NFL.COM Top Quarterbacks under 30

[Phantoom]

I am actually fine with the ranking. It is meaningless next week.

What struck me is how much younger Sam Bradford and Matt Stafford are than Flacco. It all kind of blurs together, but those guys seem so much more beaten up than Flacco. I think of Flacco as a guy that will be around for another decade and I feel like Bradford is about 1 hit away from retiring.

Absolutely. I think the most underrated piece of value Flacco has is his durability. Bill Barnwell did a great job talking about this at the beginning of the year:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...-league-part-2

Flacco's post-season rating being the same as Ryan's is due mostly to Flacco's poor performance's in both his rookie and second year. It's not exactly surprising that he didn't do all that well in those games (especially considering he was hurt in one).

And Ryan's receivers are not slightly better than Flacco's, there is a good bit of margin between them. White, Jones and Gonzo are number 1's on pretty much any team in the league.

Fair enough, though this is probably balanced by having a better O-line, and a much better running game and defense. I definitely thing comparing their "standard" stats requires a lot of balancing, but the advanced stats do a good (not perfect) job of this.

[NCRAVEN]

They actually do. Feel free to read up on them. They also (attempt to) normalize for defense quality, first down yardage, pass interference yards, and do common sense things like not counting hail mary INTs.

They attempt to take those things into account, but I am not buying it. How do you fully rank how much better there WR's corps is better than ours?

Or if a defense is better or worse, does that mean it would the exact same against two different teams? Meaning, Pittsburgh may be the #1 D and while they play that way against us one week, will they be that against Atlanta the next week as well? No, people match up differently, so I don't buy advanced stats, or advanced advanced stats matter, or can accurately say who is a better QB.

Hire's a question for you. DO you think Ryan would do better in Baltimore than Joe?

[GOTA]

The logic is that Matt Ryan is superior in both standard statistics and advanced stats (which try to normalize for things like domes and receiver/o-line prowess) over a significant sample size.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

And for all of Joe's "postseason heroics", he has exactly the same QB rating in his postseason career as Matt Ryan. Matt Ryan certainly has a better home field for stats, and has slightly better receivers, but has never had a great defense or running game like Joe, so comparing wins or postseason wins is dumb.

Brandt is the one who brought up wins. I actually hate using wins for any individual player for a team sport. His first line for why he chose Ryan was regular season wins. Obviously he must think that the most important criteria or he would have lead with something else.

[RavenScallywag]

http://www.rrstar.com/blogs/matttrow...0-quarterbacks

Now, I'm going to start off saying I don't like this guy, because he ranks Kaepernick, RG3, Luck, and Wilson 6-9, and says Ravens would trade Flacco for any of them in a heartbeat. That's just ridiculous. And throws in a slight dig, saying Atlanta probably would too, but not QUITE as quickly.

But, when talking about Flacco, they bring up exactly why his postseason stats seem a bit odd...

In that coldhardfootballfacts.com chart -- which included his first two playoff games this year -- Flacco ranked 17th out of 20 playoff quarterbacks in WPA, at 0.03 ahead of only Chad Pennington, Donovan McNabb and Michael Vick, and 16th in expected points added at 0.79. He was worth less than a point per game over a replacement level quarterback.

But that's because he USED to be brutal. Flacco had nothing to do with Baltimore's first three playoff wins of his career, then got a gimme win over an overmatched Kansas City team. But Flacco has posted five straight playoff games with a passer rating of 95 or above the past two years. That's awfully good. And awfully consistent.

All the 2008 playoff games were brutal Flacco. It was really the D making those games work. The in 2009, we played NE in a game where Joe was 4/10. That's because of HUGE plays by Rice and McGahee, and the D. We got knocked out by the Colts (In a game I apparently had totally forgotten, where Joe had a turnover to ice the game). Then in 2010, in the first game Joe really played well in, he had 2 TD and 265 yards. The next game against Pitt, Joe had us up by 14 at halftime, but he threw a pick combined with a Rice fumble to let the Steelers back in the game.

[somedumbguy]

http://www.rrstar.com/blogs/matttrow...0-quarterbacks

Now, I'm going to start off saying I don't like this guy, because he ranks Kaepernick, RG3, Luck, and Wilson 6-9, and says Ravens would trade Flacco for any of them in a heartbeat. That's just ridiculous. And throws in a slight dig, saying Atlanta probably would too, but not QUITE as quickly.

But, when talking about Flacco, they bring up exactly why his postseason stats seem a bit odd...



All the 2008 playoff games were brutal Flacco. It was really the D making those games work. The in 2009, we played NE in a game where Joe was 4/10. That's because of HUGE plays by Rice and McGahee, and the D. We got knocked out by the Colts (In a game I apparently had totally forgotten, where Joe had a turnover to ice the game). Then in 2010, in the first game Joe really played well in, he had 2 TD and 265 yards. The next game against Pitt, Joe had us up by 14 at halftime, but he threw a pick combined with a Rice fumble to let the Steelers back in the game.

I would consider trading Joe Flacco for Andrew Luck if it were after the season. I think Luck has the chance to to be Epic Hall of Fame multiple championships good in the right situation and I would take that chance. I think Joe can win multiple championships, just maybe with not as much style. I would not trade Flacco for any of the other three. Running QB's have short shelf lives. Russell Wilson and Colin Kaepernick are Haloti Ngata hits from a torn ACL and who knows if RGIII will ever be the same again.

[JStruds]

It will be interesting to see how Joe's enhanced stats compare to Ryan's after next season (assuming a shaky OLine and Cam Cameron greatly contributed to his inconsistency in the regular season).

[alienrace]

I would love you to explain this "clutch gene" to me. Does Tom Brady have it?

They have run stat studies, and basically no matter how you define "clutch", it turns out that people just play as well as they play. No QB has ever played significantly different from his career stats in the 4th quarter or on game winning drives or in the playoffs (given sample size). I find it hilarious that Matt Ryan would have been "clutch" if they had called the obvious pass interference at the end of the NFC Championship (or his D can hold a lead), or that Joe Flacco would be less "clutch" if a safety does his job in Denver.

If Joe was more clutch, wouldn't he have better postseason stats than Matt Ryan, who is a "choker"?

A lot of people used to believe in clutch in baseball too, where the statistics also proved them wrong.

And this is why we have advanced stats (see what I linked) that normalize for things like that. Feel free to check them out.

First to answer you question - Tom Brady *used* to have it. Last few hears he seems to get rattled and frustrated a bit more easily. Two years in a row, he has played poorly in the AFCC game. Tom Brady from the first part of the decade would have stepped up and played great.

The Flacco vs Ryan postseason debate demonstrates just how much stats don't show the real picture at times. Even early in their careers, when Joe was putting up some pretty bad stats in the postseason, he was making big plays that helped his team win.

For example, the clutch, yes clutch throw to Todd Heap under pressure that put the Ravens in position to win the game on their final drive. Matty Ice that year was busy throwing picks to Cardinal defenders in the absolute worst times possible. See, stats don't show the timing of things. Don't give me the "Normalized 4th quarter" crap either. That still doesn't show anything. You HAVE TO LOOK AT EACH GAME, and the CONTEXT!

Clutch is hitting Boldin for two TD's when the game is in the balance. Or hitting Jones with 31 seconds left on a game tying 70 yard TD pass. Clutch is hitting Lee Evans with 26 seconds left for the game winning score(ooops the idiot dropped it!).

Not clutch is throwing a pick six against the Packers right before the half that swung the game completely around. Not clutch is turning the ball over twice when you have a lead in a championship game.

Now Flacco hasn't always been clutch in every game, (i.e Pitt 2010), but more often than not he has been.

To say "clutch" doesn't exist is ridiculous.

Now, regarding a couple of other things you mention:

First, that was NOT pass interference on Atlanta's last play in the NFCC game. The receiver was within 5 yards of the LOS and got bumped, legally. When the ball arrived Bowman reached around and swatted it down.

You also need to look more closely at the play in Denver. It was just as much a case of a great play call and route running as it was defensive breakdown. Moore was caught between a rock in a hard place, as Pitta was wide open underneath and had Moore been playing deeper to cover Jones better, Pitta likely would have gotten the Ravens within pretty close striking distance. Note, Ray Rice was also open for what would have been a 30 yard or more gain as well. The play was "clutch" because Joe recognized Jones being open, and he made the throw, with the game on the line. That is the DEFINITION of clutch, my friend.

Not clutch, is throwing the ball to a receiver who wouldn't have gotten a first down anyway, and not seeing a wide open Tony Gonzales who would not only have gotten the first down, but likely SCORED.

That is why you have to watch the games instead of looking at stats to know how good a player really is.

[Ravenblue]

He was being sarcastic.

Yeah i know, I was just expanding on his Kaepernick win stat.

[JohnBKistler]

Just win 2 or 3 rings Joe and shut all these idiots up.

[jonboy79]

I would consider trading Joe Flacco for Andrew Luck if it were after the season. I think Luck has the chance to to be Epic Hall of Fame multiple championships good in the right situation and I would take that chance. I think Joe can win multiple championships, just maybe with not as much style. I would not trade Flacco for any of the other three. Running QB's have short shelf lives. Russell Wilson and Colin Kaepernick are Haloti Ngata hits from a torn ACL and who knows if RGIII will ever be the same again.

I'm with you on this entire post.

Back to the OP, I really don't have a problem with their rankings much at all. Ryan vs. Flacco was settled as of about week 12-15 when Ryan was jsut coming down from his MVP-type season pedestal, while Flacco lost 3 straight. That said, Obviously it's been in Flacco's favor since the Giants game, but it's a relatively short run. Clutch is the main place that Flacco has an advantage over Ryan, and it is certainly of the utmost importance, but I'm not sure it outweigh's Ryan's stats on these types of lists.

Dalton should certainly be higher then Tannehill, but Stafford, IMO is where he should be. I like how they have the young uys ranked, as the group of Luck, RGIII, WIlson, Kaepernick and Cam have certainly put their stamp on this league. I have no issue with ever single one ranked over Stafford, who has been consistantly inconsistant, and fragile. Without Calvin Johnson he would look more like Sam Bradford.

[NjRavensFan]

I would love you to explain this "clutch gene" to me. Does Tom Brady have it?

They have run stat studies, and basically no matter how you define "clutch", it turns out that people just play as well as they play. No QB has ever played significantly different from his career stats in the 4th quarter or on game winning drives or in the playoffs (given sample size). I find it hilarious that Matt Ryan would have been "clutch" if they had called the obvious pass interference at the end of the NFC Championship (or his D can hold a lead), or that Joe Flacco would be less "clutch" if a safety does his job in Denver.

If Joe was more clutch, wouldn't he have better postseason stats than Matt Ryan, who is a "choker"?

A lot of people used to believe in clutch in baseball too, where the statistics also proved them wrong.



And this is why we have advanced stats (see what I linked) that normalize for things like that. Feel free to check them out.

I can assure you this has nothing to do with the fact that you have a different opinion than I do but... People like you are the absolute worst. Guys who go around touting advanced metrics as the end all be all are annoying enough in baseball, where advanced stats actually work. Advanced metrics in football are damn near useless, too many moving parts. Just watch the games

[NjRavensFan]

Phantoom, honest question - 2 minutes left, you're team is down 4 and has the ball at their own 20... You would prefer to put the ball in Matt Ryan's hands over Joe Flacco's?

[Phantoom]

Phantoom, honest question - 2 minutes left, you're team is down 4 and has the ball at their own 20... You would prefer to put the ball in Matt Ryan's hands over Joe Flacco's?

Considering Matt Ryan led his team to a win in a similar situation in the playoffs this year, why would I not choose him? Oh, right, he's not "clutch" somehow...

I can assure you this has nothing to do with the fact that you have a different opinion than I do but... People like you are the absolute worst. Guys who go around touting advanced metrics as the end all be all are annoying enough in baseball, where advanced stats actually work. Advanced metrics in football are damn near useless, too many moving parts. Just watch the games

Thanks for that...opinion. Baseball stats proved that we cannot trust our eyes. Football advanced stats are more difficult to obtain and dissect than baseball, but I am not inclined to to throw the baby out with the bathwater and call it impossible. DVOA is currently the best projection system in the world (certainly much better than anyone who just "watches the games") so I respectfully disagree.

[jonboy79]

Considering Matt Ryan led his team to a win in a similar situation in the playoffs this year, why would I not choose him? Oh, right, he's not "clutch" somehow...

Big difference, in that situation a FG won the game, it was not 4 points.

Matt Bryant kicked several game winning FG's this year.

[Phantoom]

Big difference, in that situation a FG won the game, it was not 4 points.

Matt Bryant kicked several game winning FG's this year.

HA! You're right. Leading your team to a game winning FG is completely different...

Also, this:

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...gle_season.htm

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...gwd_career.htm

But please, come up with some other reason why Matt Ryan isn't "clutch" and Joe is. Keep changing the definition until you are right.

[wickedsolo]

Hire's a question for you. DO you think Ryan would do better in Baltimore than Joe?

I watched Matt Ryan's passes dying after like 15-20 yards against the Niners. His receivers had to go down low for passes, unless he put a ton of loft under them.

So, no. I don't think Matt Ryan would have been more successful in Baltimore simply because Baltimore plays outdoors in the elements and consistently faces top tiered defenses, which Matt Ryan does not.

We saw how Ryan played in Pittsburgh last year and that wasn't even in the winter.

Ryan is a good QB, but I'll take Flacco over him any day.

[callahan09]

I would love you to explain this "clutch gene" to me. Does Tom Brady have it?

They have run stat studies, and basically no matter how you define "clutch", it turns out that people just play as well as they play. No QB has ever played significantly different from his career stats in the 4th quarter or on game winning drives or in the playoffs (given sample size). I find it hilarious that Matt Ryan would have been "clutch" if they had called the obvious pass interference at the end of the NFC Championship (or his D can hold a lead), or that Joe Flacco would be less "clutch" if a safety does his job in Denver.

If Joe was more clutch, wouldn't he have better postseason stats than Matt Ryan, who is a "choker"?

A lot of people used to believe in clutch in baseball too, where the statistics also proved them wrong.



And this is why we have advanced stats (see what I linked) that normalize for things like that. Feel free to check them out.

Matt Ryan also only played 1 post-season game in his rookie + sophomore seasons. Flacco played 5. The inclusion of those games during which Flacco was an inexperienced QB playing on the road (and in the case of his second year, with a really bad injury) really hurts his career numbers. How about we pick up from 2010. Both QBs have made it to the post-season every year since then.

Flacco has played in 7 games, 5 of which were on the road, and he has a 5-2 record in those games. And he has 1725 yards, 15 TDs, and 2 INTs for a 102.2 QB Rating.

Ryan has played in 4 games, 3 of which were at home, and he has a 1-3 record in those games. And he has 1031 Yards, 7 TDs, and 5 INTs for an 88.6 QB Rating.

For Flacco, that's a touchdown every 14.7 passes, and an INT every 110 passes. 7.84 yards per attempt. For Ryan, that's a touchdown every 21 passes, and an INT every 29.4 passes. 7.01 yards per attempt.

It's obvious that Flacco has performed much, much better in the play-offs, and then when you consider that Flacco has played every playoff game outside in the cold and wind, and Ryan has played mostly in his comfy dome... and Flacco does what he does on the Road, while Ryan benefits from being at home... It's really night and day how much better Flacco is in the post-season.

[Jay D83]

Big difference, in that situation a FG won the game, it was not 4 points.

Matt Bryant kicked several game winning FG's this year.

Not only that, when the Falcons were up by 14 points vs Seattle, Matty Ice threw a bomb that ended up being intercepted that put them in the situation to begin with.

People forget that though. I live in Atlanta, I watch the games, and even WITH a lead, he ALWAYS throws an untimely interception that keeps the game close. That's why he has no choice but to chuck it away to try and win the game. Didn't work this past Sunday though.

[NCRAVEN]

Considering Matt Ryan led his team to a win in a similar situation in the playoffs this year, why would I not choose him? Oh, right, he's not "clutch" somehow...



Thanks for that...opinion. Baseball stats proved that we cannot trust our eyes. Football advanced stats are more difficult to obtain and dissect than baseball, but I am not inclined to to throw the baby out with the bathwater and call it impossible. DVOA is currently the best projection system in the world (certainly much better than anyone who just "watches the games") so I respectfully disagree.

Look if you want to believe in stats, great, whatever floats your boat. I don't think they're meaningful way of comparing two people, mainly in football, there are just way to many variables to account for.

That said, I'd take Flacco over Ryan. Joe has done more with less. I've sen Ryan lead his teams on game winning drives too. Just watching the two my opinion (which has as much weight as subjective stats) is Ryan can sometimes have that deer-in-the-headlight look and Joe has the here-I-fucking-come look. Not only are those the looks but when their teams needs those attitudes I see it in Joe's play more than I do Ryan's

[Phantoom]

Matt Ryan also only played 1 post-season game in his rookie + sophomore seasons. Flacco played 5. The inclusion of those games during which Flacco was an inexperienced QB playing on the road (and in the case of his second year, with a really bad injury) really hurts his career numbers. How about we pick up from 2010. Both QBs have made it to the post-season every year since then.

Flacco has played in 7 games, 5 of which were on the road, and he has a 5-2 record in those games. And he has 1725 yards, 15 TDs, and 2 INTs for a 102.2 QB Rating.

Ryan has played in 4 games, 3 of which were at home, and he has a 1-3 record in those games. And he has 1031 Yards, 7 TDs, and 5 INTs for an 88.6 QB Rating.

For Flacco, that's a touchdown every 14.7 passes, and an INT every 110 passes. 7.84 yards per attempt. For Ryan, that's a touchdown every 21 passes, and an INT every 29.4 passes. 7.01 yards per attempt.

It's obvious that Flacco has performed much, much better in the play-offs, and then when you consider that Flacco has played every playoff game outside in the cold and wind, and Ryan has played mostly in his comfy dome... and Flacco does what he does on the Road, while Ryan benefits from being at home... It's really night and day how much better Flacco is in the post-season.

These gymnastics of picking a choosing when we are going to count are hurting my head. I'm sure I could counter with Ryans injury, or the quality of defenses he played (San Fran had the second best D in the league this year) but how about this: I will admit that Joe Flacco has been better than Matt Ryan in the playoffs since 2010. I just think that judging QBs on such a tiny sample size is ludicrous. I would much rather judge a QB on how they have done over the past 32 games than the past 4. Hell, I could probably find 4 game runs that made Boller look like a decent QB. Well, maybe.

Look if you want to believe in stats, great, whatever floats your boat. I don't think they're meaningful way of comparing two people, mainly in football, there are just way to many variables to account for.

That said, I'd take Flacco over Ryan. Joe has done more with less. I've sen Ryan lead his teams on game winning drives too. Just watching the two my opinion (which has as much weight as subjective stats) is Ryan can sometimes have that deer-in-the-headlight look and Joe has the here-I-fucking-come look. Not only are those the looks but when their teams needs those attitudes I see it in Joe's play more than I do Ryan's

I am completely fine with people taking Flacco, I just think it is ridiculous to not understand why many people would want Ryan (which is why this thread was started, from what can tell).