What percentage of a teams effectiveness is attributed to the QB?

[RashanGary]

10% special teams
45% defense
45% offense


Since a QB isn’t on the field for 55% of plays, wed start to look at how much he impacts the 45% he plays in.

I’d split the offenses effectiveness into three groups and give them about equal thirds

OL
Skill players
QB

The quarterback accounts for, by my estimation, approximately 1/3 of 45% or 15%


This is not the Green Bay Rodgers vs the Tampa Bay Brady’s

[MadScientist]

That sound plausible, but when you look at the results from replacing Rodgers with Hundley, the offense took a huge hit.

[Bretsky]

10% special teams
45% defense
45% offense


Since a QB isn’t on the field for 55% of plays, wed start to look at how much he impacts the 45% he plays in.

I’d split the offenses effectiveness into three groups and give them about equal thirds

OL
Skill players
QB

The quarterback accounts for, by my estimation, approximately 1/3 of 45% or 15%


This is not the Green Bay Rodgers vs the Tampa Bay Brady’s

What percentage Super Bowl's have been won by bad QB's over the last 15 years ?

[Upnorth]

That sound plausible, but when you look at the results from replacing Rodgers with Hundley, the offense took a huge hit.

2010 defence minus Nick collins became crap. 2020 defence withput Clark becomes crap.
When certain players become keys to scheme they have a larger impact on the game. Qbs tend to become keys to the scheme. As to rodgers impact I think it would be larger than 15% but he is one of the greatest to ever play the game. For an average qb I would say 10-15 is very realistic

[smuggler]

The defense when the game is on the line has actually been decent this year. They've just been playing a lot of garbage time. To be fair, they have FAILED in garbage time. You're willing to give up points in exchange for burning clock. The garbage time defense has given up quick points.

[bobblehead]

What percentage Super Bowl's have been won by bad QB's over the last 15 years ?

Bad or average? And do you mean IN THAT GAME, or overall. Cuz Brady's Owl wins read:

13-3, 34-28, 28-24, 24-21, 32-29, 20-17

So in 4 of 6 wins he didn't put 30 on the board. Other recent Owl winners who were not great: Nick Foles, Washed up Manning, Other Manning 2x, and Joe Flacco.

But no, you can't have a BAD QB and win. Average..sure.

[RashanGary]

First, there are about 25 good quarterbacks in the NFL. You wouldn’t know that unless you’ve watched every game for a season. You would bitch and cry how bad good players are like most fans do.

A huge amount of nfl quarterbacks do a good job leading their teams. Very few are so bad, their team can’t win with them at QB.


So the difference is the average ones (most of them being good) can win and the great ones give their teams a better shot. 15% makes total sense.


I know nobody wants to hear it, but the difference between Brady, Rodgers and Tannenhill is more supporting cast than individual performance. And a bunch of the QB stats are surrounding cast stats more than QB stats.

[Upnorth]

First, there are about 25 good quarterbacks in the NFL. You wouldn’t know that unless you’ve watched every game for a season. You would bitch and cry how bad good players are like most fans do.

A huge amount of nfl quarterbacks do a good job leading their teams. Very few are so bad, their team can’t win with them at QB.


So the difference is the average ones (most of them being good) can win and the great ones give their teams a better shot. 15% makes total sense.


I know nobody wants to hear it, but the difference between Brady, Rodgers and Tannenhill is more supporting cast than individual performance. And a bunch of the QB stats are surrounding cast stats more than QB stats.

I agree. Nfl is more if a team sport than any other. I think a few currently may exceed the 15% maybe. The list is probably rodgers Wilson and and no one else.
I feel like the oline in total is more important than most qbs

[sharpe1027]

There's a difference between comparing a dropoff after injury and QBs with an offense designed for them and after an entire preseason of preparation. You would expect a bigger difference when a backup gets put into a spot due to injury.

So hard to really quantity because injury situation would otherwise be a great way to judge by comparing the same supporting cast for two QBs.

[Zool]

First, there are about 25 good quarterbacks in the NFL. You wouldn’t know that unless you’ve watched every game for a season. You would bitch and cry how bad good players are like most fans do.

A huge amount of nfl quarterbacks do a good job leading their teams. Very few are so bad, their team can’t win with them at QB.


So the difference is the average ones (most of them being good) can win and the great ones give their teams a better shot. 15% makes total sense.


I know nobody wants to hear it, but the difference between Brady, Rodgers and Tannenhill is more supporting cast than individual performance. And a bunch of the QB stats are surrounding cast stats more than QB stats.

It’s not really possible to have 25 “good” QBs. Someone has to be average and that has to be in the middle. Everyone branches out from there. You can’t have 25 out of 32 be above average. Number 15-17 would be the average QBs.

[bobblehead]

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2020/10/17/21520269/nathaniel-hackett-unsung-hero-of-the-packers-offense

How about we switch it up. How much is attributed to system. First line here is "freed of Blake Bortles". Take a look at actual history. Bortles regressed every year under Hackett. Hackett blew as OC of Jacksonville. Now he is suddenly head coaching material? Only to an idiot owner who doesn't realize Hackett is riding Flower's coat tails.

[RashanGary]

It’s not really possible to have 25 “good” QBs. Someone has to be average and that has to be in the middle. Everyone branches out from there. You can’t have 25 out of 32 be above average. Number 15-17 would be the average QBs.

25 quarterbacks you can win with. Using your metric, you're correct. If you're looming for a Qb who can win games, even championships, im correct. Since I focus on winning, not comparative dick size, I like my metric. I

[RashanGary]

I do see a lot of bad defensive tackles, OTs and corners. Those positions are losing games more than the mostly excellent QB play around the league.

There are like 10 good DTs in the league at any given time. Id draft them first all day if there's a good one.

[RashanGary]

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2...ackers-offense

How about we switch it up. How much is attributed to system. First line here is "freed of Blake Bortles". Take a look at actual history. Bortles regressed every year under Hackett. Hackett blew as OC of Jacksonville. Now he is suddenly head coaching material? Only to an idiot owner who doesn't realize Hackett is riding Flower's coat tails.

Relax! You have no clue if Hackett is any good as a coach!

[Zool]

25 quarterbacks you can win with. Using your metric, you're correct. If you're looming for a Qb who can win games, even championships, im correct. Since I focus on winning, not comparative dick size, I like my metric. I

I’m just using math, not your dick. You can’t have 80% of things over average. Otherwise it’s not average. Average is middle.

If you compare them to QB play 30 years ago, they probably do seem much better. The game has changed. QBs are given too much credit and too much blame.