PDA

View Full Version : ESPN's "new" rating system says Eli > Ben



SteelTorch
08-10-2011, 10:59 AM
Yep, according to a new rating system ESPN made up, Eli Manning is better than Big Ben. :roll: Here's a fun article making fun of the knuckleheads at that network:

LINK (http://www.pittsburghmagazine.com/Best-of-the-Burgh-Blogs/Pulling-No-Punches/August-2011/ESPN-Snubs-Roethlisberger-Once-Again-With-New-QB-Rating-System/)

I'm one of the few people here who defends the current QB rating system, since it actually has a fairly high correlation with winning. But this new system of theirs also accounts thins like "accuracy" and "pocket pressure". WTF? :shock:

Slapstick
08-10-2011, 12:10 PM
1) Did these same guys formulate the BCS system?

2) Did you watch the embedded clip? I remember watching that back in the day...

4 TDs by Dorsey Levens...

fezziwig
08-10-2011, 12:11 PM
All I can say is " WOW "

hawaiiansteel
08-10-2011, 02:35 PM
http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p479/blindmessiahDC/WTF.png

Starlifter
08-10-2011, 02:52 PM
as soon as I saw the initials ESPN - I knew to look no further.

feltdizz
08-10-2011, 03:46 PM
ESPN will churn out all types of formula's to make the big market QB's look good.

Who cares about ratings systems... Rings and W's are more important.

flippy
08-10-2011, 06:47 PM
I watched the special and I think overall it is a better system that takes more into account.

We all know Ben is a different beast at QB. And he loses a lot of points for all the sacks he takes. And that's the part they're missing when comparing Ben. He may hold the ball forever and take sacks, but that's also the reason he makes so many incredible plays no other QB could dream of making.

Since they're taking points away from him due to the sacks, they should give him uber bonus points for how long he can extend a play in the pocket after pressure. If there was a measure of how long a QB is able to hold the ball to make a play, Ben would be at the top of the list. Probably need something along the lines of how long after pressure can a QB keep the play alive and then make a play downfield. That's really the key thing missing and hurting Ben. And you can't blame Ben for that, he's a different beast.

I just hope he doesn't adjust his play to drive his number higher.

Just get a couple more rings. That's the real stat that matters for QBs.

Other than that, I do think ESPN did a pretty good job with the number and what they're measuring.

And to their credit, Ben's style is completely different than other QBs. So this anomoly can't be avoided.

Captain Lemming
08-10-2011, 07:03 PM
Ben's style is completely different than other QBs. So this anomoly can't be avoided.

Nicely reasoned post Flippy.

SteelTorch
08-10-2011, 08:00 PM
I watched the special and I think overall it is a better system that takes more into account.

We all know Ben is a different beast at QB. And he loses a lot of points for all the sacks he takes. And that's the part they're missing when comparing Ben. He may hold the ball forever and take sacks, but that's also the reason he makes so many incredible plays no other QB could dream of making.

Since they're taking points away from him due to the sacks, they should give him uber bonus points for how long he can extend a play in the pocket after pressure. If there was a measure of how long a QB is able to hold the ball to make a play, Ben would be at the top of the list. Probably need something along the lines of how long after pressure can a QB keep the play alive and then make a play downfield. That's really the key thing missing and hurting Ben. And you can't blame Ben for that, he's a different beast.

I just hope he doesn't adjust his play to drive his number higher.

Just get a couple more rings. That's the real stat that matters for QBs.

Other than that, I do think ESPN did a pretty good job with the number and what they're measuring.

And to their credit, Ben's style is completely different than other QBs. So this anomoly can't be avoided.
I agree on all points, except that I still believe the "old" QB rating system is much better. Why? Because unlike most other stats, it actually has a strong correlation with winning. Big Ben, unsurprisingly, does very well in the QB rating category. :wink:

fezziwig
08-10-2011, 09:20 PM
as soon as I saw the initials ESPN - I knew to look no further.


:Clap

flippy
08-10-2011, 10:48 PM
I agree on all points, except that I still believe the "old" QB rating system is much better. Why? Because unlike most other stats, it actually has a strong correlation with winning. Big Ben, unsurprisingly, does very well in the QB rating category. :wink:

They used to use YPA in the 50s and you could argue that correlates about the best to winning.

The more I've heard about the new system, the more I like it.

I like that it weights situations for example. A turnover that leads to points (pick 6 for example) hurts the number big time, but a hail mary at the end of a half that gets int'd doesn't.

QB contribution gets measured a bit better too. Like a long pass in the air gets more positive points than a screen that turns into an 80 yard TD. The QB no longer gets credit for what the receiver contributes to a play and on the flip side doesn't get dinged when a WR tips a catchable ball that turns into an INT.

We should expect Ben to get dinged for some of his play. We're always talking about the fine line for Ben. We'd all like to see his sack numbers go down. We'd all like to see him get rid of the ball in certain situations. But at the same time we don't want to miss out on the out of this world plays.

They really did a good job with the formula. And really the only thing I see missing is Ben probably deserves to have the Big Ben rule adjust the system a bit to fairly factor in the I can't believe he just did that play. The system dings him on the bad side of the line. But doesn't reward him enough on the good side.

In the end, I'm glad he's not high on the list. It will only drive him to play better. That's a win for us.

SanAntonioSteelerFan
08-11-2011, 10:25 PM
When it 1st came out, I read that a category called something like "Game Changing Plays" was going to be highly weighted in the overall score. So, naturally I thought Ben would be at or near the top of the heap.

As if.

I'm just a naive Steeler Fan. But now I know for sure ESPN is FOS (my eyes were kind of opened when my 17 year old said, "Dad, they're just a bunch of talking heads, I only watch for the scores").

Smarter than his old man!

NJ-STEELER
08-11-2011, 11:59 PM
I wonder if some of these guys can hear themselves talk.
One minute gradient talks about Ben being downgraded cause he holds the ball too long looking for a play and it costs us some sacks then is praising Josh freeman cause he's the best at buying time for his receivers. WTF?

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
08-12-2011, 11:55 AM
Since they're taking points away from him due to the sacks

How do you automatically take points away from the QB due to sacks? This method instantly rewards the QB with the best Oline.

QB stats are ridiculous enough as it is. Every QB plays under markedly different circumstances in so many ways.

* O line - how much time are you getting every time you drop back?
* Running game
* Receivers/TE/receiving RBs - are you throwing to wide open receivers or needing to thread the needle?
* Team - are you playing from ahead and shutting down the pass of from behind against a prevent D to help inflate numbers in a loss?
* Short Yardage back - are you running the ball in from the 1 yard line, or do you throw? A stat line of 1-1 for 1 yard and a TD gives a QB rating of 118.75.


Now to add a blantantly ridiculous stat that says every time you are sacked it is on you and effects your rating is stupid. Also, how do they decide the weight that is given to each number? Just so stupid that they should stick with their original stupid rating because adding a new stupid rating just creates way to much useless conversation.....like this post!! :lol:

Djfan
08-12-2011, 12:25 PM
I don't care if they make a new QB scale that makes Ryan Leaf look better than Ben.

It's the rings. Rings. Did you hear me?

RINGS!!!

Next?

RuthlessBurgher
08-12-2011, 03:42 PM
I don't care if they make a new QB scale that makes Ryan Leaf look better than Ben.

It's the rings. Rings. Did you hear me?

RINGS!!!

Next?

I couldn't hear you. I had Ben's two Super Bowl rings stuck in my ears. :wink:

fordfixer
08-13-2011, 01:49 AM
I don't care if they make a new QB scale that makes Ryan Leaf look better than Ben.

It's the rings. Rings. Did you hear me?

RINGS!!!

Next?

I couldn't hear you. I had Ben's two Super Bowl rings stuck in my ears. :wink:
Why were Ben's fingers on your ears :shock:

RuthlessBurgher
08-13-2011, 02:11 PM
I don't care if they make a new QB scale that makes Ryan Leaf look better than Ben.

It's the rings. Rings. Did you hear me?

RINGS!!!

Next?

I couldn't hear you. I had Ben's two Super Bowl rings stuck in my ears. :wink:
Why were Ben's fingers on your ears :shock:

And why would that prevent me from being able to READ Djfan's question anyway?

Djfan
08-13-2011, 02:49 PM
I don't care if they make a new QB scale that makes Ryan Leaf look better than Ben.

It's the rings. Rings. Did you hear me?

RINGS!!!

Next?

I couldn't hear you. I had Ben's two Super Bowl rings stuck in my ears. :wink:
Why were Ben's fingers on your ears :shock:

And why would that prevent me from being able to READ Djfan's question anyway?

Man, this has opened you up for some serious photoshop pain!