Mike Vick: Delicate Punk?

Cafe Society
21

A huge difference. A rolling pocket is not detrimental; one could argue it is the best way to utilize a mobile QB, as opposed to scrambling for rushing yards. Big Ben is also very good at this, in addition to Jake.

Regarding Elway, he didn’t scramble for over 300 yards in either of his winning Superbowl years. In fact, he only scrambled for 300+ yards once in his career. That year, the Redskins smoked the Broncos in the Superbowl 42 - 10. His career average (remarkably consistent up through his penultimate season) was 3.3 rushes for 14.6 yards per game. Hardly a big scrambler. Perhaps Elway is a good example of a rolling pocket style of mobile QB; I wouldn’t know, as I didn’t see enough of his games.

As far as getting eliminated earlier last year, the Chargers would have likely been able to do just as well as the Falcons had they been the ones in the soft NFC.

22

This is simply not true. He takes a lot of hits and gets back up from them. There have been a few that put him out, but he’s taken more than have hurt him.

23

After last night’s performance I think we can agree that punk is applicable, anyway: 11 of 26 with 3 picks and a gaudy 16.3 passer rating. Dare I say he was en fuego?

No. More proof that he can’t pass and is going to have a short career. If all he can do is run he’s dead meat.

24

He may well survive the open-field hits, but Father Time will take a toll on those legs of his. Vick will either learn to pass, or be reduced to competing for a CFL slot by the time he’s 32-33.

25

Yeah, that’s who it was. I remember because when the trade happened I was thinking of writing a book, and my main character was also named Tim Dwight.

26

Is that what it was? Dang, Dilfer’s was better than that.

27

Well, as ridiculous as it osunds, Testaverde had a higher rating than Vick in that game. For Vick, and pretty much all QBs, I think they should include rushes in the passer rating. It would work pretty easily.

Count every dropback as an attempt, with the exception of spike plays, regardless if they run or throw. A sack would count as an incompletion, plus the minus yards. A lost fumble should count as a pick. A scramble for positive yards should count as a completion, plus the positive yards. A rushing TD should count the same as the passing TDs.

This would no longer be a passer rating, obviously, but it would effectively take into account the production gained by scrambling. I wonder what Vick and Testaverde would get as passer ratings in that game with this method compared to what their traditional passer ratings were.

28

I don’t think that they should include running in a quarterback’s rating. The thing that distinguishes a quarterback from everybody else on the field is the ability to move his team through passing. If he can’t pass he becomes a glorified running back and in that case they might as well run the option or do direct snaps to the running backs and save the trouble of scouting quarterbacks.

29

Running is part of being a quarterback! If the offensive line breaks down, it’s not the quarterback’s fault. A good scrambling ability should gain some sort of recognition in the quarterback’s rating.

30

Tomlinson may be a better quarterback than Vick as well. He has thrown for 3 touchdowns in his career (2 already this season) for a perfect passer rating of 158.3! He’s 3/3, 82 Yds and 3 TDs.

31

In conversations like this one, I always think of the line from (I think) Vince Lombardi:

“Statistics are for losers.”

When Vick plays, the Falcons win. Period.

32

There’s a reason that the thing is formally called the “passer rating.” That’s the only thing it’s supposed to measure. It would be very interesting if they developed another measurement that includes scrambling, but that’s separate.

33

The Falcons have a long history of being a seriously disfunctional organization. Really terrible drafting and such.

Once in a while they get lucky and they land a Vick.

But they still don’t have an offensive line or receivers. Two weeks in a row of lots of dropped passes.

One of the most recent screw-ups was Peerless Price. More money down the tube.

Vick’s passing stats don’t reflect his possible ability.

The Falcon’s are 5-2, so what does that make the QBs of teams with lesser records???

34

I think that if you are going to start tracking scrambling, then you have to start tracking pocket vs. out-of-pocket passing as well. Being able to run and pass out of the pocket is just as important as being able to run for a few yards.

35

If you add scrambling statistics to the passer rating, Joey Harrington is still a grotesquely overpaid backup.

36

Hey, as Jimmy Chitwood can attest, I’m the biggest anti-scrambler you can be. I just hate scrambling as a concept in the NFL, mainly because you simply can’t win by scrambling.

But as much as I like and defend the passer rating formula – which I do anytime it’s dismissed as irrelevant – it is clearly broken in some ways. Only a broken system would rate Testaverde’s performance on MNF as anything but a disaster. Three lost fumbles!

Dropping back to pass and fumbling the ball away directly and severely impacts a quarterback’s ability to move his team through passing. The fact that it is ignored questions the credibility of the passer rating formula.

Here’s the numbers I mentioned, and tell me what you about how well they reflect the performance on the field Monday night.

Passing Stats
Vick: 11 of 26 for 116, 0 TD, 3 Int
Testaverde: 11 of 18 for 140, O TD, 1 Int

Rushing Stats
Vick: 6 for 21, 2 TD, 0 Fumbles lost (factors out the three kneeldowns)
Testaverde: 1 for 1, 1 TD, 0 Fumbles lost

Pocket Stats
Vick: 3 dropbacks, 3 sacks for -11, 0 Fumbles lost
Testaverde: 5 dropbacks, 4 sacks for -40, 3 Fumbles lost

Combined Stats
Vick: 17 of 35 for 126, 2 TD, 3 TO
Testaverde: 12 of 24 for 101, 1 TD, 4 TO

Passer Rating (conventional)
Vick: 16.35
Testaverde: 62.27

Quarterback Rating (my proposal)
Vick: 40.89
Testaverde: 35.59

Of note is that I used the Passer Rating Calculator, which is a nice resource for anyone who wants to calculate a passer rating but finds the formula cumbersome.

In my opinion, the quarterback ratings I suggested much more accurately reflect the performance on the field by the two signal callers. Not only do I not think that Testaverde was leaps and bounds better than Vick, but I agree with the QB rating that Vick was a bit less sucky than Vinny.

37

I don’t understand what you mean. A 10 yard completion counts the same whether it was thrown from the pocket or on a bootleg. It’s not like they only tally pocket passes. Could you elaborate what you mean?

38

Well, let’s say it’s not a designed bootleg or rollout but a breakdown of pass protection. The quarterback leaves the pocket looking for a passing lane. That’s a lot different, in my opinion, than throwing from the pocket and success depends much more on the quarterback. Or maybe I’ve spent too much time watching QBs like Plummer and Rothlisberger.

39

“Passing lanes” generally only exist in the pocket, as the term usually refers to the lanes between the linemen.

I don’t know if I’d give bonus points for throwing on the run. Sure, Plummer may be one of the best ever at throwing a perfect strike (and tight spiral) while on the run, but from the pocket he’s not so hot.

Six of one, half dozen of the other, IMO.

40

I wouldn’t mind seeing a revamp of the rating system, but at what point is it just too much information to have to track and make judgement calls on? Pretty soon you’d have 63 different categories that, when matched up in a QB comparison, would be difficult to judge the overall effectiveness of the two.

In either case, I’d like to see non-intercepted passes not marked as intercepted passes and count against the QB; that is, a pass that a receiver should have caught but loses due to no fault of the QB (like a tip into the CB’s hands or a ball bouncing off the receivers chest and into the hands of the S). No reason that should count as an interception, as it wasn’t intercepted, but rather redirected.