QBR and Team Success
-
But that's not really the case. All of the top teams have pretty damn powerful passing attacks. Nobody's really running their way to the Super Bowl anymore. Like I said, 6 of the top 10 running teams aren't even in the playoffs.
Holmgren's right: If you can't throw the ball really well in this league, you won't win much for long.
But you're right about Ben, too: Take away Plax, they keep throwing well. Take away Holmes, they keep throwing well. It's true of all the top guys. It was true of Favre before it was true of Brady and Manning.
But still: Our WRs suck.
6 of the top 10 PASSING teams aren't even in the playoffs... stats individually mean nothing. You have to look at the whole picture including offense and defense. 9 of the teams in the playoffs are top 10 in defense, offense, or both... (most fall under defense)
6 of the top 10 PASSING teams aren't even in the playoffs... stats individually mean nothing. You have to look at the whole picture including offense and defense. 9 of the teams in the playoffs are top 10 in defense, offense, or both... (most fall under defense)
I have this debate with Shep every season, and it never seems to come to a conclusion. He starts this thread year in and year out, but he never wants to admit that defense is just as important to postseason success as offense.
Of the top 15 QBR teams, 6 did not make the playoffs. They are:
2. SD
4. TB
8. HOU
12. DAL
14. DEN
15. NYG
Now how did these teams do on Defense?
1. SD
7. NYG
17. TB
23. DAL
30. HOU
32. DEN
Okay, so of the top 15 defenses, 6 did not make the playoffs. They are:
1. SD
6. MIA
8. MIN
11. OAK
13. SF
15. CIN
How did these teams do in QBR?
2. SD
18. CIN
21. SF
23. OAK
28. MIA
30. MIN
So what can we conclude with these numbers?
There are teams ranked high in QBR and low in defense that are out of the playoffs, and there are teams with high defense and low QBR not in the playoffs.
One cannot say that QBR is more important, and you cannot say defense is more important. The rankings don't follow this logic.
BUT...............
Keep this thread alive throughout the playoffs and watch the top QBR's drop faster than the top D's.
To be continued......................
-
6 of the top 10 PASSING teams aren't even in the playoffs... stats individually mean nothing. You have to look at the whole picture including offense and defense. 9 of the teams in the playoffs are top 10 in defense, offense, or both... (most fall under defense)
That's not true. Did you not look at the first post? 9 of the top 12 QBR teams made the playoffs. Two of the other ones had records of 9-7 and 10-6. It's sort of impossible to debate at this point. QBR and team success go hand-in-hand. Not true of being among the best rushing teams.
That's not true. Did you not look at the first post? 9 of the top 12 QBR teams made the playoffs. Two of the other ones had records of 9-7 and 10-6. It's sort of impossible to debate at this point. QBR and team success go hand-in-hand. Not true of being among the best rushing teams.
Shep come one now, 9 of the top defenses made the playoffs also. Why are you making this about rushing vs passing, when you know the true measurement is QBR vs DEF, which is a more accurate and productive comparison?
I will say this though, teams with a good D and good rushing game, and so so QBR can make the playoffs and do every season. Typically they are manned by young QB's learning the ropes.
Teams like PIT, BAL, NYJ and NYG are all good examples of how a strong rushing game and top D can take you far. Not over the top to the Super Bowl every season, but nonetheless they can get you far and a Super Bowl ring.
Shit man, BAL, TB, NYG, and PIT all WON Super Bowls this way. Ideal? Popular? No. But possible.
Anyway QBR vs DEF is a wash.
-
So The Bucs and the Texans were top 10 in rushing and had two of the most efficient quarterbacks and didn't make the playoffs???? Are you telling me defense wins championships?
Not really. Not when 9 of the top 12 passing teams are in the playoffs and two others had winning records. You can basically say that if you're in the top 12 in QBR, you're going to the playoffs. Missing at 10-6 is really rare.
Keep in mind that Elway, Favre, Warner, Brady, Manning, and Roethlisberger have basically won all the championships for a pretty damn long time. They were Pro Bowlers, MVPs, and it's probable they'll all be in the HOF.
But... defense is pretty damn huge. Some fairly bad to mediocre defenses have been in Super Bowls lately (Cardinals and Colts), and the Saints of last year weren't all that good... but most champions have great quarterbacks and at least really good defenses.
BTW, 7 of the top 12 defenses (total defense) made the playoffs. Not as high as QBR, and the average wins is quite a bit lower. And here's something really interesting: Only TWO Top 12 defenses that weren't also Top 12 in QBR made the playoffs (Bears, Jets).
That's not very many.
Not really. Not when 9 of the top 12 passing teams are in the playoffs and two others had winning records. You can basically say that if you're in the top 12 in QBR, you're going to the playoffs. Missing at 10-6 is really rare.
Keep in mind that Elway, Favre, Warner, Brady, Manning, and Roethlisberger have basically won all the championships for a pretty damn long time. They were Pro Bowlers, MVPs, and it's probable they'll all be in the HOF.
But... defense is pretty damn huge. Some fairly bad to mediocre defenses have been in Super Bowls lately (Cardinals and Colts), and the Saints of last year weren't all that good... but most champions have great quarterbacks and at least really good defenses.
BTW, 7 of the top 12 defenses (total defense) made the playoffs. Not as high as QBR, and the average wins is quite a bit lower. And here's something really interesting: Only TWO Top 12 defenses that weren't also Top 12 in QBR made the playoffs (Bears, Jets).
That's not very many.
you are kind of right. only 8 of the top 12 passing teams are in the playoffs (if you go off of QBR). but why choose the top 12 passing offenses and total defenses to look at? why not stick with just 10? or better yet 5? I could still say only 3 playoff teams have a top 5 passing offense (again using QBR), while 4 playoff teams have a top 5 defense (total defense). Now defense looks more important..
All I'm saying is that people can use stats to fit whatever viewpoint they believe in... Bottom line, to win championships, you need a quarterback that won't turn the ball over, an established running game, and a great defense..
-
That's not true. Did you not look at the first post? 9 of the top 12 QBR teams made the playoffs. Two of the other ones had records of 9-7 and 10-6. It's sort of impossible to debate at this point. QBR and team success go hand-in-hand. Not true of being among the best rushing teams.
Shep come one now, 9 of the top defenses made the playoffs also. Why are you making this about rushing vs passing, when you know the true measurement is QBR vs DEF, which is a more accurate and productive comparison?
I will say this though, teams with a good D and good rushing game, and so so QBR can make the playoffs and do every season. Typically they are manned by young QB's learning the ropes.
Teams like PIT, BAL, NYJ and NYG are all good examples of how a strong rushing game and top D can take you far. Not over the top to the Super Bowl every season, but nonetheless they can get you far and a Super Bowl ring.
Shit man, BAL, TB, NYG, and PIT all WON Super Bowls this way. Ideal? Popular? No. But possible.
Anyway QBR vs DEF is a wash.
Shep come one now, 9 of the top defenses made the playoffs also. Why are you making this about rushing vs passing, when you know the true measurement is QBR vs DEF, which is a more accurate and productive comparison?
I will say this though, teams with a good D and good rushing game, and so so QBR can make the playoffs and do every season. Typically they are manned by young QB's learning the ropes.
Teams like PIT, BAL, NYJ and NYG are all good examples of how a strong rushing game and top D can take you far. Not over the top to the Super Bowl every season, but nonetheless they can get you far and a Super Bowl ring.
Shit man, BAL, TB, NYG, and PIT all WON Super Bowls this way. Ideal? Popular? No. But possible.
Anyway QBR vs DEF is a wash.
I don't really disagree with that so much. What an offense does and what a defense does on any team is sort of separate paths with different coordinators, etc. There are trends in offense and trends in defense.
On offense, it's becoming a passing league. When 11 of the top 12 QBRs had winning records and 9 were in the playoffs (there are only 12), then that's pretty amazing.
The same just isn't true of the best running teams.
Now, comparing great passing teams to great defensive teams does get murkier because there's so much overlap. But I do know it's 9 of 12 top QBRs and 7 of 12 top overall defenses. And only TWO Top 12 defenses that weren't also Top 12 QBRs are in the playoffs (Bears and Jets).
I can think of some great passing teams with pretty poor defenses that have been really competitive lately (Colts, Cardinals, Saints sometimes, Texans in 2009, Chargers in 2009) but not many great defenses with poor passing games. The Jets last year, but they really should have been 7-9 except for a couple gifts. The year Tampa Bay won the Super Bowl, they also had a Pro Bowl passer... so that 2000 Ravens team is the only "modern" example of winning with just defense and an epic running game.
All that said... I don't really disagree that passing offense and overall defense are the two vital factors in today's NFL. Plenty of teams win with half-assed running games. Rushing the passer is getting HUGE, given the proclivity of passing offenses and the rules against covering them.
-
Shep come one now, 9 of the top defenses made the playoffs also. Why are you making this about rushing vs passing, when you know the true measurement is QBR vs DEF, which is a more accurate and productive comparison?
I will say this though, teams with a good D and good rushing game, and so so QBR can make the playoffs and do every season. Typically they are manned by young QB's learning the ropes.
Teams like PIT, BAL, NYJ and NYG are all good examples of how a strong rushing game and top D can take you far. Not over the top to the Super Bowl every season, but nonetheless they can get you far and a Super Bowl ring.
Shit man, BAL, TB, NYG, and PIT all WON Super Bowls this way. Ideal? Popular? No. But possible.
Anyway QBR vs DEF is a wash.
I don't really disagree with that so much. What an offense does and what a defense does on any team is sort of separate paths with different coordinators, etc. There are trends in offense and trends in defense.
On offense, it's becoming a passing league. When 11 of the top 12 QBRs had winning records and 9 were in the playoffs (there are only 12), then that's pretty amazing.
The same just isn't true of the best running teams.
Now, comparing great passing teams to great defensive teams does get murkier because there's so much overlap. But I do know it's 9 of 12 top QBRs and 7 of 12 top overall defenses. And only TWO Top 12 defenses that weren't also Top 12 QBRs are in the playoffs (Bears and Jets).
I can think of some great passing teams with pretty poor defenses that have been really competitive lately (Colts, Cardinals, Saints sometimes, Texans in 2009, Chargers in 2009) but not many great defenses with poor passing games. The Jets last year, but they really should have been 7-9 except for a couple gifts. The year Tampa Bay won the Super Bowl, they also had a Pro Bowl passer... so that 2000 Ravens team is the only "modern" example of winning with just defense and an epic running game.
All that said... I don't really disagree that passing offense and overall defense are the two vital factors in today's NFL. Plenty of teams win with half-assed running games. Rushing the passer is getting HUGE, given the proclivity of passing offenses and the rules against covering them.
I can think of some great passing teams with pretty poor defenses that have been really competitive lately (Colts, Cardinals, Saints sometimes, Texans in 2009, Chargers in 2009) but not many great defenses with poor passing games. The Jets last year, but they really should have been 7-9 except for a couple gifts.
Agreed. It is a passing league. But the Colts were in this game last year right up until the Saints did what?
INT for a TD
Defense and QBR are so neck and neck it is too close to call.
As I said, lets keep this great thread alive for the playoffs and see who makes it to the next level(s): QBR vs DEF
To be continued...........................
-
Shep come one now, 9 of the top defenses made the playoffs also. Why are you making this about rushing vs passing, when you know the true measurement is QBR vs DEF, which is a more accurate and productive comparison?
I will say this though, teams with a good D and good rushing game, and so so QBR can make the playoffs and do every season. Typically they are manned by young QB's learning the ropes.
Teams like PIT, BAL, NYJ and NYG are all good examples of how a strong rushing game and top D can take you far. Not over the top to the Super Bowl every season, but nonetheless they can get you far and a Super Bowl ring.
Shit man, BAL, TB, NYG, and PIT all WON Super Bowls this way. Ideal? Popular? No. But possible.
Anyway QBR vs DEF is a wash.
I don't really disagree with that so much. What an offense does and what a defense does on any team is sort of separate paths with different coordinators, etc. There are trends in offense and trends in defense.
On offense, it's becoming a passing league. When 11 of the top 12 QBRs had winning records and 9 were in the playoffs (there are only 12), then that's pretty amazing.
The same just isn't true of the best running teams.
Now, comparing great passing teams to great defensive teams does get murkier because there's so much overlap. But I do know it's 9 of 12 top QBRs and 7 of 12 top overall defenses. And only TWO Top 12 defenses that weren't also Top 12 QBRs are in the playoffs (Bears and Jets).
I can think of some great passing teams with pretty poor defenses that have been really competitive lately (Colts, Cardinals, Saints sometimes, Texans in 2009, Chargers in 2009) but not many great defenses with poor passing games. The Jets last year, but they really should have been 7-9 except for a couple gifts. The year Tampa Bay won the Super Bowl, they also had a Pro Bowl passer... so that 2000 Ravens team is the only "modern" example of winning with just defense and an epic running game.
All that said... I don't really disagree that passing offense and overall defense are the two vital factors in today's NFL. Plenty of teams win with half-assed running games. Rushing the passer is getting HUGE, given the proclivity of passing offenses and the rules against covering them.
All that said... I don't really disagree that passing offense and overall defense are the two vital factors in today's NFL. .
Honestly, I didn't think you did. You were always too smart for that.
-
Not sure how fair it is to use a calculated rating (qbr) compared to a raw figure like total rushing yards. The fair comparison would be two comparable statistics, like qbr to rbr if one so existed. We do know that the top passing yardage team almost never wins the superbowl, if they ever have at all. Its important to be able to run the ball as well.
-
Any one of those qb's mentioned by Shep, ... take away their wr's they throw to the most, and their protection, and they will suck.
In Ben Rocklicksboogers case, take away his defense and wr's, and he's a bust.
Flacco was spoken of as a possible bust, and he had a good oline. But he only had one big time wr. Now he has two or three.
Bend Rothlicksbooger has maybe five solid wr's.
You get all the other pieces in place, and you need a very good or great qb to make it work.
But a great qb can't make gold out of wr's who suck, and an oline that can't block. It's a team game.
Any one of those qb's mentioned by Shep, ... take away their wr's they throw to the most, and their protection, and they will suck.
Except in the case of Brady who actually got better when they got rid of Randy Moss!
In Ben Rocklicksboogers case, take away his defense and wr's, and he's a bust.
Flacco was spoken of as a possible bust, and he had a good oline. But he only had one big time wr. Now he has two or three.
Bend Rothlicksbooger has maybe five solid wr's.
You get all the other pieces in place, and you need a very good or great qb to make it work.
But a great qb can't make gold out of wr's who suck, and an oline that can't block. It's a team game.
-
Good post Shep, just to add to the stat fest, in the last 10 years post Palmer, the Browns have thrown more TD passes than INT's only twice and you can all guess the years, 2002 and 2007. This team is much closer to being a competitive team in the playoff hunt than most think, we need a QB and the sorry fact is we haven't had one since Bernie. There is more to it than just the QB, but imo the selection of the next QB is as if not more important than the HC, especially since we need to match up with Flacco and Roethlisberger 4 times a year.
-
I can think of some great passing teams with pretty poor defenses that have been really competitive lately (Colts, Cardinals, Saints sometimes, Texans in 2009, Chargers in 2009) but not many great defenses with poor passing games. The Jets last year, but they really should have been 7-9 except for a couple gifts.
Agreed. It is a passing league. But the Colts were in this game last year right up until the Saints did what?
INT for a TD
Defense and QBR are so neck and neck it is too close to call.
As I said, lets keep this great thread alive for the playoffs and see who makes it to the next level(s): QBR vs DEF
To be continued...........................
Agreed. It is a passing league. But the Colts were in this game last year right up until the Saints did what?
INT for a TD
Defense and QBR are so neck and neck it is too close to call.
As I said, lets keep this great thread alive for the playoffs and see who makes it to the next level(s): QBR vs DEF
To be continued...........................
Great insight, Hoss. Stuff like this makes a board fun, digging into stats and shit. Baseball people are nuts for it. Riceloft used to bring in some amazing stuff. And good find on turnovers by Zombo. That's a compelling list.
Lovers of defense (hey, my son's a linebacker) will keep an eye on the Jets and Bears, because neither has a juggernaut offense. Cutler had a pretty damn good year and God knows he can light it up... and Sanchez keeps flickering that he'll be among the really good ones soon-ish... they aren't like teams led by Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Vick, etc.
Atlanta's very interesting because of how complete they are. None of the above has a running back like Michael Turner and Atlanta's defense is really, really good... and then there's Ryan-White-Gonzales. They can beat you in a lot of ways. They're "team complete."
First matchup out of the gate is one to watch for this conversation: Jets (great defense) versus Colts (passing is all they do well).
-
Not sure how fair it is to use a calculated rating (qbr) compared to a raw figure like total rushing yards. The fair comparison would be two comparable statistics, like qbr to rbr if one so existed. We do know that the top passing yardage team almost never wins the superbowl, if they ever have at all. Its important to be able to run the ball as well.
Caleb said:
Not sure how fair it is to use a calculated rating (qbr) compared to a raw figure like total rushing yards. The fair comparison would be two comparable statistics, like qbr to rbr if one so existed. We do know that the top passing yardage team almost never wins the superbowl, if they ever have at all. Its important to be able to run the ball as well.New Orleans was right up there last year, for sure. Same with Manning's Colts. This year's favorite (Patriots) are very high on the list.
It's amazing how many of the top teams the last few years aren't very good at running the ball. In consecutive years, the team that finished DEAD LAST in rushing made it to the Super Bowl (Cards and Colts). This year's playoff teams feature a lot who don't run the ball very well (Patriots, Colts, Saints, Packers, and so on).
-
Good post Shep, just to add to the stat fest, in the last 10 years post Palmer, the Browns have thrown more TD passes than INT's only twice and you can all guess the years, 2002 and 2007. This team is much closer to being a competitive team in the playoff hunt than most think, we need a QB and the sorry fact is we haven't had one since Bernie. There is more to it than just the QB, but imo the selection of the next QB is as if not more important than the HC, especially since we need to match up with Flacco and Roethlisberger 4 times a year.
Good post Shep, just to add to the stat fest, in the last 10 years post Palmer, the Browns have thrown more TD passes than INT's only twice and you can all guess the years, 2002 and 2007. This team is much closer to being a competitive team in the playoff hunt than most think, we need a QB and the sorry fact is we haven't had one since Bernie. There is more to it than just the QB, but imo the selection of the next QB is as if not more important than the HC, especially since we need to match up with Flacco and Roethlisberger 4 times a year.
Talk about reducing it to the cold, hard truth.
There was a terrific article that quoted a lot of GMs and Gruden quite a bit, pointing out the simple fact that high-level play and stability at QB is the common thread of the winningest teams of the past decade. Almost all of the sources felt the QB affected the team around him more than vice-versa, citing Manning, Brady, Brees, and Favre/Rodgers being able to win with a revolving door at WR and RB. Not very often do the top teams feature the highest-paid and most decorated OL, either.
The best LT of the last 30 years is probably Munoz... and he never won a Super Bowl. Best TE? Gonzales. No rings. CB? Revis. Nothing yet. You really want your best player to be your QB. It's tough to machinate that... but it's the ideal. You want your money on the position with the most influence on the bottom line and nothing else comes close. Generally, you go to left tackle and pass rusher next. Then #1 WR and lockdown corner, although the latter has been hamstrung by rules quite a bit. Oakland's had the second best in the league for five years now... and it hasn't won them anything.
-
Interestingly, pass yardage teams have mostly been playoff teams the last few years. I went over that last year as well. Here are where the playoff teams rank in run yardage:
1 - KC
4 - Jets
5 - Phil
11 - Pitt
12 - Atl
14 - Balt
22 - Chicago
24 - Green Bay
28 - New Orleans
29 - Indy
31 - Seattle
Each of the last two years, the team ranked 32nd in rushing made the Super Bowl. You've got some pretty serious contenders ranked 24, 28, and 29 this year.
On the whole, that list tells you running for a lot of yards has absolutely no correlation with making the playoffs. It's all over the board.
QBR, on the other hand...
-
As far as raw passing yardage:
Five teams rank in the bottom half of pass yardage: Seattle, Baltimore, NYJ, Chicago, and Kansas City. I personally expect to see Seattle, the Jets, and KC out after round one. Baltimore will beat KC... not sure who Chicago plays.
Indy, New Orleans, and Green Bay rank 1-3-5. They were three of the worst rushing teams. Interesting to watch how that plays out.
Otherwise, you have these "top half" teams...
9 - Phil
11 - NE
14 - Pitt
15 - ATL
-
12 playoff teams and their ranking in QBR:
NE1
GB 3
PHI 4
PIT 5
BAL 7
KC 8
IND 9
ATL 11
NO 12
CHI 16
JETS 27
SEA 28
12 Playoffs teams and their ranking in Scoring DEF:
Pitt 1
GB 2
BAL 3
CHI 4
ATL 5
JETS 6
NO 7
NE 8
KC 11
PHI 21
IND 23
SEA 25
I see more of the bottom feeders in QBR still alive, and more of the bottom feeders in Scoring DEF home right now. 3 of the top 10 teams in QBR are out now and they happen to have lower DEF rankings. Just keeping a running tally.
-
As far as raw passing yardage:
Five teams rank in the bottom half of pass yardage: Seattle, Baltimore, NYJ, Chicago, and Kansas City. I personally expect to see Seattle, the Jets, and KC out after round one. Baltimore will beat KC... not sure who Chicago plays.
Indy, New Orleans, and Green Bay rank 1-3-5. They were three of the worst rushing teams. Interesting to watch how that plays out.
Otherwise, you have these "top half" teams...
9 - Phil
11 - NE
14 - Pitt
15 - ATL
As far as raw passing yardage:
Five teams rank in the bottom half of pass yardage: Seattle, Baltimore, NYJ, Chicago, and Kansas City. I personally expect to see Seattle, the Jets, and KC out after round one. Baltimore will beat KC... not sure who Chicago plays.
Indy, New Orleans, and Green Bay rank 1-3-5. They were three of the worst rushing teams. Interesting to watch how that plays out.
Otherwise, you have these "top half" teams...
9 - Phil
11 - NE
14 - Pitt
15 - ATL
DEFENSE baby. DEFENSE!
-
12 playoff teams and their ranking in QBR:
NE1
GB 3
PHI 4
PIT 5
BAL 7
KC 8
IND 9
ATL 11
NO 12
CHI 16
JETS 27
SEA 28
12 Playoffs teams and their ranking in Scoring DEF:
Pitt 1
GB 2
BAL 3
CHI 4
ATL 5
JETS 6
NO 7
NE 8
KC 11
PHI 21
IND 23
SEA 25
I see more of the bottom feeders in QBR still alive, and more of the bottom feeders in Scoring DEF home right now. 3 of the top 10 teams in QBR are out now and they happen to have lower DEF rankings. Just keeping a running tally.
On the macro level, I'm buying your take on defense in the playoffs. BUT... I see scoring defense as the result of statistical factors while QBR IS a statistical factor.
If a team scores a lot and doesn't let the other team score much... that's just called winning.
12 playoff teams and their ranking in QBR:
NE1
GB 3
PHI 4
PIT 5
BAL 7
KC 8
IND 9
ATL 11
NO 12
CHI 16
JETS 27
SEA 28
12 Playoffs teams and their ranking in Scoring DEF:
Pitt 1
GB 2
BAL 3
CHI 4
ATL 5
JETS 6
NO 7
NE 8
KC 11
PHI 21
IND 23
SEA 25
I see more of the bottom feeders in QBR still alive, and more of the bottom feeders in Scoring DEF home right now. 3 of the top 10 teams in QBR are out now and they happen to have lower DEF rankings. Just keeping a running tally.
-
A result of statistical factors? You mean POINTS ALLOWED? Because that is how those teams are ranked. That is not a result of anything BUT one ranking - how many points did your team give up? It is about as pure a ranking regarding making the playoffs as we can find.
It is not a result of anything but stopping the team from scoring.
Now QBR on the other hand is just the opposite. It is a complicated compilation of a bunch of different statistics, including YPA, Sacks, INTS, and if the guy got laid the night before.
I know what you tried to do right there, but no dude. No.
-
bottom line, the teams with the better defenses won. Jets have a better D than the colts, Packers have a better D than the Eagles, Ravens have a better D than the chiefs, Seattle doesn't have a better D than the Saints- but they did last Saturday. The saints D gave up over 40 pts to a team that averaged 19 a game all season.. Drew Brees has got to be pissed with his defense.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login