The NFL's unfair passing grade
The Vick vs. Collins case study is an eye-opener in the way we measure quarterbacks
If you want one set of numbers to demonstrate why the NFL's passer rating is obsolete, Week 1 action served up this doozy:
Michael Vick's passer rating was 83.7.
Kerry Collins' was 82.3.
That's right, according to passer rating, Vick's Sunday was barely distinguishable from the game Collins had, and both were right around the league average (82.2 in 2010).
Of course, while Vick was throwing for just 187 yards, he did have two TDs, one of them game-tying, and he ran for 98 yards on just 10 carries. Oh, and the Eagles won. Meanwhile, Collins fumbled twice, took three sacks and piled up most of his yardage during garbage time in the Colts' blowout loss to the Texans. By the time Collins hit Reggie Wayne for a touchdown, the Colts were already losing 34-0 and many Colts fans had probably checked out.
As we kick off our weekly Next Level look at quarterbacks, let's run through the reasons why the traditional passer rating sees these performances as remotely similar, and how Total QBR differs. It's not an endorsement, just an exercise in clarity.
1. Rushing yards: Passer rating doesn't include them. And it turns out Vick added 5.8 expected points to the Eagles on running plays, by far the most of any QB in Week 1.
2. Ball-discipline skills: Passer rating doesn't include them, either. And Collins was awful at handling the football. Indeed, Collins' performance was a stark reminder of just how great Peyton Manning has been before the Colts were forced to start Collins in his stead. From 2008 through 2010, Manning took three sacks in a game only twice. And he fumbled a total of just six times. In fact, he cost his team as many points on fumbles (2.0) in those 48 games as Collins did in one start.
To read more about why Michael Vick is a complete QB, plus why Cam Newton's performance topped Tom Brady's, you must be an ESPN Insider.