Running Back by DYAR (Rushing)
Rk	Player	Team	Runs	Rush Yds	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	Total DYAR	Rush DYAR	Rec DYAR	Opp
1.	LeGarrette Blount	NE	17	31	1	0/0	0	0	-41	-41	0	DEN	Blount's 1-yard touchdown against Denver was his only first down on the day. His longest run gained only 5 yards, and he was hit for no gain or a loss four times. He did this against a Denver defense that has been pretty terrible against the run this season.

Five Best Wide Receivers and Tight Ends by DYAR
Rk	Player	Team	Rec	Att	Yds	Avg	TD	Total DYAR	Opp
1.	Brandin Cooks	NO	7	8	186	26.6	2	92	ARI	Cooks had touchdowns of 65 and 45 yards against Arizona, plus four other first downs.	2.	Brandon LaFell	CIN	7	9	91	13.0	0	64	PIT	On top of his nine catches, LaFell's longest play was a 39-yard DPI. He had seven first downs on the day.	3.	Tyler Lockett	SEA	7	8	130	18.6	1	54	LARM	Lockett had a 57-yard touchdown against the Rams, plus a 29-yarder and two other first downs.	4.	Jarvis Landry	MIA	3	4	108	36.0	1	43	NYJ	In his career, Landry is averaging 6.0 catches and 64.0 yards per game. He only caught three passes against the Jets, but the longest -- a 66-yard touchdown -- eclipsed his career average for yards by itself.	5.	Aldrick Robinson	ATL	4	5	111	27.8	0	40	SF	All of Robinson's catches produced first downs, including gains of 20, 21, and 59 yards.

Worst Wide Receiver or Tight End by DYAR
Rk	Player	Team	Rec	Att	Yds	Avg	TD	Total DYAR	Opp
1.	Brandon Marshall	NYJ	1	11	16	16.0	0	-69	MIA	Well at least that one reception converted a second-and-13.

Football Outisders+ Perks & Features image

Comments

39 comments, Last at 22 Dec 2016, 11:35am

#1 by Chappy // Dec 20, 2016 - 9:39am

Not really sure I buy the analysis about QBing being worse. Seems like the cut-offs for bad/good/average are pretty arbitrary. (For example, if you use last weeks DVOA data, I think you have 3 fewer bad QBs). Wouldn't a better measure be some measure of variance in DVOA among qualified QBs?

#2 by techvet // Dec 20, 2016 - 9:46am

Wait, so Ty Montgomery had more rushing yards and more TDs with fewer rushes than Ryan Mathews and yet his rushing DYAR isn't even close to Ryan Mathews? Please explain. Is this because he had a bunch of runs that gained little or no yardage?

#6 by MinisterCheevy // Dec 20, 2016 - 10:10am

Opponent adjustments?

#8 by techvet // Dec 20, 2016 - 10:20am

Good point because Mathews was going up against a big rushing defense.

#28 by Arkaein // Dec 20, 2016 - 2:03pm

Seems hard to believe it would add up to that. With 10 YPC and only 39 DYAR on 16 carries, that's about 3 DYAR per carry. It would imply that an average RB should gain about 7 YPC against the Bears. And Chicago's rush D is only slightly below average by DYOA.

Regardless of where Montgomery ranks compared to other players, 39 DYAR just seems really low, especially for a player with 2 TDs and no fumbles.

#32 by Eddo // Dec 20, 2016 - 3:47pm

Using P-F-R, I see the following carries (in ascending order by yards gained) for Montgomery:

-2 yards on 3rd and 1
-1 yards on 1st and goal from the 2
1 yard on 1st and 10
1 yard on 1st and 10
2 yards on 1st and 10
3 yards on 1st and 10
3 yards on 2nd and goal touchdown
3 yards on 2nd and 2 first down
4 yards on 2nd and 10
4 yards on 1st and goal touchdown
9 yards on 1st and 10
13 yards on 1st and 10 first down
26 yards on 1st and 10 first down
36 yards on 1st and 10 first down
61 yards on 1st and 10 first down

So seven very good successes, one more strong success (9 yards on 1st and 10), one neutral (4 yards on 2nd and 10), and six failures. Honestly, his placement seems about right.

#3 by jtr // Dec 20, 2016 - 9:51am

I would love to see a more detailed analysis of QB DVOA over the years in the offseason when you guys have more time to work on it. Graphing out the distribution of DVOA and seeing how the distribution changes over time would give a much better view of how QB talent in the NFL has evolved over time. It sounds like the top tier of QBs have been getting better faster than the rest, making it harder to compete with a QB who's below the median. But it's hard to draw too strong of a conclusion from a quick-and-dirty analysis like the one above.

#12 by garion333 // Dec 20, 2016 - 11:24am

I'm with you on this. I'd also suggest throwing out a QB's first couple of seasons, if they played. Curious to see if the throw-the-rookie-to-the-wolves mentality has made QBs look worse or if there really is less QB talent.

Also, maybe instead of simply counting the number of good/bad/average QBs you list the percentage of QBs who were good/bad/average for the year. Seems unfair to compare 40 QBs to 30 QBs.

#23 by Duke // Dec 20, 2016 - 1:36pm

What jtr said.

My first thought reading this article was that maybe the top QBs are skewing DVOA more than they had in the past. Which does mean there are "more bad QBs" but not in the way that phrase implies

#4 by MilkmanDanimal // Dec 20, 2016 - 9:59am

I feel like the calculation for DVOA should be modified so that when the right tackle apparently dies on the field at the start of the fourth quarter and nobody notices, leaving the QB open to repeated free runs from the defensive end.

Also, RIP GOSDER CHERILUS NEVER FORGET.

I'm just saying, I wouldn't mind a Word of Muth focusing exactly on whatever the hell Cherilus thought he was supposed to be doing in that fourth quarter.

#5 by jtr // Dec 20, 2016 - 10:08am

Relatedly, perhaps Bryce Petty deserves a break this week too. He took a sack-fumble in the first quarter when the right tackle decided he could just ignore Cameron Wake, and then got brutally double-teamed in the fourth quarter when the center snapped the ball early and neither OT really got out of his stance at all.

#34 by johonny // Dec 20, 2016 - 4:46pm

As noted, worst WR of week Marshall did him no favors either. Marshall ran his mouth big all week and then got out played by an injury replacement rookie corner. Although mostly he just dropped passes. Early, often, and critically. Howard's play helped, but Marshall killed most plays all by himself.

#15 by Will Allen // Dec 20, 2016 - 11:37am

I really do wish there was a way to quantify offensive line play across years and eras, in order to confirm or disprove my suspicion that blocking and coordination among the big guys has declined significantly. What has often made the games less enjoyable to me is the consistently poor o-line play, which really narrows the type of offenses that can be utilized. Denver's trying to run their offense with guys who can't begin to execute the backside blocking in the run game, much less anything else. It's ridiculous. The Vikings are going to have a game where, if this keeps up, Bradford is going to go 32 for 35, for 96 yards, and 8 sacks.

The game is more fun to watch when a o-lines can execute basic fundamentals.

#16 by PirateFreedom // Dec 20, 2016 - 11:56am

That's a very good point.
I think almost all QBs would be at least 'good' if they had excellent lines.
Very few can still be 'good' with bad line play.

I wonder if the decline in running plays has made life harder on O-lines.
Maybe they aren't worse, maybe the job is harder.

Continuity might be another difference but free agency has been around for quite a while now, on the other hand I don't remember interior linemen getting expensive until Hutchinson

#18 by Will Allen // Dec 20, 2016 - 12:16pm

The CBA's restrictions on practice, especially practice in pads, very likely harms o line play more than any other unit. If you don't get to practice handing off responsibilities at full speed, with full contact, doing it in the game gets a lot harder. Fans just don't commonly appreciate the intricate coordination required, in an extremely violent environment.

Toss in that college spread offenses really don't train o linemen well for the next level, and boring NFL offenses are the predictable result. Yeah, they keep scoring up by making the rules tough for dbs, but raw scoring numbers dont really tell the story.

#24 by Duke // Dec 20, 2016 - 1:38pm

If that's true, then figuring out a way to train OLinemen under the newer rules is the new market inefficiency. I wonder how you'd try to solve it.

#29 by Will Allen // Dec 20, 2016 - 2:17pm

Or you go the Dallas route, and be very good/lucky at investing in o-linemen in the 1st round, and dominate games with your offensive line. Whether that was lucky or good (and how would we categorize Stephen Jones physically restraining Jerel Jones from drafting Johnny Manziel instead of an o-lineman?), it may not be repeatable.

#7 by PatsFan // Dec 20, 2016 - 10:14am

Vincent,

How much of a positive adjustment did Brady get for playing the DEN defense?
How much of a negative adjustment did Siemian get for playing the NE defense?

#9 by PatsFan // Dec 20, 2016 - 10:26am

With respect to the change after 2003, something else happened in 2004 -- Bill Polian's jihad (sorry, "point of emphasis") against pass defense.

Maybe making it harder to play pass defense, while it floated all ships higher, benefited the better QBs disproportionally and so increased the "spread" between best-of-best and everyone else, pushing more QBs out of good into average and pushing more out of average into bad?

#10 by dmstorm22 // Dec 20, 2016 - 10:53am

The real rise didn't really start until after the lockout though. There definitely was a spike in '04, but there was mostly a course correction in 2005-06.

2007 had another spike, and then the real spikes started 2011 onwards.

To me it has more to do with the rise of short-passing, shotgun offenses and raising the pass/run ratio to favor the pass.

Sure, defensive backfield play has become a lot tougher, but there has to be more than just that since even comparing recent years to 2004 there is a big difference.

#39 by MC2 // Dec 22, 2016 - 11:35am

I think the reason the numbers are better now than in 2004 is because it has taken a while for teams to adjust to the fact that passing is now so much more efficient than running. Most coaches are very stubborn and set in their ways, and it takes a while to weed out the guys (e.g. Jeff Fisher) who simply refuse to adjust.

Also, there have been some other rules changes since then that have helped the offense (e.g. roughing the passer, can't hit a defenseless receiver, etc.). Again, it takes a little while for teams to fully adjust to the impact of these changes, and as they do, the better offenses keep getting gradually more efficient, and the gap keeps growing between the teams that successfully adjust, and those that are unable (or unwilling) to do so.

#22 by mrt1212 // Dec 20, 2016 - 1:33pm

This has been my prevailing theory on why some QBs like Brees are so far and away better in this era - he among a handful of others really are adept at making the most of the rule structure whereas most can't capitalize to nearly the same degree and are exposed in their dearth of talent relative to Brees et al.

#25 by Tomlin_Is_Infallible // Dec 20, 2016 - 1:50pm

dearth is a really nice choice of words

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHE0sA2qKy0

--------------------------------------
The standard is the standard!

#36 by dbostedo // Dec 20, 2016 - 10:40pm

Cool video, but pretty disingenuous to claim that Brees is more accurate than an olympic archer.

Sure, Brees hit the bulls-eye more often, but from 20 yards, where the archers shoot from 70 meters! I'd think Brees would be lucky to get the ball to hit the target at all, much less the bulls-eye, from 70 meters (not that THAT would be a valid comparison either).

#11 by big10freak // Dec 20, 2016 - 11:17am

Randall Cobb was on the field for 51 plays on Sunday and did not have a pass thrown in his direction. Chicago consistently either locked him up at the LOS forcing Rodgers to look elsewhere as the timing was off or had a hand on him downfield where he could not disengage and get separation. Physical play really impacts his game.

#13 by Thomas_beardown // Dec 20, 2016 - 11:25am

What is the standard deviation of DVOA over the years? Are QBs spreading out more or just shifting down?

#17 by Eddo // Dec 20, 2016 - 11:58am

Also, do we have more below-average QBs now because the overall average has increased?

Let's say, in 2000, we had ten QBs, with raw (i.e. NOT DVOA) values of:

-10, -8, -6, -4, -2, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10

That average is 0, so we have five below, five above.

But now, let's say, in 2016, we have:

-6, -4, -4, 2, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20

The average is now 5 - a good bit higher than in 2000 - and SIX QBs are below it.

Subjectively, I don't see worse QB play in general - I see BETTER QB play from 2/3 of the starters in the league, but the remaining third or so is about as bad as they were fifteen years ago (i.e. Brock Osweiler is about as bad as the 32nd best starter in 2000). So the overall average is up, which means more QBs are below it.

#27 by Chappy // Dec 20, 2016 - 1:59pm

You guys are saying the same thing I'm saying in comment #1. Totally agree. The author could show the standard deviation and/or show say, quartiles of QBing so you see how the top 25% perform relative to the bottom 25%. My guess is there is drift.

An even simpler way would be to show the median. My guess, like yours, is that in the Brady/Manning (Brees/Rivers/Rodgers) era, you have some pretty big outliers bringing up the average, so the median player might be below the mean.

Lastly, I think the cut-off for qualifying QBs should be era adjusted. It seems kind of weird to me that 1995 has about as many qualifying QBs as the previous years, but there were two expansion teams added. Why is this the case? I suspect because using 175 qualifying throws was a pretty high bar when the running game was more valued. Point being, being a back-up QB today means you throw 175 throws in 4 games and that was maybe half a season of throws for a back-up in the 1990s. I think that only shows that back-ups are being more relied upon today to throw than in years past, but I don't think that means that back-ups are worse--they are just leveraged more (or the cost of an injury is higher).

#31 by Eddo // Dec 20, 2016 - 3:34pm

I agree that the standard deviation would be good to know, but I'm actually saying I'd like to know the not-adjusted-to-average values, so I'd want to see something besides DVOA. Or DVOA to be recalculated (for this exercise) using the same baseline across all the years (it's done year-by-year now, right?).

#14 by serutan // Dec 20, 2016 - 11:36am

"Winston was sixth among all quarterbacks through three quarterbacks this week, "

Do I want to know how a quarterback goes through quarterbacks? Sounds like it could be grisly.
______
Was wr

#19 by Lance // Dec 20, 2016 - 12:21pm

The first paragraph is telling. To anyone who is paying attention, the NFL has made it much much easier to pass in the last 20 years or so, and the numbers reflect that. Amazingly, though, the TV and radio pundits haven't caught on (ahem) to this, and still swoon over the big numbers put up by modern QBs. Sorry, but 4000 yards and 35 TDs is no longer the feat is was back in 1995 or something.

#26 by PatsFan // Dec 20, 2016 - 1:57pm

Yeah. I'd like to see all QB and receiving stats normalized to the season they occurred in.

So sure, keep track of the raw yards, TD, etc. as well but also have adjusted yards and adjusted TDs done something like this:
1) pick a season to be the baseline for all the stats
2) player's adjusted stat = league avg for stat in baseline year * (player's raw stat)/(league avg for stat in current year)

The idea is to compute some sort of "constant yards" and "constant TD passes" and the like, analogous to how economists compute "constant dollars" when making intertemporal comparisons.

#30 by RickD // Dec 20, 2016 - 2:50pm

Even with that in mind, I would dislike seeing the stats reduced to "number of standard deviations above or below the mean".

#20 by Tomlin_Is_Infallible // Dec 20, 2016 - 12:21pm

The description on BigBen sums up what is wrong with nfl play by play logs and our use of the word "deep".
--------------------------------------
The standard is the standard!

#21 by Red // Dec 20, 2016 - 1:13pm

Vince - Where did your 6.77 yards per pass figure come from? Standard Y/A is 7.2 and NY/A is 6.4 this year. It seems like you're using different measures in the numerator and denominator, leading to a distorted result.

#33 by Vincent Verhei // Dec 20, 2016 - 4:06pm

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but the numbers in the table represent all of 2016, not just one week.

The biggest reason is the massive opponent adjustments Mathews gets for playing Baltimore. Without those, Mathews would only have had 46 DYAR. Montgomery also had more bad runs -- eight runs that were worth negative YAR, even without opponent adjustments. (Most of these gained 3 yards or less, without gaining a first down.) Mathews also had eight, but in four more carries. And again, against Baltimore.

How much of a positive adjustment did Brady get for playing the DEN defense?
How much of a negative adjustment did Siemian get for playing the NE defense?

Brady: plus-79, most of any quarterback this week.
Siemian: minus-18, 26th

What is the standard deviation of DVOA over the years? Are QBs spreading out more or just shifting down?

There's no real pattern.

https://twitter.com/FO_VVerhei/status/811310321612754944

Somebody asked about median DVOA -- there's a lot of noise, but it's definitely on the decline.

https://twitter.com/FO_VVerhei/status/811313434646212608

"Winston was sixth among all quarterbacks through three quarterbacks this week, "
Do I want to know how a quarterback goes through quarterbacks? Sounds like it could be grisly.

Heh. Three QUARTERS. Fixed.

Oh, dammit. I just realized the numbers at PFR list net passing yards for teams, but don't distinguish between yards gained passing and yards lost on sacks. So the numbers listed in the opening paragraph are (league-wide net passing yards, including sacks) divided by (total passes, NOT including sacks).

OK, I found the real data. It's fixed now.

Yes, the baseline is recalculated each year so the sum-total for each season is zero. I think you're looking for the baselines, but that's easy to answer just by re-reading the opening paragraph (even with its errors): League-wide baselines for quarterbacks are higher than they have ever been before.

#35 by Eddo // Dec 20, 2016 - 5:27pm

"Yes, the baseline is recalculated each year so the sum-total for each season is zero. I think you're looking for the baselines, but that's easy to answer just by re-reading the opening paragraph (even with its errors): League-wide baselines for quarterbacks are higher than they have ever been before."

Thanks, Vince.

So if the baseline - the mean for DVOA purposes - is trending up, but the median is trending down, that would mean there are more "elite" QBs these days, but probably the same amount of mediocre ones as ever, right?

That is, compare these two sets of raw values:

A: -10, -8, -6, -4, -2, +2, +4, +6, +8, +10
B: -10, -8, -6, -4, -2, +4, +8, +12, +16, +20

The baseline/mean for set A is 0. For B, it is 3.

Given that, the values over average for each set would be:

A: -10, -8, -6, -4, -2, +2, +4, +6, +8, +10
B: -13, -11, -9, -7, -5, +1, +5, +9, +13, +17

A's median is 0, while B's is -2, which is what we're seeing in real life, no?

EDIT: Of course, B's standard deviation is going to be higher than A's, which isn't necessarily what we're seeing. But these two sets show a case where (a) the baseline is higher, (b) the median over-average metric is lower, (c) the worse raw scores are about the same, and (d) the elite scores are even better.

#37 by Chappy // Dec 21, 2016 - 10:23am

Thanks. I wrote the comment:

What I meant here is that I looked at your qualifying QBs in the database for week 15 and figured out that 3 (terrible) QBs wouldn't have qualified in week 15, but presumably did in week 16 (since you have better data). My main point is that if you did the same analysis one week earlier you'd have 3 fewer "bad" QBs so the cut-offs are arbitrary. I also think you have a problem with your 175 qualifying pass cut-off. Today that means you are selecting in QBs that would have otherwise been true, non-qualifying back-ups in say the 1990s because many fewer passes were attempted. Now 175 passes could be 4 games of a back-up. Back, say, in the 1990s coaches would have stopped playing a back-up before they got to that many passes.

#38 by jtr // Dec 21, 2016 - 11:35am

Hey Vince, you get asked in the comments about the opponent adjustment for some player every week. It might save you some effort if you add YAR onto the tables so that people can figure it out for themselves.