Clutch Quarterback Play

[vince]

Here's a meaty article from Football Outsiders that cuts through the misleading 4th quarter comeback trackers and provides a comprehensive analysis for measuring a quarterback’s performance in potential game-winning or game-tying situations.

While the hacks at the JS have loved to rip on Rodgers for not finishing games, this deeper analysis turns that misnomer on its head. It turns out that he's actually been very good in the clutch over the last 2 years. He's 5th best among all QB's with at least 30 qualifying drives since 1998 according to this analysis, and his clutch QB rating is #1 among all quarterbacks the last 12 years.

Adjusted Comeback Efficiency Article (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ramblings/2010/guest-column-adjusted-comeback-efficiency)

[Bossman641]

It's like this sentence was specifically written for Rodgers' 08 season.


If the quarterback leads his team on a drive to take the lead with one minute left, and then his defense subsequently surrenders a touchdown, shouldn’t he still get credit for that drive?

Good find and it backs up what many of us already know. Only those looking at the numbers on the surface think Rodgers can't get it done in clutch time.

[channtheman]

Even more surprising (well not really) is Favre's lack of success at being a clutch QB. In a time where he is often used as a prime example of a clutch QB and Rodgers is looked upon as not clutch it really is interesting to see that it is actually the opposite.

[Fritz]

Facts and analysis, facts and analysis. Sheesh. I'm so, so tired of this shit.

Can't we get back to the senseless, repetetive bashing?

[Joemailman]

Facts and analysis, facts and analysis. Sheesh. I'm so, so tired of this shit.

Can't we get back to the senseless, repetetive bashing?

Shut up, moron.

[sharpe1027]

Facts and analysis, facts and analysis. Sheesh. I'm so, so tired of this shit.

Can't we get back to the senseless, repetetive bashing?

Shut up, moron.

Shut up, moron. (Now it is repetitive.)

[cheesner]

Facts and analysis, facts and analysis. Sheesh. I'm so, so tired of this shit.

Can't we get back to the senseless, repetetive bashing?

Shut up, moron.

Shut up, moron. (Now it is repetitive.) :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Fritz]

Since I threw the thread off track I'll try to get it back on.

Weirdest name near the top of the list for me: Trent Green.

[Pugger]

Facts and analysis, facts and analysis. Sheesh. I'm so, so tired of this shit.

Can't we get back to the senseless, repetetive bashing?

:lol: :lol:

[get louder at lambeau]

Since I threw the thread off track I'll try to get it back on.

Weirdest name near the top of the list for me: Trent Green.

Other surprising guys who outrank our former QB at clutchiness-
Plummer
Delhomme
Culpepper
Brooks
Testaverde
Flutie
Batch
Garrard
Frerrotte
Fiedler
Chandler
Collins
Bledsoe
Vick
Banks
Leftwich
Brunell

At least Faver outperformed Tim Couch, even if it was only by .01 on their scale.

[arcilite]

Can't take anything seriously that has Eli Manning #1

[jmbarnes101]

Can't take anything seriously that has Eli Manning #1

The problem with that logic is that it's the only area of the game that he's really good at. He is the epitome of a clutch QB. As much as the rest of his game sucks if his team can keep it close they have a very good chance to win at the end. That Super Bowl march was about 8-10 weeks of doing exactly this; not only staying in the playoff hunt but than winning as a wildcard team and even in the game against the Patriots. Obviously, other people had to step up as well but he put them in the position to succeed on those drives.

Otherwise, Eli isn't very good.

[Fritz]

That list did make me wonder if a guy who otherwise is pretty mediocre can somehow excel at clutch time. If so, you wonder what that "it" is that that guy would have at those times and not at others.

[get louder at lambeau]

That list did make me wonder if a guy who otherwise is pretty mediocre can somehow excel at clutch time. If so, you wonder what that "it" is that that guy would have at those times and not at others.

I figure it's just that some people get all panicky under pressure, others get focused.

[vince]

Can't take anything seriously that has Eli Manning #1
If you would have shown either the method or the data used to be invalid in some respect, you may have some ground for this statement, but you didn't. "Understanding" without foundation, or based on incomplete or pre-selected data and/or an invalid method of analysis is the reason for the advent of the scientific method in the first place. It very often leads to wrong conclusions.


While the hacks at the JS have loved to rip on Rodgers for not finishing games, this deeper analysis turns that misnomer on its head. It turns out that he's actually been very good in the clutch over the last 2 years. He's 5th best among all QB's with at least 30 qualifying drives since 1998 according to this analysis, and his clutch QB rating is #1 among all quarterbacks the last 12 years.
I'd like to re-evaluate (thanks Fritz) my statement above about the clutch QB rating. The QB rating listed in the study is the overall QB rating. My bad on that.

As you'd expect, most of the QB's that perform well overall also perform well in the clutch and vice-versa, but Eli Manning and Brett Favre are a couple notable exceptions.

Without having data, I would say that Favre's clutch rating would be far higher for the beginning of his career - up until about '98 - when the data in this study begins. Favre's status on and off the field vaulted into the stratosphere at that time, and that could have impacted his focus on the task at hand in game-defining situations over the second two-thirds of his career. Success may well have gotten into his head.

It's not surprising that clutch QB play is important in the playoffs, but it's interesting to see just how vitally important it is - both for QB's and defenses - to playoff success. The last four Super Bowls have been won by the QB's with the top 3 ratings. Peyton Manning could make it five in a row this year, but even if the Saints win, Drew Brees is also a highly rated clutch QB. The author also mentions that both the Colts and Saints have been very strong in clutch situations on both sides of the ball.

[Fritz]

"Favre's status on and off the field vaulted into the stratosphere at that time, and that could have impacted his focus on the task at hand in game-defining situations over the second two-thirds of his career. Success may well have gotten into his head."

This is the sort of thing I find fascinating. We mostly understand the physical gifts required for a great quarterback (imagine how good Doug Flutie might've been if he'd been about five inches taller), and I think we think we understand the mental requirements. People like to talk about the "mental toughness" required to be a great QB. Quarterbacks who have the physical gifts but don't have the mental makeup (I think of Jeff George) we think of as lacking some sense of cool under fire. Yet a quarterback who, in the popular imagination, definitely has that "it" factor - Favre - statistically does not have it at the end of games (when it's supposed to surface most strongly)..

On the other hand, a guy like Trent Green, whom we think of mostly as a journeyman, appears to rise above his limitations - but only at certain times (that is, at the end of a close game). Then you've got a guy with some physical gifts whom the populace often thinks of as a spoiled, had-it-handed-to-him guy - Eli Manning (no poor boondocks kid story there) - and he seems to have this end-of-game "it" factor we like to associate with self-made Marlon Brando tough guys, not with the sons of the privileged.

Crazy.

[vince]

I agree. It's fascinating - and such an an intangible thing that I'm not sure the guys at the top of the list can accurately pinpoint what it is about themselves that contribute to their effectiveness. So even though it's an excercise in futility to try to identify what is happening, I'll go ahead and give it a shot anyway.

I don't think most QB's get "panicky" as much as I'd say thoughts creep into their mind that tend to inhibit their success in clutch situations. And I think there are as many different types of thoughts that can do that as there are quarterbacks that don't tend to do well in clutch situations. In that sense, I would say it has to do with focus, or more specifically, a lack of focus on the right things when they recognize the gravity of the moment. Sometimes and for some people, it could be thoughts about how success or failure may impact their legacy that detracts from appropriately focusing on the right things. Other times it could be a bum finger or ankle that creates doubt. And other times, it could be the temperature or fatigue that "makes cowards" of them.

It could also have a lot to do in specific circumstances with coaching and how structured the QB's approach is within the offensive system that helps or hinders their effectiveness at crunch time. It seems that QB's who work more effectively within the system and are more disciplined about their decisions in crunch time have more success, and those who get outside of their offensive system, have a tendency to think its about them, and/or place that burden on themselves and try to do too much have more failure.

[Fritz]

That last paragraph hits home for me. One of the qualities I think maybe the great ones have is a knowledge as to exactly what it takes to win - no more, no less.

That may seem obvious, but when you look at a guy like Montana, he strikes me as the type who would know that his field goal kicker was consistently successful from, say, 45 yards, and it would take a field goal to win, then Montana would know to get right to the 28 yard line - any more would be gravy but NOT worth any extra risk. He'd also be more likely to know the big picture - maybe a field goal would tie and send it into OT, but he'd know that his defense was bushed, so he might be more willing to take a higher risk pass than if his D was rested and solid.

This is what I think might be Favre's downfall. If a safe seven yard pass would get you into a reasonable position for a game winning kick, and Favre thinks he sees a twelve yard gain open (in addition to the seven yarder), he's more likely to try to get the twelve yard pass despite the higher risk.

Other QB's might not take enough risk - that was the criticism leveled at Rodgers his first year as a starter.

[get louder at lambeau]

"Favre's status on and off the field vaulted into the stratosphere at that time, and that could have impacted his focus on the task at hand in game-defining situations over the second two-thirds of his career. Success may well have gotten into his head."

This is the sort of thing I find fascinating. We mostly understand the physical gifts required for a great quarterback (imagine how good Doug Flutie might've been if he'd been about five inches taller), and I think we think we understand the mental requirements. People like to talk about the "mental toughness" required to be a great QB. Quarterbacks who have the physical gifts but don't have the mental makeup (I think of Jeff George) we think of as lacking some sense of cool under fire. Yet a quarterback who, in the popular imagination, definitely has that "it" factor - Favre - statistically does not have it at the end of games (when it's supposed to surface most strongly)..

On the other hand, a guy like Trent Green, whom we think of mostly as a journeyman, appears to rise above his limitations - but only at certain times (that is, at the end of a close game). Then you've got a guy with some physical gifts whom the populace often thinks of as a spoiled, had-it-handed-to-him guy - Eli Manning (no poor boondocks kid story there) - and he seems to have this end-of-game "it" factor we like to associate with self-made Marlon Brando tough guys, not with the sons of the privileged.

Crazy.

Another thing that's fascinating is how Trent Green can be considered a journeyman and Favre is considered superhumanly amazing, but their career passer ratings are almost identical, 86.0 to 86.6.

[MJZiggy]

"Favre's status on and off the field vaulted into the stratosphere at that time, and that could have impacted his focus on the task at hand in game-defining situations over the second two-thirds of his career. Success may well have gotten into his head."

This is the sort of thing I find fascinating. We mostly understand the physical gifts required for a great quarterback (imagine how good Doug Flutie might've been if he'd been about five inches taller), and I think we think we understand the mental requirements. People like to talk about the "mental toughness" required to be a great QB. Quarterbacks who have the physical gifts but don't have the mental makeup (I think of Jeff George) we think of as lacking some sense of cool under fire. Yet a quarterback who, in the popular imagination, definitely has that "it" factor - Favre - statistically does not have it at the end of games (when it's supposed to surface most strongly)..

On the other hand, a guy like Trent Green, whom we think of mostly as a journeyman, appears to rise above his limitations - but only at certain times (that is, at the end of a close game). Then you've got a guy with some physical gifts whom the populace often thinks of as a spoiled, had-it-handed-to-him guy - Eli Manning (no poor boondocks kid story there) - and he seems to have this end-of-game "it" factor we like to associate with self-made Marlon Brando tough guys, not with the sons of the privileged.

Crazy.

Another thing that's fascinating is how Trent Green can be considered a journeyman and Favre is considered superhumanly amazing, but their career passer ratings are almost identical, 86.0 to 86.6.

Favre said "Don't bet against me" at just the right time.

[vince]

"Favre's status on and off the field vaulted into the stratosphere at that time, and that could have impacted his focus on the task at hand in game-defining situations over the second two-thirds of his career. Success may well have gotten into his head."

This is the sort of thing I find fascinating. We mostly understand the physical gifts required for a great quarterback (imagine how good Doug Flutie might've been if he'd been about five inches taller), and I think we think we understand the mental requirements. People like to talk about the "mental toughness" required to be a great QB. Quarterbacks who have the physical gifts but don't have the mental makeup (I think of Jeff George) we think of as lacking some sense of cool under fire. Yet a quarterback who, in the popular imagination, definitely has that "it" factor - Favre - statistically does not have it at the end of games (when it's supposed to surface most strongly)..

On the other hand, a guy like Trent Green, whom we think of mostly as a journeyman, appears to rise above his limitations - but only at certain times (that is, at the end of a close game). Then you've got a guy with some physical gifts whom the populace often thinks of as a spoiled, had-it-handed-to-him guy - Eli Manning (no poor boondocks kid story there) - and he seems to have this end-of-game "it" factor we like to associate with self-made Marlon Brando tough guys, not with the sons of the privileged.

Crazy.

Another thing that's fascinating is how Trent Green can be considered a journeyman and Favre is considered superhumanly amazing, but their career passer ratings are almost identical, 86.0 to 86.6.
300 straight starts, 3 mvp's, a super bowl ring, the most wins of any QB in history, and every other record in the book has a way of doing that to a guy.

[get louder at lambeau]

"Favre's status on and off the field vaulted into the stratosphere at that time, and that could have impacted his focus on the task at hand in game-defining situations over the second two-thirds of his career. Success may well have gotten into his head."

This is the sort of thing I find fascinating. We mostly understand the physical gifts required for a great quarterback (imagine how good Doug Flutie might've been if he'd been about five inches taller), and I think we think we understand the mental requirements. People like to talk about the "mental toughness" required to be a great QB. Quarterbacks who have the physical gifts but don't have the mental makeup (I think of Jeff George) we think of as lacking some sense of cool under fire. Yet a quarterback who, in the popular imagination, definitely has that "it" factor - Favre - statistically does not have it at the end of games (when it's supposed to surface most strongly)..

On the other hand, a guy like Trent Green, whom we think of mostly as a journeyman, appears to rise above his limitations - but only at certain times (that is, at the end of a close game). Then you've got a guy with some physical gifts whom the populace often thinks of as a spoiled, had-it-handed-to-him guy - Eli Manning (no poor boondocks kid story there) - and he seems to have this end-of-game "it" factor we like to associate with self-made Marlon Brando tough guys, not with the sons of the privileged.

Crazy.

Another thing that's fascinating is how Trent Green can be considered a journeyman and Favre is considered superhumanly amazing, but their career passer ratings are almost identical, 86.0 to 86.6.
300 straight starts, 3 mvp's, a super bowl ring, the most wins of any QB in history, and every other record in the book has a way of doing that to a guy.

Yep. I'm well aware of all that stuff. Just sayin.

[ThunderDan]

"Favre's status on and off the field vaulted into the stratosphere at that time, and that could have impacted his focus on the task at hand in game-defining situations over the second two-thirds of his career. Success may well have gotten into his head."

This is the sort of thing I find fascinating. We mostly understand the physical gifts required for a great quarterback (imagine how good Doug Flutie might've been if he'd been about five inches taller), and I think we think we understand the mental requirements. People like to talk about the "mental toughness" required to be a great QB. Quarterbacks who have the physical gifts but don't have the mental makeup (I think of Jeff George) we think of as lacking some sense of cool under fire. Yet a quarterback who, in the popular imagination, definitely has that "it" factor - Favre - statistically does not have it at the end of games (when it's supposed to surface most strongly)..

On the other hand, a guy like Trent Green, whom we think of mostly as a journeyman, appears to rise above his limitations - but only at certain times (that is, at the end of a close game). Then you've got a guy with some physical gifts whom the populace often thinks of as a spoiled, had-it-handed-to-him guy - Eli Manning (no poor boondocks kid story there) - and he seems to have this end-of-game "it" factor we like to associate with self-made Marlon Brando tough guys, not with the sons of the privileged.

Crazy.

Another thing that's fascinating is how Trent Green can be considered a journeyman and Favre is considered superhumanly amazing, but their career passer ratings are almost identical, 86.0 to 86.6.
300 straight starts, 3 mvp's, a super bowl ring, the most wins of any QB in history, and every other record in the book has a way of doing that to a guy.

To me the crazy thing about Trent Green is the should have beens. If he doesn't blow out his knee Warner never sees the field in STL. T Green gets the MVPs and Super Bowl MVPs and we never hear about Warner.

[vince]

Yeah Louder, I didn't mean to be snide, although it came across that way. Sorry about that.

This shows how big a part of Favre's legendary status his longevity and durability are. In the last 12 years, he's second only to Peyton Manning in successful comeback drives, which is what we tend to remember - having seen his comeback drives time and again, going all the way back to his first year with the Packers. He's had by far the most clutch opportunities in that time. But his success ratio isn't very good. We don't tend to keep formal stats on failures or generally remember them as much, but Favre if far and away the leader in clutch failures.

Only now it seems he's being remembered for his clutch failures because of the playoff magnitude of them and the fact that he's stacked a bunch of them on top of one another in the last decade.

He's had a lot of successes and a lot of failures. Individual biases predispose us to emphasize one or the other when we think of him. This objective study shows that, over the last 12 years, he's been a below average QB in crunch time.

[get louder at lambeau]

Yeah Louder, I didn't mean to be snide, although it came across that way. Sorry about that.

This shows how big a part of Favre's legendary status his longevity and durability are. In the last 12 years, he's second only to Peyton Manning in successful comeback drives, which is what we tend to remember - having seen his comeback drives time and again, going all the way back to his first year with the Packers. He's had by far the most clutch opportunities in that time. But his success ratio isn't very good. We don't tend to keep formal stats on failures or generally remember them as much, but Favre if far and away the leader in clutch failures.

Only now it seems he's being remembered for his clutch failures because of the playoff magnitude of them and the fact that he's stacked a bunch of them on top of one another in the last decade.

He's had a lot of successes and a lot of failures. Individual biases predispose us to emphasize one or the other when we think of him. This objective study shows that, over the last 12 years, he's been a below average QB in crunch time.

Yeah, no problem. I don't think we really disagree at all on this. I also expect to get some kind of response like that from someone. Just the way it is when you point out stats that disagree with conventional wisdom without qualifying it first.