This upcoming draft makes 10 years of drafts since the rookie wage scale was introduced, and the concept of a rookie QB contract being a team building advantage. To get a sense of how drafting QBs changed in 2011, take a look at the contracts for Sam Bradford (drafted in 2010 under the old CBA) and Cam Newton (drafted in 2011 and paid after the end of the lockout):
2010 #1 pick Sam Bradford: 6 years, $78M
2011 #1 pick Cam Newton: 4 years, $22M
Consider that Joe Burrow was drafted just last year, and his 4 year, $36M contract still isn't half of what Bradford got ten years ago. It really was a "before & after" line, and I wonder the extent to which it changed the way teams look at drafting quarterbacks.
I also started thinking about the last 10 years of 1st round QBs as a group. The table below contains the college career stats of every QB drafted in the first round from 2011-2020. I added the five likely first rounders in the upcoming draft, as well as significant non-first round picks that stuck and made significant impacts in the NFL. This last group is obviously subjective, but I don't know that I'm missing much by excluding the Geno Smiths of the world.
- CAPS denotes a QB that played a big role in getting to a Super Bowl ("big role" really just referring to Carson Wentz; all other QBs in CAPS started a Super Bowl game)
- * denotes a QB who was not picked in the first round; there are 13 of these QBs
- Strikethrough denotes a QB who flamed out and was quickly out of the league
- Sports Reference didn't have all of Garoppolo's stats, so I just included what they had
Every statistical category is shaded green (high rank) to red (low rank), but the QBs are sorted by their college passer rating. I also included their college and NFL AY/A next to each other. AY/A is a pretty good catch-all stat, and is calculated by (pass yards + 20*(pass TD) - 45*(interceptions thrown))/(passing attempts).
Two thoughts:
1. I thought the number of QBs over this 10 year period would be larger than it is (49, 36 drafted in round 1). But maybe that feels about right? A shade under 5 QBs per draft on average?
2. You can see how passing efficiency has really gone up. I am reminded of Nick Saban's recent admission that you have to outscore people now...no surprise that the two highest rated QBs are his last two. Lincoln Riley's guys also stand out: Murray, Mayfield, and Hurts.
The only one I see is that any chart that has Dwayne Haskins ranked 8th, Trubisky 19, and Bortles 24, while Mahomes is 28th, Russell Wilson is 30th and Josh Allen is 43rd is just a bunch of meaningless numbers on a page, when it comes to evaluating QBs
Really interesting, for sure.
So many questions pop to mind...
Really of that list who stands out as elite? Only Mahomes to me, although Wilson is in the conversation.
So which of this group becomes the new Brady or Eli? Will any of these guys win multiple SBs?
A couple of Guys have gotten to or won a SB, and have either fallen off the map, or are just not in high demand anymore. Crazy when you think about what we had with Eli.... and how truly amazing Brady, Brees, Eli, Big Ben's and Rivers careers have been.
Good stuff Terps.
The only one I see is that any chart that has Dwayne Haskins ranked 8th, Trubisky 19, and Bortles 24, while Mahomes is 28th, Russell Wilson is 30th and Josh Allen is 43rd is just a bunch of meaningless numbers on a page, when it comes to evaluating QBs
I was thinking the same thing.
Looking though a Giants lense, I’d say the takeaway is the team around a QB has more to do with their success that their QB rating. In other words, helps prove the point the Giants problems the last 2 years are less about Daniel Jones and more about the team around him. Bc looked at without any other factors considered, QB rating in college clearly doesn’t correlate to NFL success
And along those lines...had Daniel Jones played at Ohio State and Dwayne Haskins played at Duke in 2018, how differently would they have been perceived coming out?
Totally agree with this. They may still get exposed at some point but it certainly helps with at least having moderate success.
I don't find any surprise in the fact that the guys from the big dominant programs have better college stats. That makes sense. What scouts do is figure out if that will translate to the NFL or not (like Leinert). Also they find the guys with worse stats that come from programs that didn't win as much and try to figure out if its the program or them
But you never know.
But you never know.
Pretty sure that’s his point.
I'm not sold on that opinion at all, but it does stand out here.
There are a lot more interesting things I get from this data, that I have already stated...
- Of that list who stands out as elite? Only Mahomes to me, although Wilson is in the conversation.
- Which of this group becomes the new Brady or Eli?
- Will any of these guys win multiple SBs?
A couple of Guys have gotten to or won a SB, and have either fallen off the map, or are just not in high demand anymore (Kaepernick).
And it TRULY is Crazy when you think about what we had with Eli.... and how truly amazing Brady, Brees, Eli, Big Ben's and Rivers careers have been.
Quote:
I just kind of figured he posted as informational... make your own inferences. It sure makes me think, and mfsd I agree with your last point. But I have always felt where a guy lands is almost as important as the guy himself... with a (very) few exceptions.
Totally agree with this. They may still get exposed at some point but it certainly helps with at least having moderate success.
For sure. This data solidifies that for me even more. It's a pretty interesting graphic.
Say 100? ;)
Say 100? ;)
See, this is trolling for an argument. In my view this only matters if you consider it an important metric for determining who you pick from college. Sort by other metrics and he goes up and down comparatively. He is better in almost every metric than Josh Allen. And his NFL AY/A is a whole lot closer to other guys who ar5e having success. I'd be interested to see it sorted by that metric.
Say 100? ;)
I don't see how this proves anything one way or another about Jones, except that college performance as measured by QB rating has little correlation to NFL success
But if you would prefer Haskins over Mahomes, Wilson, or Lamar Jackson bc Haskins had better college stats, knock yourself out
Quote:
Should we set the O/U for the number of excuses for Jones while at Duke?
Say 100? ;)
I don't see how this proves anything one way or another about Jones, except that college performance as measured by QB rating has little correlation to NFL success
But if you would prefer Haskins over Mahomes, Wilson, or Lamar Jackson bc Haskins had better college stats, knock yourself out
I really was just joking with Terps because there was a recent thread where we got inundated with excuses for Jones's play thus far. Nothing more, nothing less.
When I look at college QBs, I don't put a lot of emphasis on their college stats. I put more weight on physical attributes like arm talent and mobility. I will look at completion % because I think that might be a decent indicator for the pros.
The problem is that the schemes and talent level the QBs had around them were all different. Tua and Mac Jones are obviously at the top because they play at the most loaded team in the nation.
Jones played at Duke with zero future NFL players. It's just impossible to compare what he did vs. what Mac Jones/Tua did purely based on stats.
Quote:
In comment 15215145 bw in dc said:
Quote:
Should we set the O/U for the number of excuses for Jones while at Duke?
Say 100? ;)
I don't see how this proves anything one way or another about Jones, except that college performance as measured by QB rating has little correlation to NFL success
But if you would prefer Haskins over Mahomes, Wilson, or Lamar Jackson bc Haskins had better college stats, knock yourself out
I really was just joking with Terps because there was a recent thread where we got inundated with excuses for Jones's play thus far. Nothing more, nothing less.
When I look at college QBs, I don't put a lot of emphasis on their college stats. I put more weight on physical attributes like arm talent and mobility. I will look at completion % because I think that might be a decent indicator for the pros.
Apologies for overreacting, both to you and Terps above...I sort looked at this thinking there was some hidden meaning intended, and my first responses were on the argumentative side, but Terps may well have simply posted to say here’s 10 years of data, discuss
As for the stats, I’d agree that there are way too many variables between college and pros to assign too much to any of them...type of offense run, quality of surrounded players, quality of opponents, etc. As much as the pros try to gather all they can and parse through it, they still get it wrong a lot
The problem is that the schemes and talent level the QBs had around them were all different. Tua and Mac Jones are obviously at the top because they play at the most loaded team in the nation.
Jones played at Duke with zero future NFL players. It's just impossible to compare what he did vs. what Mac Jones/Tua did purely based on stats.
Well, I’m not sure this is entirely correct. The level of talent has some relative correlation to outcomes. If you put me at Alabama QB1, my stats aren’t going to be better than the Duke QB1 no matter how much talent I have around me. Also, the QB1 position at Alabama isn’t randomly assigned anymore than the starting QB1 at Eastern Illinois. Those teams are composed of relatively similar levels of talent and play, mostly, against similar levels of talent. I don’t think Terps weighted his data but you could also argue that the CFB recruiting process did most of the heavy lifting. I think...
Agreed
I agree, but he did finally look human with the OL he had in front of him in the SB.
Is this a signal that perhaps the future of the NFL is a devaluation of QBs because there just aren't many good ones? Or an increasing valuation of the really good ones since they are becoming more scarce? Or some combination of both?
Meanwhile we have the usual amount of baiting from bw, referring to an entirely separate thread, as usual.
I was more along the lines of what McL posted.
I was more along the lines of what McL posted.
It's a pretty cool view for sure. So many points it brings to attention. Can you sort it by NFL AY/A? It looks like Jones will still be in the lower range but I'm interested to see that. Thx Terps
When you look at it sorted this way there is more green on top (obviously ignoring this year's N/A prospects) than there is on the bottom, implying that there may be some level of correlation between college pass completions & attempts, college TDs, and NFL AY/A.
And regarding Jones, it just doesn't paint a great picture. His 6.5 AY/A was 26th in the NFL...remember - that number does not take into account his league leading 19 fumbles. And if you look into his 12 starts in 2019 here are his game by game AY/A numbers:
1: 10.44
2. 5.00
3. 4.13
4. 1.48
5. 5.66
6. 9.80
7. 4.51
8. 9.70
9. 5.28
10. 3.38
11. 10.76
12. 5.87
So in his rookie season he played 4 great games and 8 really poor games. Again...that's not counting 19 fumbles.
It's commonly stated that Jones had a good rookie year. That isn't true.
And I said this in another thread, but Josh Rosen’s NFL career looks like some weird outlier, even on a list with a number of busts included. I am curious to learn the full story there one day.
Nice work.
Quote:
It's definitely interesting to look at.
The problem is that the schemes and talent level the QBs had around them were all different. Tua and Mac Jones are obviously at the top because they play at the most loaded team in the nation.
Jones played at Duke with zero future NFL players. It's just impossible to compare what he did vs. what Mac Jones/Tua did purely based on stats.
Well, I’m not sure this is entirely correct. The level of talent has some relative correlation to outcomes. If you put me at Alabama QB1, my stats aren’t going to be better than the Duke QB1 no matter how much talent I have around me. Also, the QB1 position at Alabama isn’t randomly assigned anymore than the starting QB1 at Eastern Illinois. Those teams are composed of relatively similar levels of talent and play, mostly, against similar levels of talent. I don’t think Terps weighted his data but you could also argue that the CFB recruiting process did most of the heavy lifting. I think...
This is utter nonsense. You are telling me Cee Dee Lamb, Waddle, Smith et al aren't going to make a difference over what some QB from Northern Illinois has to catch his passes. 1st round WR vs guys who are selling insurance or teaching in HS.
One of the biggest arguments about NYG receivers is separation or lack thereof vs say Mahomes and his guys. Alabama's guys are open against CBs that get drafted into the NFL - that doesn't help Matt Jones completion percentage?
There are a WHOLE LOT of QB questions in the NFL right now.
Who really is set at QB in the NFL except for KC/Mahomes?
1) Buffalo - Josh Allen
2) Baltimore - Lamar Jackson
3) Arizona - Kyler Murray
4) Cleveland - Mayfield
5) Tampa - Brady (For How long?)
TD%
INT%
There's a big discrepancy between the way many on BBI view Y/A and NFL people do. It is looked at as an offensive effiency value for football people while here it is looked at as a QB stat.
QB's don't intentionally look to have low yards per play, but some offensive designs will result in that vs. others.
I'm curious why you look at it as a QB metric and an important one at that?
I don't expect you to talk directly with NFL people, but the fluctuation QB's have had from year to year when the offensive systems change should be enough for you to realize that.
Suppose Tampa safety makes the tackle. Clearly, Jones’ stats represented in this thread would go down.
Suppose Engram drops the pass. He does it quite a bit. Jones’ stats in this thread also go down.
That’s why it was so important to bring in guys like Golladay, Rudolph, hopefully Ross, a draft pick (?). You need weapons that help your QB look good. Add in a healthy Barkley and away we go.
Do you have a better number? I know there is EPA (expected points added) but that's harder to come by.
That list covers over 50000 passes thrown by 49 college QBs in a 10 year period. It's a pretty good sample size. Are we really going to believe that Jones's poor AY/A and TD% in college and the pros are because of a series of unfortunate events that only befell him?
Now look at your list. Only 5 in 45 (11%) are significantly differentiated in any way.
So your own data tells us that following this strategy leads to the same posts over 3 years with new names stitched in.
So unless I am missing something significant, the most likely outcome of what you have advocated likely produces no cheese at the end of the tunnel? Using your own data.
Nor does the above analysis show that the metric significantly correlates to NFL success except for Brady and a few others...who are statistical outliers in so many ways. (and I point out that Bradys metric on this radically decreased once he no longer had Moss or the 2 TE offense).
Unless the real cheese is to argue, does all this show that the top 10% of a data sample is nowhere close to the average of the sample?
Its an opinion that Jones is not good enough. I share the same doubts. I cant make a good argument beyond what I worry about from watching and I havent seen anyone else do so...so to me...those who argue otherwise are on equally spongy ground.
Unless the goal is to argue- imo, we dont know enough to be conclusive yet. Doubt Judge does either.
That list covers over 50000 passes thrown by 49 college QBs in a 10 year period. It's a pretty good sample size. Are we really going to believe that Jones's poor AY/A and TD% in college and the pros are because of a series of unfortunate events that only befell him?
Sample sizes across different QB's and systems don't mean much. How many of those QB's have stable AY/A??
Here's a few examples for you. Brett Favre had AY/A's of 5.0, 5.2, 5.6, 5.6 and AY/A's of 7.9, 7.9, 7.6 and 7.4
His last season with the Pack was 7.8. Went to the Jets and had a 6.7. Went to Minny and had a 7.9. What is stable about his stat??
Carson Wentz has had AY/A's of 5.7, 8.3, 7.9, 7.0 and 5.3. A lot of fluctuation.
Tannehill has had AY/A's of 6.1, 6.2, 6.9, 7.1, 7.3, 7.0, 10.2 and 8.7
Trying to pigeon-hole consistency to a metric that varies a lot is disingenuous.
Jones' AY/A is actually slightly better in the NFL. That doesn't mean a whole lot - but AY/A doesn't mean a whole lot for individual QB's anyway.
There's a reason that people who put credence in the stat do so to evaluate an offense, but for some reason, we're supposed to take it to a different level on BBI? why?