Only Patrick Mahommes impressed me. The other three left plays on the table, in my opinion. I appreciate that all 4 teams in the championship games had strong defenses, but it was interesting to see the QB play.
On a side note, if I hadn't been so lazy, I could have won some coin. Mahommes was an underdog, and when he was an underdog, he covered the spread 90% of the time. If I had a draft betting app set up, I would have placed a solid bet on KC (I also had read that the ref in the KC game favored away teams, historically).
Good observation - I would thoroughly agree.
Mahomes stood out. I thought he was great, especially considering how good that Ravens' D has been all year. They were easily the best D in the league.
Lamar was not impressive overall, and neither were the NFC QBs. All three QBs had their moments, but all three of them made multiple bad throws/plays. Goff was the victim of some bad drops, although he also had some really poor throws, including when he wasn't really under pressure.
Goff doesn't have a high ceiling. Good but not special. Plus..he's bad under any sort of pressure and outside a dome. Never liked him.
Lamar can't perform in big games. He presses and gets careless. I blame Harbaugh too. What was that game plan?
Purdy showed moxie yesterday but also got lucky a lot. Mahomes is Mahomes-the best we've seen since Brady.
I really don't think L Jackson is good enough to win a title. His reads on that last Int he threw looked like something from the Mike Glennon days here.
Wait Goff played bad ? How so? And Josh Allen wasn't good? 3TDs and 75 rushing yards in a play off game is bad. But he should have thrown it underneath instead his left tackle bumped into him while trying to throw a TD to an open receiver. :confused:
Quote from: spiderblue43 on January 29, 2024, 09:36:17 AMMahomes is Mahomes-the best we've seen since Brady.
Not to hijack, but just as an aside because I saw this this am:
https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1751747062314520660
Disagree. Purdy was a pure winner I'm the second half.
Goff was also excellent. Of the four really only Jackson was sub par.
Yesterday featured the 3 top scoring defenses in the NFL. Baltimore, KC and SF all gave up less than 18 ppg during the season.
As good as Mahomes is, and KC needed every bit of it, that game was won by the defense giving up 10 points to a team that averaged of 28 PPG.
I thought Goff and Purdy played reasonably well. Purdy had a 88.1 QBR, which is extremely high (Mahomes broke 91) and Goff had just under 60 which is pedestrian, but not awful. I don't think either of those two are top 5 QBs in the NFL, but those teams are not built to rely as heavily on QB play. That's part of why I feel like they played reasonably well.
It was stunning to me the way Detroit could do no wrong in the 1st half and do no right in the 2nd with SF doing the opposite. It was reminiscent of the Buffalo Houston 35-3 comeback game in that way. Detroit ran the ball 21 times for 148 yards and 3 TDs in the 1st half. They managed just 34 rushing yards in the 2nd half.
The bigger question is based on what we saw each QB do yesterday, can our QB do at least the same?
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 29, 2024, 10:44:30 AMYesterday featured the 3 top scoring defenses in the NFL. Baltimore, KC and SF all gave up less than 18 ppg during the season.
As good as Mahomes is, and KC needed every bit of it, that game was won by the defense giving up 10 points to a team that averaged of 28 PPG.
I thought Goff and Purdy played reasonably well. Purdy had a 88.1 QBR, which is extremely high (Mahomes broke 91) and Goff had just under 60 which is pedestrian, but not awful. I don't think either of those two are top 5 QBs in the NFL, but those teams are not built to rely as heavily on QB play. That's part of why I feel like they played reasonably well.
It was stunning to me the way Detroit could do no wrong in the 1st half and do no right in the 2nd with SF doing the opposite. It was reminiscent of the Buffalo Houston 35-3 comeback game in that way. Detroit ran the ball 21 times for 148 yards and 3 TDs in the 1st half. They managed just 34 rushing yards in the 2nd half.
I think Dan Campbell's aggressive nature betrayed his team in the second half. There is a reason why teams who are up by 17 points tend to be a bit more conservative: they don't want to give the other side big chunks of points or momentum. To me, the turning point of the game was not answering the 49ers FG to open the second half with their own FG (instead, going for it on 4th down). Had they evened things up, it would have taken a bit of the wind out of the 49ers sails and I don't think they are back in it tied after just 8 minutes have gone by.
Quote from: Trench on January 29, 2024, 10:48:35 AMThe bigger question is based on what we saw each QB do yesterday, can our QB do at least the same?
I don't look at QB ratings to evaluate how they performed in the game and what they did to help their team win. Goff was very good. He had some beautiful throws that were dropped. Purdy elevated his game by throwing and running leading his team to victory. I won't even talk about Mahomes. Nothing to say but he is the best out there.
And with the exception of Pittsburgh and Cleveland, every playoff QB was/is head and shoulders better than what the Giants currently have on their roster.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 29, 2024, 10:57:03 AMI think Dan Campbell's aggressive nature betrayed his team in the second half. There is a reason why teams who are up by 17 points tend to be a bit more conservative: they don't want to give the other side big chunks of points or momentum. To me, the turning point of the game was not answering the 49ers FG to open the second half with their own FG (instead, going for it on 4th down). Had they evened things up, it would have taken a bit of the wind out of the 49ers sails and I don't think they are back in it tied after just 8 minutes have gone by.
Rich,
I totally agree. The momentum change after that 1st stop on 4th down was the beginning of the end.
Sometimes you will hear the announcers say things like "this is how they did all season". And that's great, but to me that's no different than the coaches that try to run "their system" even though they don't have the personnel for it. The idea is to win, not to be stubborn in your ways. Detroit was winning all year with that type of strategy but hadn't played too many opponents as good as SF on the road.
So instead of putting 6 points on the board in the 1st 22 minutes of the 2nd half, the team didn't score until there were 56 seconds left.
Not sure if Detroit would have won with those points if they were still making the mistakes they made in the last 1.5 quarters, but I think they would have had a better shot.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 29, 2024, 10:44:30 AMIt was stunning to me the way Detroit could do no wrong in the 1st half and do no right in the 2nd with SF doing the opposite. It was reminiscent of the Buffalo Houston 35-3 comeback game in that way. Detroit ran the ball 21 times for 148 yards and 3 TDs in the 1st half. They managed just 34 rushing yards in the 2nd half.
You don't even need to go back that far in NFL playoff history. Blown leads happen all the time. The Chargers to the Jags last season. Texans to the Chiefs prior to that. The pre-Mahomes Chiefs to the Colts in 2013. Then our Giants to the 49ers in 2002.
Quote from: TDToomer on January 29, 2024, 11:53:01 AMYou don't even need to go back that far in NFL playoff history. Blown leads happen all the time. The Chargers to the Jags last season. Texans to the Chiefs prior to that. The pre-Mahomes Chiefs to the Colts in 2013. Then our Giants to the 49ers in 2002.
You have a better memory than me.
Quote from: Fletch on January 29, 2024, 10:03:54 AMWait Goff played bad ? How so? And Josh Allen wasn't good? 3TDs and 75 rushing yards in a play off game is bad. But he should have thrown it underneath instead his left tackle bumped into him while trying to throw a TD to an open receiver. :confused:
I wouldn't say "bad" but I wouldn't say great either. He had a number of errant throws (including a wide open TD pass) with minimal to zero pressure on him. He also had an unstoppable running game to lean on, which makes it easier to throw the ball as you're going to face more favorable defensive looks when your RBs are going off. I thought he was ok. He didn't turn it over and he had a solid completion rate. But let's face facts - the Lions jumped all over the 9ers early with their running game, and then they were basically shut out after that. The passing TD to get to 31 total points was made when the game was pretty much over (they would have needed an onside kick to even have a chance of tying it in regulation, and onside kicks hit 5% of the time now or less).
I thought Allen played very well last week but I'm not sure why we're talking about him.
Quote from: katkavage on January 29, 2024, 10:24:46 AMDisagree. Purdy was a pure winner I'm the second half.
I agree. I thought Purdy was very impressive in the second half. He made plays with both his arm and his legs. I'm sure everyone was counting SF out after the first half, but Purdy would not be denied. He took some big hits too, but just kept on coming and getting the job done.
To add context, I figured it would be worth giving grades
PFF
Purdy- 72.4 (which is a little above average)
Goff- 73.3 (which is a little above average)
Jackon- 61.7 (which is low average)
Mahommes- 86.0 (which is excellent)
QB ratings
Mahommes- 100.5 (good)
Jackson- 75.5 (mediocre)
Purdy- 89.0 (okay)
Goff- 88.8 (okay)
QBR
Purdy- 88.1 (good)
Goff- 59.9 (moderate)
Jackson- 42.9 (mediocre)
Mahommes 91.1 (good)
Rich,
I thought that 42.9 for Jackson was a poor number being that 50 is average on that scale (at least I thought).
Certainly those of us who thought Jackson did not look good are backed up by these numbers regardless of that label of the grade. His QBR for the 2023 regular season was 64.7, so definitely not up to his own standards.
Mahomes finally has an elite Defense. When it's all said and done he's going to have something to say about GOAT.
Could not have had a better matchup for the SB this year. Good for the networks, sponsors and the NFL. They couldn't have planned it better. Lol
I know a lot of people disagreed with my assessment (that only Mahommes had impressed), and the others left a lot of plays on the field). I will clarify that I think you want a QB who has their best performances on the biggest stages (like Eli for example).
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 29, 2024, 01:53:20 PMRich,
I thought that 42.9 for Jackson was a poor number being that 50 is average on that scale (at least I thought).
Certainly those of us who thought Jackson did not look good are backed up by these numbers regardless of that label of the grade. His QBR for the 2023 regular season was 64.7, so definitely not up to his own standards.
If you need numbers to tell you what your own experienced eyes can see clearly, there is a problem. These are tough playoff games. This is not a regular season game like Detroit playing Minnesota in game three. These games are about going to the Super Bowl. I thought three of the four QBs rose to the level of the games they were in. Purdy, with his acumen, his swagger in the second half using his legs on big plays, showed what winning QB play is all about. Goff can't run, never could. He needs that great offensive line he has. But yes he might have missed a few when pressured, but he also hit a few receivers in the numbers and they didn't catch them. Are those perfect passes figured into the ratings? Again, I'll say nothing about Mahomes because there is no one better when you need a big play. And even if he struggled most of the game, he will find that big play and get the win for you.
Quote from: katkavage on January 29, 2024, 02:18:05 PMIf you need numbers to tell you what your own experienced eyes can see clearly, there is a problem. These are tough playoff games. This is not a regular season game like Detroit playing Minnesota in game three. These games are about going to the Super Bowl. I thought three of the four QBs rose to the level of the games they were in. Purdy, with his acumen, his swagger in the second half using his legs on big plays, showed what winning QB play is all about. Goff can't run, never could. He needs that great offensive line he has. But yes he might have missed a few when pressured, but he also hit a few receivers in the numbers and they didn't catch them. Are those perfect passes figured into the ratings? Again, I'll say nothing about Mahomes because there is no one better when you need a big play. And even if he struggled most of the game, he will find that big play and get the win for you.
Numbers can make sure your eyes aren't playing tricks on you.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 29, 2024, 02:19:26 PMNumbers can make sure your eyes aren't playing tricks on you.
The only numbers I concern myself with is the score.
Quote from: katkavage on January 29, 2024, 02:18:05 PMIf you need numbers to tell you what your own experienced eyes can see clearly, there is a problem. These are tough playoff games. This is not a regular season game like Detroit playing Minnesota in game three. These games are about going to the Super Bowl. I thought three of the four QBs rose to the level of the games they were in. Purdy, with his acumen, his swagger in the second half using his legs on big plays, showed what winning QB play is all about. Goff can't run, never could. He needs that great offensive line he has. But yes he might have missed a few when pressured, but he also hit a few receivers in the numbers and they didn't catch them. Are those perfect passes figured into the ratings? Again, I'll say nothing about Mahomes because there is no one better when you need a big play. And even if he struggled most of the game, he will find that big play and get the win for you.
Sometimes our eyes can get focused on a one or two big plays that stick in our mind and overshadow other plays that may have contributed to winning or losing in a less glaring way.
And I would say for two of the three metrics that Rich posted, the perfect passes are included. I have never been a fan of QB rating because it only looks at very basic data (completion %, TDs, INTs), unlike QBR that has a much more in depth look at every play.
I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised if one of the halftime adjustments that was made for SF was telling Purdy to look to run when he saw man coverage. Those runs btw, are part of both QBR and PFF's ratings. I was surprised Purdy's QBR was as high as it was because of the way the 1st half played out.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 29, 2024, 02:37:03 PMSometimes our eyes can get focused on a one or two big plays that stick in our mind and overshadow other plays that may have contributed to winning or losing in a less glaring way.
And I would say for two of the three metrics that Rich posted, the perfect passes are included. I have never been a fan of QB rating because it only looks at very basic data (completion %, TDs, INTs), unlike QBR that has a much more in depth look at every play.
I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised if one of the halftime adjustments that was made for SF was telling Purdy to look to run when he saw man coverage. Those runs btw, are part of both QBR and PFF's ratings. I was surprised Purdy's QBR was as high as it was because of the way the 1st half played out.
Matt,
QB ratings are still considered by NFL teams. I play quite a bit with numbers and sorting QBs by QB rating will almost always push the elite ones to the top.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 29, 2024, 02:37:03 PMSometimes our eyes can get focused on a one or two big plays that stick in our mind and overshadow other plays that may have contributed to winning or losing in a less glaring way.
And I would say for two of the three metrics that Rich posted, the perfect passes are included. I have never been a fan of QB rating because it only looks at very basic data (completion %, TDs, INTs), unlike QBR that has a much more in depth look at every play.
I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised if one of the halftime adjustments that was made for SF was telling Purdy to look to run when he saw man coverage. Those runs btw, are part of both QBR and PFF's ratings. I was surprised Purdy's QBR was as high as it was because of the way the 1st half played out.
I agree, but after watching football for over fifty years, I think you can get an idea of who is playing well and who isn't without looking at numbers. And we have to remember these QBs got their teams to where they are. That cannot be minimized. There are intangibles that can't be measured.
https://x.com/danorlovsky7/status/1752058903288828016?s=20
I know some people hate stats and don't want to hear about them much less talk about them, but all they are is a numerical expression of what a player has done on the field. I think sometimes they get over-mystified, and then people throw their hands up and just angrily dismiss them out of hand. They're just data on a player. Nothing more. But if I'm evaluating a player, I like knowing what he has done on the field, myself.
I have always been a fan of QB rating. No stat is perfect by any means, and like the others it has its flaws, but by and large I find it useful over a large enough sample size. If you look at the components of QB rating, it is all stuff that any reasonable fan would care about.
Obviously, like with any statistic, you cannot simply look at it in isolation without considering multiple contextual factors (caliber of supporting cast, system the QB plays in, opponents, etc), but overall of a broad sample of data I think it gives you a solid picture of how efficient and productive a QB has been with his passing. Obviously, it does not incorporate running, but everyone understands that, and it's not difficult to do a separate analysis of what a QB contributes with his legs.
Passer rating has been around for a while, but I would argue it was ahead of its time when it came out.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 29, 2024, 03:04:44 PMI know some people hate stats and don't want to hear about them much less talk about them, but all they are is a numerical expression of what a player has done on the field. I think sometimes they get over-mystified, and then people throw their hands up and just angrily dismiss them out of hand. They're just data on a player. Nothing more. But if I'm evaluating a player, I like knowing what he has done on the field, myself.
I have always been a fan of QB rating. No stat is perfect by any means, and like the others it has its flaws, but by and large I find it useful over a large enough sample size. If you look at the components of QB rating, it is all stuff that any reasonable fan would care about.
Obviously, like with any statistic, you cannot simply look at it in isolation without considering multiple contextual factors (caliber of supporting cast, system the QB plays in, opponents, etc), but overall of a broad sample of data I think it gives you a solid picture of how efficient and productive a QB has been with his passing. Obviously, it does not incorporate running, but everyone understands that, and it's not difficult to do a separate analysis of what a QB contributes with his legs.
Passer rating has been around for a while, but I would argue it was ahead of its time when it came out.
While I was watching the games, I was playing with the stats of the top QB draft prospects. I added up their QB rating, QBR, PFF offense grade and subtracted their PFF pass-blocking grade, receivers, and running grade (I am thinking of modifying this) to get a better feel for their true college production.
I appreciate that in the draft, it's about physical traits/mental makeup, scouting their play on the field, and their production, but there are a lot of commercials in an NFL game, and I was just interested in who had the most production.
Now I want to back test it with previous drafted QB to see if there is value in what I did.
I guess I don't understand the post. All four QBs are elite or close to it regardless of what happened on the field yesterday. One is a HOF maybe the best of all time, another has been to one Super Bowl and one championship game with two different teams, a third will be a two time league MVP, and the fourth, though young, was an injury away from going to a SB his rookie year and now going to one in his second year.
Ben macadoo wanted Maholmes. Imagine...
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
Once the Ravens started blitzing Mahones he lost a lot of his magic. You need to blitz and pressure him to. Sure he runs around but he also makes bad throws. In the 1st half the Ravens hardly blitzed and Mahones picked them apart. In the 2nd the Ravens blitzed more and made Mahones uncomfortable.
Quote from: LennG on January 29, 2024, 06:41:47 PMOnce the Ravens started blitzing Mahones he lost a lot of his magic. You need to blitz and pressure him to. Sure he runs around but he also makes bad throws. In the 1st half the Ravens hardly blitzed and Mahones picked them apart. In the 2nd the Ravens blitzed more and made Mahones uncomfortable.
It took them long enough. But never ever bet against Mahomes. He just is a flat out winner.