Mike Vick

[texas23]

Now this proof that your premise is wrong,,,,very wrong regarding the way in which you determine who is a great QuarterBack.

 

read the highlighted parts for some very interesting comments regarding statistics and the intention of the ratings.

 

NFL quarterback rating formula

The NFL rates its passers for statistical purposes against a fixed performance standard based on statistical achievements of all qualified pro passers since 1960. The current system replaced one that rated passers in relation to their position in a total group based on various criteria.

 

The current system, which was adopted in 1973, removes inequities that existed in the former method and, at the same time, provides a means of comparing passing performances from one season to the next.

 

It is important to remember that the system is used to rate pass-ers, not quarterbacks. Statistics do not reflect leadership, play-calling, and other intangible factors that go into making a successful professional quarterback.

Four categories are used as a basis for compiling a rating:

• Percentage of completions per attempt

• Average yards gained per attempt

• Percentage of touchdown passes per attempt

• Percentage of interceptions per attempt

 

The average standard, is 1.000. The bottom is .000. To earn a 2.000 rating, a passer must perform at exceptional levels, i.e., 70 percent in completions, 10 percent in touchdowns, 1.5 percent in interceptions, and 11 yards average gain per pass attempt. The maximum a passer can receive in any category is 2.375.

 

For example, to gain a 2.375 in completion percentage, a passer would have to complete 77.5 percent of his passes. The NFL record is 70.55 by Ken Anderson (Cincinnati, 1982).

 

To earn a 2.375 in percentage of touchdowns, a passer would have to achieve a percentage of 11.9. The record is 13.9 by Sid Luckman (Chicago, 1943).

 

To gain 2.375 in percentage of interceptions, a passer would have to go the entire season without an interception. The 2.375 figure in average yards is 12.50, compared with the NFL record of 11.17 by Tommy O'Connell (Cleveland, 1957).

 

In order to make the rating more understandable, the point rating is then converted into a scale of 100. In rare cases, where statistical performance has been superior, it is possible for a passer to surpass a 100 rating.

 

For example, take Steve Young's record-setting season in 1994 when he completed 324 of 461 passes for 3,969 yards, 35 touchdowns, and 10 interceptions.

 

The four calculations would be:

• Percentage of Completions — 324 of 461 is 70.28 percent. Subtract 30 from the completion percentage (40.28) and multiply the result by 0.05. The result is a point rating of 2.014.

Note: If the result is less than zero (Comp. Pct. less than 30.0), award zero points. If the results are greater than 2.375 (Comp. Pct. greater than 77.5), award 2.375.

 

• Average Yards Gained Per Attempt — 3,969 yards divided by 461 attempts is 8.61. Subtract three yards from yards-per-attempt (5.61) and multiply the result by 0.25. The result is 1.403.

Note: If the result is less than zero (yards per attempt less than 3.0), award zero points. If the result is greater than 2.375 (yards per attempt greater than 12.5), award 2.375 points.

 

• Percentage of Touchdown Passes — 35 touchdowns in 461 attempts is 7.59 percent. Multiply the touchdown percentage by 0.2. The result is 1.518.

Note: If the result is greater than 2.375 (touchdown percentage greater than 11.875), award 2.375.

 

• Percentage of Interceptions — 10 interceptions in 461 attempts is 2.17 percent. Multiply the interception percentage by 0.25 (0.542) and subtract the number from 2.375. The result is 1.833.

Note: If the result is less than zero (interception percentage greater than 9.5), award zero points.

 

The sum of the four steps is (2.014 + 1.403 + 1.518 + 1.833) 6.768. The sum is then divided by six (1.128) and multiplied by 100. In this case, the result is 112.8. This same formula can be used to determine a passer rating for any player who attempts at least one pass.

 

source of information:

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/981202qbrate.html

Edited January 3, 2006 by texas23

[Gerry Bertier]

Texas, just give up, don't you know gotmilk has a doctorate degree in "I am always right in my own mind." You can't have a discussion with him. Just do what I do and block and and you don't have to read his irrevelant post with all his facts he got from the gotmilk sports almanac 2005 edition.

[Solomon]

I don't believe these two are still arguing this. Two stubborn mules at their finest.

 

I am going to throw in some thoughts though. I agree that Vick is overrated. For the expectations that were set up for him and the hype that surrounds him, how could you argue otherwise? By this point he was supposed to be setting new milestones and change the way the game is played like that other Michael did. Yes, the Falcons struggle when he is not in the lineup, but so do various other teams when their starting QB goes down too. See the 2005 edition of the New York Jets.

 

Vick's atheltic ability cannot be questioned, but he's GOT to be more of a threat to throw the ball to be considered an elite QB in the NFL, and right now he just isn't. In all honesty, he should be averaging 250-275 TOTAL yards (rushing and throwing) a game himself, and in 2005 he averaged 200.6 YPG in the 15 games he played. That's not what elite QBs produce. In comparison, Gus Fervotte produced 191.1 total YPG and Tom Brady produced 262.2 YPG.

 

Defenses are stopping his running ability and daring him to throw the ball to beat them and thusfar he consistently hasn't. I will place some of that blame on Mora for placing him in a rigid structure offense that doesn't fit him at all, but overall Vick has not been as great of a player as everyone thought he would be.

 

He's athletic, flashy, and marketable, but that is about all I give him. I don't consider him an elite QB.

Edited January 4, 2006 by Solomon

[texas23]

I don't believe these two are still arguing this. Two stubborn mules at their finest.

 

I am going to throw in some thoughts though. I agree that Vick is overrated. For the expectations that were set up for him and the hype that surrounds him, how could you argue otherwise? By this point he was supposed to be setting new milestones and change the way the game is played like that other Michael did. Yes, the Falcons struggle when he is not in the lineup, but so do various other teams when their starting QB goes down too. See the 2005 edition of the New York Jets.

 

Vick's atheltic ability cannot be questioned, but he's GOT to be more of a threat to throw the ball to be considered an elite QB in the NFL, and right now he just isn't. In all honesty, he should be averaging 250-275 TOTAL yards (rushing and throwing) a game himself, and in 2005 he averaged 200.6 YPG in the 15 games he played. That's not what elite QBs produce. In comparison, Gus Fervotte produced 191.1 total YPG and Tom Brady produced 262.2 YPG.

 

Defenses are stopping his running ability and daring him to throw the ball to beat them and thusfar he consistently hasn't. I will place some of that blame on Mora for placing him in a rigid structure offense that doesn't fit him at all, but overall Vick has not been as great of a player as everyone thought he would be.

 

He's athletic, flashy, and marketable, but that is about all I give him. I don't consider him an elite QB.

 

sorry you do not understand the discussion, but I do not believe I was saying he was elite. His hype is about what he could potentially do to a defense with his feet and arm. So far his arm has not been too good.

 

I disagree about what Mora has done in regards to a ridgid system. He says he wants Vick to be Vick, i.e. run when he sees he has the lane.

 

My point to gotmilk is that the QB rating is not the be all of determining the worthyness of an NFL QB. Like the information I posted, it is a rating system for the passer, not all the things that go into being the QB.

 

I like that gotmilk will argue his point, even when the world knows he is wrong. oh, and your wrong too solomon! LOL

[Augielio]

sorry you do not understand the discussion, but I do not believe I was saying he was elite. His hype is about what he could potentially do to a defense with his feet and arm. So far his arm has not been too good.

 

I disagree about what Mora has done in regards to a ridgid system. He says he wants Vick to be Vick, i.e. run when he sees he has the lane.

 

My point to gotmilk is that the QB rating is not the be all of determining the worthyness of an NFL QB. Like the information I posted, it is a rating system for the passer, not all the things that go into being the QB.

 

I like that gotmilk will argue his point, even when the world knows he is wrong. oh, and your wrong too solomon! LOL

 

MICHAEL VICK IS A BELOW AVERAGE NFL QB WHO IS MORE AN NFL CELEBRITY THAN AN EFFECTIVE QB,AND MEDIA COVERAGE OF HIM IS REMARKABLY UNCRITICAL.

 

(Note that this is an opinion. I can marshal stats to support it; I am sure some of you can bring other facts to show that his is--or is going to be--the best pro QB in history.)

 

This is my position:

1. Michael Vick (The "Mike" movement did not catch on.)

became an overnight star when he led Virginia Tech in a David-and-Goliath struggle against Florida State. Spectators had never seen a QB who could move the way he did.

2. He came into the NFL and could not read defenses, so Atlanta avoided throwing into the middle of the field.

3. Vick became an NFL celebrity--an image--but not an effective QB. QB's like Vick bring the fans to their feet, but they do not win Super Bowls and found dynasties.

4. Since he came into the league, Vick has had QB ratings of: 62.7, 81.6, 69.0, 75.1 and 74.1--none of them very close to the league average.

5. Some will point to his rushing ability and his escapability

and scrambling. Vick averaged 5.9 yards rushing through 15 games this year. At the same time, Atlanta averaged 11.18 yards per completed pass and 6.02 yards per attempted pass. In spite of his scrambling ability, Vick has suffered more sacks than most QB's. My point is: maybe if he had been a better reader of coverages and thrower, he could/should have thrown more and run less. Atlanta averaged about the same on every attempt as the team did on his running efforts.

If NFL football were about kneeling in the huddle and making up plays in the dirt/grass/turf, Vick might be all-world. QB discipline and offensive discipline and reading defenses wins the games. Vick cannot do it. One writer suggest that he is about one leg injury away from becoming another Bobby Douglass.

6. The media loves him. (Obviously, he is the only NFL player to have a major commercial venture without being in the upper half of his position ratings.) After the Dallas-Falcons game this year, the AP account went like this:

 

(HEADLINE: VICK RUMBLES, VINNY FUMBLES IN FALCON WIN.

followed by: "Michael Vick ran for two scores while Vinny

Testaverde turnd the ball over four times in a convincing Atlanta win Monday.

 

But the devil is in the details.

1. Vick's "rumbles" were 2 1-yd runs.

2. He was 11 for 26 for 116 yards, was sacked 3 times and threw 3 interceptions. Only 4 of his 11 completions were to wideouts for a total of 39 yards.

 

That kind of coverage has been typical. Apologists cite everything for lack of wide receivers (Could it be that Michael might be one reason why he does not have topnotch wideouts), the rushing style of offense, cold weather, and injuries

Vick was chosen to go to the Pro Bowl this year. He will be received there as one of the "NFL Stars." He may do well in a meaningless game where everyone goes 3/4 speed, and a good % of those chosen opt not to go. Being chosen to go to the Pro Bowl has one value: it gives the player leverage in negotiating a new contract. Check the list of NFC QB's this year and decide whether Michael Vick stepped forward in 2005 or the rest of the QB line stepped back.

[gotmilk?]

I don't believe these two are still arguing this. Two stubborn mules at their finest.

 

I am going to throw in some thoughts though. I agree that Vick is overrated. For the expectations that were set up for him and the hype that surrounds him, how could you argue otherwise? By this point he was supposed to be setting new milestones and change the way the game is played like that other Michael did. Yes, the Falcons struggle when he is not in the lineup, but so do various other teams when their starting QB goes down too. See the 2005 edition of the New York Jets.

 

Vick's atheltic ability cannot be questioned, but he's GOT to be more of a threat to throw the ball to be considered an elite QB in the NFL, and right now he just isn't. In all honesty, he should be averaging 250-275 TOTAL yards (rushing and throwing) a game himself, and in 2005 he averaged 200.6 YPG in the 15 games he played. That's not what elite QBs produce. In comparison, Gus Fervotte produced 191.1 total YPG and Tom Brady produced 262.2 YPG.

 

Defenses are stopping his running ability and daring him to throw the ball to beat them and thusfar he consistently hasn't. I will place some of that blame on Mora for placing him in a rigid structure offense that doesn't fit him at all, but overall Vick has not been as great of a player as everyone thought he would be.

 

He's athletic, flashy, and marketable, but that is about all I give him. I don't consider him an elite QB.

Sol, you hit the nail on the head, I have been saying this for 8 pages now, but it doesnt seem to be sinking in!! Good Post!!! I agree 100%

 

But if you can get theses guys to overlook there foolish pride and admit that we are right, then you have done more than me!!!

 

I know that deep down they agree with my comments, being that I have showed them all they have ask for, yet there pride stands in the way of them agreeing with me!!!

 

Good Post though SOL!!!

[gotmilk?]

MICHAEL VICK IS A BELOW AVERAGE NFL QB WHO IS MORE AN NFL CELEBRITY THAN AN EFFECTIVE QB,AND MEDIA COVERAGE OF HIM IS REMARKABLY UNCRITICAL.

 

(Note that this is an opinion. I can marshal stats to support it; I am sure some of you can bring other facts to show that his is--or is going to be--the best pro QB in history.)

 

This is my position:

1. Michael Vick (The "Mike" movement did not catch on.)

became an overnight star when he led Virginia Tech in a David-and-Goliath struggle against Florida State. Spectators had never seen a QB who could move the way he did.

2. He came into the NFL and could not read defenses, so Atlanta avoided throwing into the middle of the field.

3. Vick became an NFL celebrity--an image--but not an effective QB. QB's like Vick bring the fans to their feet, but they do not win Super Bowls and found dynasties.

4. Since he came into the league, Vick has had QB ratings of: 62.7, 81.6, 69.0, 75.1 and 74.1--none of them very close to the league average.

5. Some will point to his rushing ability and his escapability

and scrambling. Vick averaged 5.9 yards rushing through 15 games this year. At the same time, Atlanta averaged 11.18 yards per completed pass and 6.02 yards per attempted pass. In spite of his scrambling ability, Vick has suffered more sacks than most QB's. My point is: maybe if he had been a better reader of coverages and thrower, he could/should have thrown more and run less. Atlanta averaged about the same on every attempt as the team did on his running efforts.

If NFL football were about kneeling in the huddle and making up plays in the dirt/grass/turf, Vick might be all-world. QB discipline and offensive discipline and reading defenses wins the games. Vick cannot do it. One writer suggest that he is about one leg injury away from becoming another Bobby Douglass.

6. The media loves him. (Obviously, he is the only NFL player to have a major commercial venture without being in the upper half of his position ratings.) After the Dallas-Falcons game this year, the AP account went like this:

 

(HEADLINE: VICK RUMBLES, VINNY FUMBLES IN FALCON WIN.

followed by: "Michael Vick ran for two scores while Vinny

Testaverde turnd the ball over four times in a convincing Atlanta win Monday.

 

But the devil is in the details.

1. Vick's "rumbles" were 2 1-yd runs.

2. He was 11 for 26 for 116 yards, was sacked 3 times and threw 3 interceptions. Only 4 of his 11 completions were to wideouts for a total of 39 yards.

 

That kind of coverage has been typical. Apologists cite everything for lack of wide receivers (Could it be that Michael might be one reason why he does not have topnotch wideouts), the rushing style of offense, cold weather, and injuries

Vick was chosen to go to the Pro Bowl this year. He will be received there as one of the "NFL Stars." He may do well in a meaningless game where everyone goes 3/4 speed, and a good % of those chosen opt not to go. Being chosen to go to the Pro Bowl has one value: it gives the player leverage in negotiating a new contract. Check the list of NFC QB's this year and decide whether Michael Vick stepped forward in 2005 or the rest of the QB line stepped back.

I agree, you and Sol can open your minds up about football and not be blinded by the Vick craze as the others have been! But just so you know, theses guys may agree with you, but you will never know it because of there pride!!!

 

Good Post Though!!!

[texas23]

gotmilk, you give yourself way too much credit as a person to convince others. It is not pride, it is persperctive that keeps us from agreeing. It is a different opinion, my friend. Nothing more.

[gotmilk?]

gotmilk, you give yourself way too much credit as a person to convince others. It is not pride, it is persperctive that keeps us from agreeing. It is a different opinion, my friend. Nothing more.

I sense that the gasket is warming up! Just Kidding with you Tex!

[texas23]

I sense that the gasket is warming up! Just Kidding with you Tex!

nah....I like the debate for the most part. I do not like the name calling that sometimes happens, but so far none of that between us. We are just having a fun and friendly back and forth about nothing important.....mike vick.

[ERA]

Texas, just give up, don't you know gotmilk has a doctorate degree in "I am always right in my own mind." You can't have a discussion with him. Just do what I do and block and and you don't have to read his irrevelant post with all his facts he got from the gotmilk sports almanac 2005 edition.

 

I was so impressed, I rushed out and GOT the 2006 Edition.

[texas23]

I was so impressed, I rushed out and GOT the 2006 Edition.

 

 

ERA,,,,,I love your graphics....LOL