Jump to content

Winning Formula for QBs


nyjbuddy

Recommended Posts

I was listening to the "Move the Sticks" Podcast the other day and Daniel Jeremiah had brought up a few interesting statistics about starting QBs in the league and their respective college careers. He spoke to the fact that 30 of 32 starting QBs had winning seasons their senior year of college (Jay Cutler and Trevor Siemian did not).  He then goes on to mention 24 of 32 won 10 or more games their senior year.  Though after looking into this its actually 22 of 32 (Tannehill, Osweiler, Siemian, Rivers, Prescott, Wentz (Injury), Cutler, Brees, Goff, Bradford (Injury)), unless you remove Bradford (played 1 full game and 2 half games) and Wentz (played only 7 games).  Lastly, 27 of 32 had completion percentages higher that 60% (Tyrod[59.7], Siemian[58.2], Cutler [59.1], Ryan[59.3], Bradford[56.6]) during their senior year.  If you take Bradford's Sophomore season, which is his last full season, he had a 67.9 completion %, the numbers would be 28 of 32.

I do not believe these statistical numbers are essential attributes to look for in a QB (i.e. Parcell's rules for drafting a QB), but it is interesting how trends like this present themselves over time.  If you were to apply these 3 indicators to the draft class this year, you would end up with Watson, Evans, Liufau and Terrell as the only options.  If you applied it to last year's draft you would have Prescott, Cardale Jones, Kevin Hogan, Jake Rudock and Brandon Daughty.

Lastly, Petty is the only one out of Smith, Fitzpatrick and Hackenberg that would satisfy each condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is so tough to know who's game will translate to the pros.  Accuracy and a quick release are pretty important for me, also pocket presence.

I look at a guy like Geno, very nice arm, mobile enough, can make all the throws but his pocket presence has always been so terrible.

That is one thing I liked a lot about Darnold last year.  sure he has some other attributes to be a good Qb but his pocket presence, knowing when to leave the pocket, when to run etc was just superior looking to many college QBs.

One thing is for sure re QBs imo, need makes teams see things that are not there or ignore things that are there.  Teams will swear up down and sideways re their evals but QBs just get over drafted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, nyjbuddy said:

I was listening to the "Move the Sticks" Podcast the other day and Daniel Jeremiah had brought up a few interesting statistics about starting QBs in the league and their respective college careers. He spoke to the fact that 30 of 32 starting QBs had winning seasons their senior year of college (Jay Cutler and Trevor Siemian did not).  He then goes on to mention 24 of 32 won 10 or more games their senior year.  Though after looking into this its actually 22 of 32 (Tannehill, Osweiler, Siemian, Rivers, Prescott, Wentz (Injury), Cutler, Brees, Goff, Bradford (Injury)), unless you remove Bradford (played 1 full game and 2 half games) and Wentz (played only 7 games).  Lastly, 27 of 32 had completion percentages higher that 60% (Tyrod[59.7], Siemian[58.2], Cutler [59.1], Ryan[59.3], Bradford[56.6]) during their senior year.  If you take Bradford's Sophomore season, which is his last full season, he had a 67.9 completion %, the numbers would be 28 of 32.

I do not believe these statistical numbers are essential attributes to look for in a QB (i.e. Parcell's rules for drafting a QB), but it is interesting how trends like this present themselves over time.  If you were to apply these 3 indicators to the draft class this year, you would end up with Watson, Evans, Liufau and Terrell as the only options.  If you applied it to last year's draft you would have Prescott, Cardale Jones, Kevin Hogan, Jake Rudock and Brandon Daughty.

Lastly, Petty is the only one out of Smith, Fitzpatrick and Hackenberg that would satisfy each condition.

FWIW - there is literally zero predictive analytics as it pertains to QB.  Nothing.  None.  Nada.  That's why it's the hardest position to draft and it has the highest fail ratio than any other position.  If there was some type of empirical data used to evaluate QB's, there wouldnt be so many busts or some much conjecture when it comes to their evaluation. 

While this is pretty interesting, it means nothing in the grand scheme of things.  You could probably do this with 95% of college prospects at every single position.  Why?  Because good programs produce good players.

Daniel Jeremiah is a boob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JiF said:

FWIW - there is literally zero predictive analytics as it pertains to QB.  Nothing.  None.  Nada.  That's why it's the hardest position to draft and it has the highest fail ratio than any other position.  If there was some type of empirical data used to evaluate QB's, there wouldnt be so many busts or some much conjecture when it comes to their evaluation. 

While this is pretty interesting, it means nothing in the grand scheme of things.  You could probably do this with 95% of college prospects at every single position.  Why?  Because good programs produce good players.

Daniel Jeremiah is a boob.

Interesting to note, for the Jets, of the players that had significant playing time approximately 75% had winning records their senior year and below 40% had double digit wins.   That is a huge difference with 94% and 70+% for the QBs.

Agreed that good programs produce good players, but the NFL does not all come from big programs.  From stats taken in 2015: 67.9% came from Power 5 programs. 12 players came from schools that no longer have football, 14 players went to div 3 schools, 4 from NAIA and 4 came from Canada, 7.7% played at the FCS level, and 3.8 percent at the Div 2 level.

Though there isn't an easy way to identify which players will be good and which will not, the NFL actually does a pretty good job of finding adequate players.  There are nearly 760 college football programs in the US.  Every year scouts have to go through a significant amount of those players as they could be seniors or underclassman that may enter the draft.  If each school were to average 20 players per class, that more than 15,000 candidates that need to go through a year.  Yes, teams quickly narrow these down after watching one game or a couple plays, (I think they target around 6000 eventually) but looking at all the prospects is how teams find those gems.  Approximately 260 players get drafted and only around 300 rookies make a team.  Only half of that will play beyond the 4 year mark.  Purely based on numbers there is a 1% chance out of 150,000 that a player will get beyond 4 years.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...