Quote
RFL
Quote
max
Negatives [on Rogers]: Only 17-36 with a game-winning drive or comeback opportunity, a .321 winning percentage that’s by far the worst of this bunch, according to Scott Kacsmar of Football Outsiders.[/color][/b]
Negatives [on Ryan]: Only had seven INTs this season, but four came in losses — three in the final four minutes; another was a pick-6 late in the first half. Trailing by one possession in the fourth quarter, career passer rating is 81.9, with 16 TDs, 14 INTS. Just 2-4 in playoff games, with 7 INTs.
Lots to chew on here. But one thing stands out to me: the attribution of winning and losing to 1 player. Notice that AR is listed as having a ".321 winning percentage."
Of course, some QBs do develop a knack of stealing games late. That's undeniable. And it is true that a guy with a late-game-steal rep can intimidate the other guys and inspire his own, affecting performances.
It's also true that many variables affect the W/L apart from the QB's performance. I always think of Kurt who almost never won from behind when I was watching him. I dunno what he did in NY or AZ. But I do remember him in the SB with AZ coming back to take the lead very late and watching his defense blow the game. (Is my aging memory right on that?)
Now, I never felt that Kurt's lack of game steals was his fault. We were so often far ahead. And I don't recall him blowing late drives. Things just seemed not to click that way for him. There are so many variables at play and so many people have to do their jobs. It is always really hard for me to attribute W/L to a QB. (Same thing with pitchers in baseball.)
On the other hand, it can be useful to look at stats on a QB's performance in the situation. The stats on Ryan do that, and I think that's helpful. There absolutely can be a difference between a clutch guy and a guy who wilts a bit in the highest heat.
Right now, there is talk about Goff in these situations. I don't know that we have much real data, and he seems a bit under-defined in trying to win a game late. We'll see. But I'll be looking at his performance more than whether we win the game.
I am an old longstanding "wins and losses are not just on the qb" kinda guy.
But comeback situations are different.
In comebacks, you depend on the qb to execute consistently in a situation where the defense knows you have to pass. Time is a factor and there usually is no "punt and win next series" option. The qb's job gets magnified in that situation. It just does. That's a fact of the game.
In terms of all the other variables, those get evened out in the numbers. All qbs are in situations where WRs drop passes or the defense does not hold after a score (good example: the 99 Detroit game, where Rams took the lead late but the defense blew it in the final seconds).
So since everything gets evened out, you DO find some qbs are better at it. Though the best are around 51%. Still, your own team will know if your qb is good in that situation, so it becomes self-perpetuating because the team plays with more confidence as a result. Less pressing. Which is a very real factor.
And that holds up to ordinary observation too.
If I took a poll and asked. who would you rather have in a close game at the end and a comeback situation? Most people's answers to that will indicate that perceptions actually do mirror the numbers for the most part.
Some qbs are not as good in that situation, some are especially good in that situation. Across a few dozen games, where all the variables get evened out all the way around, the numbers will reflect that.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2018 06:40AM by zn.
