Laviano rated #2 qb in Big 10 by ESPN site
- Thread starter Kbee3
- Start date
Sometimes you have to look deeper at certain stats. This is one of those cases.
When you get a high rating for dinking and dunking, that rating calculous needs to be questioned.
What's Rettig's rating on this scale, assuming he had the minimum number of pass attempts is an interesting question.
What's Rettig's rating on this scale, assuming he had the minimum number of pass attempts is an interesting question.
Seriously, after the performance in the Penn State and Ohio State games, why do you put any value into this stat? You post it every week.
Wouldn't you rather have wins? Or are you stoked to see this each week?
Wouldn't you rather have wins? Or are you stoked to see this each week?
In case anyone was wondering, here are B1G Total QBR leaders including non-qualifiers:
http://espn.go.com/ncf/qbr/_/group/5/qualified/false
Barrett is #2 behind Rettig.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/qbr/_/group/5/qualified/false
Barrett is #2 behind Rettig.
Yeah, how dare he post anything positive about someone on the team?
Nick Saban never met RU fans if he thinks it's only 20%
I think the ESPN site I referenced has a minimum of passes for one to qualify for this ranking. I guess that's why they don't include Barrett or Rettig.
BTW, I also noticed on this site that Cioffi is tied for second place in interceptions amongst Big Ten players with three. Kudos.
He is going against two of the best defenses the next few weeks. If he can maintain a high rating, that would be impressive.
I have to laugh at all the guys who constantly regurgitate statistics that purportedly show how bad our team is, but insist that statistics don't mean anything when one of our players shows well by them.
I have to laugh at all the guys who constantly regurgitate statistics that purportedly show how bad our team is, but insist that statistics don't mean anything when one of our players shows well by them.
We don't need a high rating over the next few weeks. We need to score points and a lot of them. I would rather CL have a marginal efficiency rating but we score 35 points and win both games.
Actually, what I think some people have tried to suggest is that overall efficiency rating is not really a good stat for indicating QB performance quality. That is why QBR is created. A throw for 4 yards on 3rd and 9 is not a good play, but for efficiency rating it is a great play. A screen pass where the WR goes 70 yards is nothing special from QBR but efficiency loves that stuff. Just not as valuable stat as some people think.
Even with that said, Laviano is overall rated better than Connor Cook using efficiency. However, Cook has an 159 efficiency rating on third down and 8+. Same 159 for 2nd and 8+. Laviano has a 95 rating on 3rd and 8+ and a 103 on 2nd and 8+. Cook delivers much better when it counts to extend drives and make big plays. At least give the numbers some analytical context.
Similar threads
