1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

How does it feel to be a punchline now?  Virtually no one is agreeing with your stance on this.  This is RTK, Bacarty level of flaming out.  Most people would have ran and hid by now.  I commend you for being to stupid to know any better.  

I explained it. I am fine with my position. 

Better off deleting this thread and go into hiding until week 1. Maybe lurk for a couple weeks until someone else post something stupid

1 minute ago, Godfather said:

Better off deleting this thread and go into hiding until week 1. Maybe lurk for a couple weeks until someone else post something stupid

No shortage of people to do that.

1 minute ago, Godfather said:

Better off deleting this thread and go into hiding until week 1. Maybe lurk for a couple weeks until someone else post something stupid

He has set the bar pretty high, he may have to lurk for several years.

4 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I explained it. I am fine with my position. 

oops. 1 more.

Just now, downundermike said:

He has set the bar pretty high, he may have to lurk for several years.

Idk. Afan and RTK post some dumb stuff. Can always count on those 2 clowns to post something crazy

Everyone’s thoughts on this thread besides jsb 

9 minutes ago, Godfather said:

Better off deleting this thread and go into hiding until week 1. Maybe lurk for a couple weeks until someone else post something stupid

Will u hide for about 15 yrs

1 hour ago, downundermike said:

@Aerolithe_Lion @Next_Up @e-a-g-l-e-s eagles!

@jsb235 warned me the last guy who challenged him like this quit the board.

Whutcha think, should I quit yet ??

Technically he challenged you, so you’re safe

1 hour ago, jsb235 said:

Because if you want to compare how a player did over a certain number of games, counting those games equally is the best way to do it. 

*in your unpopularly subjective opinion

I don't need to read 9 pages to know Mike has bludgeoned this fool without mercy.

Rodney Peete’s career QB rating in the playoffs is 124.2.

According to jsb’s formula it is 86.1.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Rodney Peete’s career QB rating in the playoffs is 124.2.

According to jsb’s formula it is 86.1.

Nope. Not my position at all. But you do you. 

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Rodney Peete’s career QB rating in the playoffs is 124.2.

According to jsb’s formula it is 86.1.

27 minutes ago, olsilverhair said:

Will u hide for about 15 yrs

Just like your "missing” anal beads?  

5 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Nope. Not my position at all. But you do you. 

This entire thing started because you said taking the average of QB ratings is the way to get the QB rating as a whole.  I have given 15 examples that it doesn’t work, and the entire EMB is laughing at you.

As I just told HE, I am going to keep running numbers that prove you are  wrong, until you admit it.

Just now, downundermike said:

This entire thing started because you said taking the average of QB ratings is the way to get the QB rating as a whole.

In similar games. 

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

 I have given 15 examples that it doesn’t work, and the entire EMB is laughing at you. 

No one itt likes me. No big deal. 

 

5 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

In similar games. 

What does that mean ?? 

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

What does that mean ?? 

You are a smart person. Figure it out. 

Also, how did bragging about this thread go for you in the blog? 

Yikes. I read the replies. Talk about turning a win into a loss. 

4 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

You are a smart person. Figure it out. 

Also, how did bragging about this thread go for you in the blog? 

Yikes. I read the replies. Talk about turning a win into a loss. 

21 hours ago, jsb235 said:

Again, you fail to understand the qb rating is a measure of performance, not a raw stat.

It's a snapshot on how a qb did in a certain timeframe. So if a qb had ratings of 86, 110 and 90, you wouldn't take the raw stats from each game and generate a new rating, but use the ratings from each game to generate an average performance over that time frame.

You want to simply calculate a new rating based on raw stats, but that's not the way qb rating works. Once the number is calculated, it becomes the number. You can't undue it simply to win an argument.

Also, as an aside, I didn't want to use qb rating, but it was in response to someone else who demanded it be used. So I only used it to keep the discussion on a level playing field.

Uh, that's exactly how QB rating is calculated dude.

If a QB hands off for 58 plays then throws two passes, both 20 yard TDs, his passer rating for that game will be phenomenal (probably perfect but I don't know).

If the next game run/pass is 50/50 (30 passing plays) and the QB only manages a 90.0 passer rating it would be foolish to say the QB rating was (90.0+158.3)/2 = 124.15. 

Naturally games in which a QB passes more will be "weighted" more by your bizarre definition. This is proper.

QB rating is intended to rate effectiveness as a passer. Thus when determining rating over any stretch of games you combine stats from all passing downs. 

You seem committed to being wrong here so you do you. But you're wrong.

9 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Uh, that's exactly how QB rating is calculated dude.

If a QB hands off for 58 plays then throws two passes, both 20 yard TDs, his passer rating for that game will be phenomenal (probably perfect but I don't know).

If the next game run/pass is 50/50 (30 passing plays) and the QB only manages a 90.0 passer rating it would be foolish to say the QB rating was (90.0+158.3)/2 = 124.15. 

Naturally games in which a QB passes more will be "weighted" more by your bizarre definition. This is proper.

QB rating is intended to rate effectiveness as a passer. Thus when determining rating over any stretch of games you combine stats from all passing downs. 

You seem committed to being wrong here so you do you. But you're wrong.

You can compare games that have similar passing attempts though and average them?

That's been my point from the beginning. Take a few similar games, use the average from each game to get an average. It's what I did. I didn't take games like the ones in your example.

And, as predicted, the average and the raw data were less than a point apart. That wasn't luck.