Matt Ryan vs. Joe Flacco (1 Viewer)

[Warhogs]

So I was just looking at some statistics in my zealots league and was surprised to see that Joe Flacco has scored 176.64 points and Matt Ryan has scored 176.30. Everyone has been talking about what a great rookie year Ryan has had and I agree with that but it sure seems like Flacco has been playing equally as well without getting nearly the same amount of attention.

The closeness in fantasy points surprised me and I thought it might create some interesting discussion.

 

[bumpman]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.

I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

 

[thatguy]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

And this is not taking anything away from what Flacco has done - he has been very good. But Ryan appears to be in another class.

 

[The_Man]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

Flacco's QB rating over the last 7 weeks is 99.9 -- the highest in the NFL during that span. This season he's faced the Steelers, Titans, and Giants. Ryan has faced Detroit, KC, San Diego and New Orleans. Yet they have the exact some completion percentage. Check out how Flacco fared vs. the Eagles compared to Ryan.Plus, with Roddy White and Michael Turner, Ryan has the better supporting cast.Ryan is definitely the more hyped player, but I see very little difference between him and Flacco.

 

[PatrickT]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.

I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

Flacco's QB rating over the last 7 weeks is 99.9 -- the highest in the NFL during that span. This season he's faced the Steelers, Titans, and Giants. Ryan has faced Detroit, KC, San Diego and New Orleans. Yet they have the exact some completion percentage. Check out how Flacco fared vs. the Eagles compared to Ryan.Plus, with Roddy White and Michael Turner, Ryan has the better supporting cast.

Ryan is definitely the more hyped player, but I see very little difference between him and Flacco.

I'll let Pat Kirwan speak to this. I think you're right that, Flacco is closer than most people think, but I still think it's clearly Ryan at this point.

These rookie QBs don't look like rookies

Last week, both Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco won again on the road. Ryan has won three in a row on the road and heads to New Orleans this week. Flacco has won four straight on the road and faces the Redskins at home this week. I believe Ryan is ahead of Flacco right now for rookie of the year honors, but it is not a runaway. Please take a look at these comparisons of the two rookie quarterbacks who have led their respective teams to identical 8-4 records:

Third down passing: Ryan has completed 75 of 123 passes (61 percent) for a 85.5 rating. Flacco has completed 64 of 107 passes (59.8 percent) for a 94 rating.

Fourth quarter passing: Ryan has completed 48 of 81 passes for 611 yards, four touchdowns, one interception and seven sacks. Flacco has completed 44 of 66 passes for 544 yards, three touchdowns, two interceptions and seven sacks.



Vs. the blitz: Ryan has completed 56 of 91 passes; Flacco has completed 46 of 88 passes for three touchdowns.

This is twice I've seen you put up Flacco's toughest opponents vs Ryan's weakest opponents. Let's try it the other way. Ryan has faced Green Bay, Chicago, Carolina x2 and TB, Flacco has had Cincy x2, Cleveland x2, Houston and a hobbled Indy. I'll grant you that Pit, NYG and Ten are collectively greater than GB, CHI, and Car. I'll also point out that Flacco's team lost those games, and Ryan's team won.You really want to compare the Philly stats? Ryan had 100 more yards, but it was marred by two picks, and one of them clearly was Roddy's fault. And yet, he still had a chance to beat them if Jennings hadn't been an idiot. Flacco was the benefactor of a Ravens D that absolutely mauled the Eagles, and McNabb doing his best Jamarcus Russell impersonation.

Look, Flacco's been great. I seriously do not want to take anything from his accomplishments. If not for Ryan, he'd be getting a ton of pub, and that's a little unfair for him. But he's had a better supporting cast on defense, arguably a better Oline, and did a lot with his legs early on in the season. Ryan was showing he "got it" from day one.

 

[North]

I might regret saying this out loud but when it's all said and done Flacco will have the better NFL career.

 

[thatguy]

I might regret saying this out loud but when it's all said and done Flacco will have the better NFL career.

You may not regret it, but I think you'll be wrong.

 

[FUBAR]

Ryan is definitely the more hyped player, but I see very little difference between him and Flacco.

These rookie QBs don't look like rookies

Last week, both Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco won again on the road. Ryan has won three in a row on the road and heads to New Orleans this week. Flacco has won four straight on the road and faces the Redskins at home this week. I believe Ryan is ahead of Flacco right now for rookie of the year honors, but it is not a runaway. Please take a look at these comparisons of the two rookie quarterbacks who have led their respective teams to identical 8-4 records...

Look, Flacco's been great. I seriously do not want to take anything from his accomplishments. If not for Ryan, he'd be getting a ton of pub, and that's a little unfair for him. But he's had a better supporting cast on defense, arguably a better Oline, and did a lot with his legs early on in the season. Ryan was showing he "got it" from day one.

I agree with this. IMO the perceived difference is larger than the real difference. If drafting or in an auction today, I'd probably let someone pay the price for Ryan and pick up Flacco a lot cheaper.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I don't think it's that close, at least if you ignore SOS (I don't know exactly how much tougher Flacco's SOS has been). Ryan is average a full yard more per pass, has a higher TD ratio, has a lower INT ratio, has a better sack rate, and is losing less yards per sack. Ryan is averaging 7.0 adjusted net yards per attempt; Flacco is averaging 5.0 adjusted net yards per attempt. Ryan ranks fourth in ANY/A, the best statistical measure of a QB's effectiveness, behind just Romo, Rivers and Brees. Flacco ranks 23rd. Ryan's got a better set of receivers, but that's a pretty big gap.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

Flacco's QB rating over the last 7 weeks is 99.9 -- the highest in the NFL during that span. This season he's faced the Steelers, Titans, and Giants. Ryan has faced Detroit, KC, San Diego and New Orleans. Yet they have the exact some completion percentage. Check out how Flacco fared vs. the Eagles compared to Ryan.Plus, with Roddy White and Michael Turner, Ryan has the better supporting cast.Ryan is definitely the more hyped player, but I see very little difference between him and Flacco.

I think they had this discussion on the Ravens board and the counterpoint was that if you figured out QB rating for any other week duration of the season (take the last 3 weeks, take the last 4 weeks, take the last 10 weeks), Ryan's is better. So 7 weeks is the convenient debate point when those putting Flacco up against Ryan as an equal would use. With that said, Flacco is at 99.9 - Ryan is at 99.0 (this only includes 6 games for Ryan since his bye week is included) for that time frame. Also, if we're to compare apples to apples, let's not put out there as an example the best defenses Flacco has faced and the worst defenses Ryan has. At the end of the day, I think both franchises are overjoyed with how their 1st round QB choices have turned out in their first year. With that said, having only watched Ryan on a consistent basis all I can say on his behalf is that when he is on the field, he is the most dangerous player on it. He can attack any part of the field, he can run the no-huddle, he has full audible authority, he has digested the entire playbook so there is no play that can't be run (this according to Mularkey).One last thing to throw in there as far as Ryan is concerned. In terms of a franchise implosion that did not involve external factors/acts of god - I don't know if a franchise had ever experienced anything like the Falcons experienced in 2007. As such, they were considered to be so DOA coming into this season that pre-season prognostications from Sporting News and SI had them winning 1 and 2 games respectively. In essence, they were supposed to be the Detroit Lions. While there are alot of factors involved in the Falcons remarkable turnaround, Ryan is at its epicenter. That goes beyond the numbers.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

Flacco's QB rating over the last 7 weeks is 99.9 -- the highest in the NFL during that span. This season he's faced the Steelers, Titans, and Giants. Ryan has faced Detroit, KC, San Diego and New Orleans. Yet they have the exact some completion percentage. Check out how Flacco fared vs. the Eagles compared to Ryan.Plus, with Roddy White and Michael Turner, Ryan has the better supporting cast.Ryan is definitely the more hyped player, but I see very little difference between him and Flacco.

I think they had this discussion on the Ravens board and the counterpoint was that if you figured out QB rating for any other week duration of the season (take the last 3 weeks, take the last 4 weeks, take the last 10 weeks), Ryan's is better. So 7 weeks is the convenient debate point when those putting Flacco up against Ryan as an equal would use. With that said, Flacco is at 99.9 - Ryan is at 99.0 (this only includes 6 games for Ryan since his bye week is included) for that time frame. Also, if we're to compare apples to apples, let's not put out there as an example the best defenses Flacco has faced and the worst defenses Ryan has. At the end of the day, I think both franchises are overjoyed with how their 1st round QB choices have turned out in their first year. With that said, having only watched Ryan on a consistent basis all I can say on his behalf is that when he is on the field, he is the most dangerous player on it. He can attack any part of the field, he can run the no-huddle, he has full audible authority, he has digested the entire playbook so there is no play that can't be run (this according to Mularkey).One last thing to throw in there as far as Ryan is concerned. In terms of a franchise implosion that did not involve external factors/acts of god - I don't know if a franchise had ever experienced anything like the Falcons experienced in 2007. As such, they were considered to be so DOA coming into this season that pre-season prognostications from Sporting News and SI had them winning 1 and 2 games respectively. In essence, they were supposed to be the Detroit Lions. While there are alot of factors involved in the Falcons remarkable turnaround, Ryan is at its epicenter. That goes beyond the numbers.

Honestly, anyone predicting 1 or 2 wins for Atlanta was an idiot. They were a four win team that made two noticeable upgrades in the off-season. Ryan's done an incredible job, but he shouldn't receive extra super credit just because sports writers aren't smart. Your other points are, as usual, right on.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Sometimes you have to look past the numbers.

Matt Ryan is asked to do more for his team than Joe Flacco. Ryan doesn't have a great defense, so he has to throw more. He's done well when asked to do it, so he has more productive numbers and stats that Chase loves to digest.

Flacco has always been Big Ben 2.0 to me, and I still see it. Flacco's rookie season is similar to Ben's - asked to play within the system, not throw a ton, just win the games and keep the Ravens offense churning. He's not asked to throw 30+ times nor is he asked to go on long drives with just his arm.

That said, over the past several weeks (as mentioned earlier) Flacco has 11 TDs compared to 2 INTs over the last 7 games, and the only loss came when he threw two picks against the Giants. Baltimore is averaging over 30 points a game in that span, even with the scant 10 against New York included.

As Flacco is developing on the job, more facets of the passing game are coming to life. Todd Heap and Mark Clayton are now fantasy viable each because of it, since Flacco has more of the playbook at his disposal.

I'm not discounting Ryan's numbers or accomplishments, but I will defend Flacco's performance as being practically on par. Both QBs are doing extremely well for Year 1 of what looks to be a long career for each.

 

[The_Man]

To me, one of the reasons that the last 7 weeks are important in assessing Flacco is because that's when Cam Cameron took the training wheels off. It actually started at halftime of the Colts game (8 games ago) when the Ravens were losing 24-0. At that juncture, Flacco had to come out flinging for the first time and he played very well in the second half.

I think that's when Cameron and Harbaugh realized just how good Flacco was and he's been on an upward trajectory ever since.

People's perceptions are funny. Because the Ravens have a great D and have always had terrible QBs, people perceive that they are asking Flacco to be a game manager, just like they have with past QBs. But that's really not the case. His arm strength is incredible, and his accuracy is outstanding. He still needs to work on putting a little less air under the deep balls and on just throwing the ball away when there's nothing there. But he is very much on par with Ryan -- which makes me think his ceiling might be a little higher, since Ryan has so much D1 experience while Flacco was playing vs. Towson and New Hampshire last year.

I will say that Ryan's game-winning throw to set up the FG vs. Chicago was the single best play I've seen either of them make, maybe the best play I've seen any QB make this year.

It will be interesting to see how these guys fare down the stretch. Both have some tough games coming up with the playoffs on the line -- my guess is one team makes the playoffs and that rookie QB ends up as ROY while the other misses out.

 

[CLIFF]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

If you take into consideration Balt's defense putting Flacco into better scoring situations you must also take into consideration the fact that Flacco plays on a run first offense and the weapons at WR that Ryan has compared to that of Flacco. I'm in a Dynasty league and I took him (Flacco)as a rookie this year so I have him for 3 years at $1. Unfortunately unless Balt changes their offensive scheme it will be difficult for Flacco to show his true potential. Before the Year I believed that Flacco was by far the better QB for the NFL, his size and arm strength seemed to be more that of a prototypical Pro QB. I still had concerns about the Offensive he was going into but I believe that with his success this year Balt can and should start looking for more offensive weapons for him.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

When I watch them play, it seems that Ryan is much more consistent when it comes to sustaining drives. I'm curious as to the number of 3 and outs each has, as well as other stats about the length of drives and number of plays in the drives.

 

[Chase Stuart]

If you take into consideration Balt's defense putting Flacco into better scoring situations you must also take into consideration the fact that Flacco plays on a run first offense and the weapons at WR that Ryan has compared to that of Flacco.

Ryan plays in a very heavy, run-first offense, too.

 

[zDragon]

If you take into consideration Balt's defense putting Flacco into better scoring situations you must also take into consideration the fact that Flacco plays on a run first offense and the weapons at WR that Ryan has compared to that of Flacco.

Ryan plays in a very heavy, run-first offense, too.

Not sure how many here browse Football Outsiders. They show Ryan at 1 and Flacco at 21. The site uses deep analysis of every play, game situation, etc.According to them Ryan has more value than Flacco in real football. I picked up Flacco to shore up my back-up QB situation and see him as an acceptable low end backup fantasy wise.

 

[The_Man]

If you take into consideration Balt's defense putting Flacco into better scoring situations you must also take into consideration the fact that Flacco plays on a run first offense and the weapons at WR that Ryan has compared to that of Flacco.

Ryan plays in a very heavy, run-first offense, too.

Not sure how many here browse Football Outsiders. They show Ryan at 1 and Flacco at 21. The site uses deep analysis of every play, game situation, etc.According to them Ryan has more value than Flacco in real football. I picked up Flacco to shore up my back-up QB situation and see him as an acceptable low end backup fantasy wise.

If Ryan is #1, then according to them he has more value in real football than Peyton or Eli, Romo, Rivers, Favre and everyone else.

 

[FUBAR]

If you take into consideration Balt's defense putting Flacco into better scoring situations you must also take into consideration the fact that Flacco plays on a run first offense and the weapons at WR that Ryan has compared to that of Flacco.

Ryan plays in a very heavy, run-first offense, too.

Not sure how many here browse Football Outsiders. They show Ryan at 1 and Flacco at 21. The site uses deep analysis of every play, game situation, etc.According to them Ryan has more value than Flacco in real football. I picked up Flacco to shore up my back-up QB situation and see him as an acceptable low end backup fantasy wise.

If Ryan is #1, then according to them he has more value in real football than Peyton or Eli, Romo, Rivers, Favre and everyone else.

If you believe DVOA = true value, then yes, Ryan is doing better as a rookie than any QB.

 

[bcr8f]

Flacco's QB rating over the last 7 weeks is 99.9 -- the highest in the NFL during that span. This season he's faced the Steelers, Titans, and Giants. Ryan has faced Detroit, KC, San Diego and New Orleans. Yet they have the exact some completion percentage. Check out how Flacco fared vs. the Eagles compared to Ryan.Plus, with Roddy White and Michael Turner, Ryan has the better supporting cast.Ryan is definitely the more hyped player, but I see very little difference between him and Flacco.

I agree with Mayock Ryan is the better decision maker, Flacco has the better physical skills.

 

[McNutts]

Ryan is money on 3rd downs..

 

[bcr8f]

If you take into consideration Balt's defense putting Flacco into better scoring situations you must also take into consideration the fact that Flacco plays on a run first offense and the weapons at WR that Ryan has compared to that of Flacco.

Ryan plays in a very heavy, run-first offense, too.

Not sure how many here browse Football Outsiders. They show Ryan at 1 and Flacco at 21. The site uses deep analysis of every play, game situation, etc.According to them Ryan has more value than Flacco in real football. I picked up Flacco to shore up my back-up QB situation and see him as an acceptable low end backup fantasy wise.

I don't listen to bean counters coming up with systems to judge players. Quarterbacks are ranked according to DYAR, or Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement. This gives the value of the quarterback's performance compared to replacement level, adjusted for situation and opponent and then translated into yardage.

 

[Truman]

If you take into consideration Balt's defense putting Flacco into better scoring situations you must also take into consideration the fact that Flacco plays on a run first offense and the weapons at WR that Ryan has compared to that of Flacco.

Ryan plays in a very heavy, run-first offense, too.

Not sure how many here browse Football Outsiders. They show Ryan at 1 and Flacco at 21. The site uses deep analysis of every play, game situation, etc.According to them Ryan has more value than Flacco in real football. I picked up Flacco to shore up my back-up QB situation and see him as an acceptable low end backup fantasy wise.

I don't listen to bean counters coming up with systems to judge players. Quarterbacks are ranked according to DYAR, or Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement. This gives the value of the quarterback's performance compared to replacement level, adjusted for situation and opponent and then translated into yardage.

All it's doing is taking down and distance, opponent and game situation into account when measuring stats.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I've run some numbers and as of now, I've got Ryan as the greatest rookie QB in NFL history. As long as he plays about average the rest of the way, he should end the season that way.

 

[PatrickT]

Yes. Both have similar aggregate numbers and Flacco has really exceeded expectation. Nevertheless, having watched both, I think Ryan has had the better year and performance overall. He has rejuvinated a much weaker team with an average defense. Flacco, IMO, gets the benefit of more scoring opportunities set up by Baltimore's excellent defense.

I expect Ryan to realize much more fantasy and real-NFL upside in the coming years than Flacco because he simply appears more talented, calm, and accurate. He is the clear leader of the Falcon's offense. Flacco is more of a game manager at this point.

Flacco's QB rating over the last 7 weeks is 99.9 -- the highest in the NFL during that span. This season he's faced the Steelers, Titans, and Giants. Ryan has faced Detroit, KC, San Diego and New Orleans. Yet they have the exact some completion percentage. Check out how Flacco fared vs. the Eagles compared to Ryan.Plus, with Roddy White and Michael Turner, Ryan has the better supporting cast.

Ryan is definitely the more hyped player, but I see very little difference between him and Flacco.

I think they had this discussion on the Ravens board and the counterpoint was that if you figured out QB rating for any other week duration of the season (take the last 3 weeks, take the last 4 weeks, take the last 10 weeks), Ryan's is better. So 7 weeks is the convenient debate point when those putting Flacco up against Ryan as an equal would use. With that said, Flacco is at 99.9 - Ryan is at 99.0 (this only includes 6 games for Ryan since his bye week is included) for that time frame. Also, if we're to compare apples to apples, let's not put out there as an example the best defenses Flacco has faced and the worst defenses Ryan has.

At the end of the day, I think both franchises are overjoyed with how their 1st round QB choices have turned out in their first year. With that said, having only watched Ryan on a consistent basis all I can say on his behalf is that when he is on the field, he is the most dangerous player on it. He can attack any part of the field, he can run the no-huddle, he has full audible authority, he has digested the entire playbook so there is no play that can't be run (this according to Mularkey).

One last thing to throw in there as far as Ryan is concerned. In terms of a franchise implosion that did not involve external factors/acts of god - I don't know if a franchise had ever experienced anything like the Falcons experienced in 2007. As such, they were considered to be so DOA coming into this season that pre-season prognostications from Sporting News and SI had them winning 1 and 2 games respectively. In essence, they were supposed to be the Detroit Lions. While there are alot of factors involved in the Falcons remarkable turnaround, Ryan is at its epicenter. That goes beyond the numbers.

The bolded part is, to me, the real key. We can debate situational stats all day, but in the end, Ryan is given free reign at the line of scrimmage, and I don't think that's tru for Flacco. In interviews I've heard with Harbaugh, he's indicated that Flacco works with about half the field. There is nothing Mularkey can't run, I don't think the same is true for Flacco.I don't think there's any debate over physical skills. Flacco has the stronger arm, that's not in question. He's also more mobile, and able to make more plays with his legs. There is one other way that Flacco is more impressive than Ryan, and that is the fact that he was drafted as a project. He was never intended to start, yet he's been very successful.

I also think you make a great point in mentioning the pressure to save the franchise that Matt was under. Hard to quantify that.

 

[millertyme1]

Since this is a fantasy board, I'd take Ryan over Flacco w/o hesitation for the future.

I see Ryan having many elite years (ala Peyton Manning, I also love the dome factor). I view Flacco having perhaps an elite year or two, but being consisenting around the QB8-12 range.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I've run some numbers and as of now, I've got Ryan as the greatest rookie QB in NFL history. As long as he plays about average the rest of the way, he should end the season that way.

Would love to see a post on this. I'm hard just thinking about it.

I'm going to wait for this weekend's games to end. After the stats are updated on Tuesday, I'll post it on Wednesday.

 

[AAABatteries]

I've run some numbers and as of now, I've got Ryan as the greatest rookie QB in NFL history. As long as he plays about average the rest of the way, he should end the season that way.

Would love to see a post on this. I'm hard just thinking about it.

I'm going to wait for this weekend's games to end. After the stats are updated on Tuesday, I'll post it on Wednesday.

Uh-oh Truman, just like the commercial says, you better contact your doctor since that's going to be more than 4 hours.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Ryan (24/33, 315, 1-1) only upping his stock with a good performance against the ugly Saints D here today.

 

[PatrickT]

Ryan (24/33, 315, 1-1) only upping his stock with a good performance against the ugly Saints D here today.

and, as **** Stockton pointed out, the numbers don't even begin to tell the story of his performance today.

 

[bumpman]

Ryan (24/33, 315, 1-1) only upping his stock with a good performance against the ugly Saints D here today.

and, as **** Stockton pointed out, the numbers don't even begin to tell the story of his performance today.

He played excellently today. Falcons defense let the team down in the end. Ryan made a full range of throws, including a bunch under pressure. The most impressive throws were the ones he was making to convert third down after third down. This guy has unbelievable talent and cool.

 

[Warhogs]

I own Ryan in 1 league and Flacco in another. My belief is that I think Ryan can be elite while I think Flacco can be merely very good. I guess the thing that surprised me is how much under the radar Flacco has been compared to Ryan yet he has been just as good to this point (even after starting out pretty slowly the first few weeks).

 

[tombonneau]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.

All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

 

[Chase Stuart]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

 

[zDragon]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

Out of curiosity what are the Right statistics?

 

[Chase Stuart]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.

All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.

2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

Out of curiosity what are the Right statistics?

The number one statistic to measure QB performance is adjusted net yards per pass attempt. It's calculated as follows:(Passing yards <plus> TDs x 20 <minus> INTs x 45 <minus> sack yards lost) divided by (pass attempts <plus> sacks). People that do calculate ANY/A usually use 10 "yards" per passing TD, but I've recently done some research that suggests upping the number to 20. Regardless, it's the best metric for a couple of reasons.

1) People use to say completion percentage was too skewed towards WCO and yards per completion was too skewed towards vertical passing games. By multiplying the two numbers, you get a metric that's relatively fair to use for any offense. Guys in WCO can compile high yards per attempt numbers and guys in vertical passing offenses can get high YPA numbers. It depends on how good the QB and the offense is.

2) But other things are important besides yards and attempts. Things like touchdowns and interceptions. So you need to give bonus yards for TDs and take away yards for INTs.

3) And then sacks need to be included. A guy who avoids three sacks by throwing in completions is more valuable than a guy who gets sacked three times. But you wouldn't know that if you just used yards per attempt.

So ANY/A (adjusted net yards per attempt) is the best measure of passing effectiveness. It's way better than things like QB Rating, completion percentage, or yards per attempt. Obviously it's team dependent and QBs that play on teams with good offensive lines and good receivers will have an advantage over QBs on teams with bad lines and bad receivers. But any statistic is susceptible to that problem. But if you just want to measure passing effectiveness, ANY/A is the way to go.

Ryan is in the top five in ANY/A with Rivers, Brees, Romo and Warner. Flacco is not in the top fifteen.

Flacco's very good, but he's not Matt Ryan.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.

All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.

2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

Out of curiosity what are the Right statistics?

The number one statistic to measure QB performance is adjusted net yards per pass attempt. It's calculated as follows:(Passing yards <plus> TDs x 20 <minus> INTs x 45 <minus> sack yards lost) divided by (pass attempts <plus> sacks). People that do calculate ANY/A usually use 10 "yards" per passing TD, but I've recently done some research that suggests upping the number to 20. Regardless, it's the best metric for a couple of reasons.

1) People use to say completion percentage was too skewed towards WCO and yards per completion was too skewed towards vertical passing games. By multiplying the two numbers, you get a metric that's relatively fair to use for any offense. Guys in WCO can compile high yards per attempt numbers and guys in vertical passing offenses can get high YPA numbers. It depends on how good the QB and the offense is.

2) But other things are important besides yards and attempts. Things like touchdowns and interceptions. So you need to give bonus yards for TDs and take away yards for INTs.

3) And then sacks need to be included. A guy who avoids three sacks by throwing in completions is more valuable than a guy who gets sacked three times. But you wouldn't know that if you just used yards per attempt.

So ANY/A (adjusted net yards per attempt) is the best measure of passing effectiveness. It's way better than things like QB Rating, completion percentage, or yards per attempt. Obviously it's team dependent and QBs that play on teams with good offensive lines and good receivers will have an advantage over QBs on teams with bad lines and bad receivers. But any statistic is susceptible to that problem. But if you just want to measure passing effectiveness, ANY/A is the way to go.

Ryan is in the top five in ANY/A with Rivers, Brees, Romo and Warner. Flacco is not in the top fifteen.

Flacco's very good, but he's not Matt Ryan.

Why do you use a multiplier of 20 (or 10, as you say some do) for TD passes & 45 for INTs? What I mean is, why those & not, say, 16.8 & 41.2? Also, you say this is a "QB measure" but I suspect you really mean it's a "Passer measure" because there's no mention of a QB's rushing stats unless you think those don't matter.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.

All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.

2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

I was with you until the bolded part.

 

[Chase Stuart]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.

All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.

2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

Out of curiosity what are the Right statistics?

The number one statistic to measure QB performance is adjusted net yards per pass attempt. It's calculated as follows:(Passing yards <plus> TDs x 20 <minus> INTs x 45 <minus> sack yards lost) divided by (pass attempts <plus> sacks). People that do calculate ANY/A usually use 10 "yards" per passing TD, but I've recently done some research that suggests upping the number to 20. Regardless, it's the best metric for a couple of reasons.

1) People use to say completion percentage was too skewed towards WCO and yards per completion was too skewed towards vertical passing games. By multiplying the two numbers, you get a metric that's relatively fair to use for any offense. Guys in WCO can compile high yards per attempt numbers and guys in vertical passing offenses can get high YPA numbers. It depends on how good the QB and the offense is.

2) But other things are important besides yards and attempts. Things like touchdowns and interceptions. So you need to give bonus yards for TDs and take away yards for INTs.

3) And then sacks need to be included. A guy who avoids three sacks by throwing in completions is more valuable than a guy who gets sacked three times. But you wouldn't know that if you just used yards per attempt.

So ANY/A (adjusted net yards per attempt) is the best measure of passing effectiveness. It's way better than things like QB Rating, completion percentage, or yards per attempt. Obviously it's team dependent and QBs that play on teams with good offensive lines and good receivers will have an advantage over QBs on teams with bad lines and bad receivers. But any statistic is susceptible to that problem. But if you just want to measure passing effectiveness, ANY/A is the way to go.

Ryan is in the top five in ANY/A with Rivers, Brees, Romo and Warner. Flacco is not in the top fifteen.

Flacco's very good, but he's not Matt Ryan.

Why do you use a multiplier of 20 (or 10, as you say some do) for TD passes & 45 for INTs? What I mean is, why those & not, say, 16.8 & 41.2? Also, you say this is a "QB measure" but I suspect you really mean it's a "Passer measure" because there's no mention of a QB's rushing stats unless you think those don't matter.

There is a rushing measure used, but I ignored it here because neither of these QBs are rushers.Explanation for 10 and 45 come from the Hidden Game of Football. The shortest explanation is that an INT generally costs a team about 45 yards of field position over what would happen with an incompletion. For a TD, think of it this way -- a 30 yard TD pass isn't much better than a 29 yard pass down to the one yard line. After doing some math, that last yard gained is worth about 10 yards.

I'll go into a bit more explanation if you like on Wednesday when I do a full write-up on Ryan and Flacco.

 

[Tau837]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.

All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.

2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

Out of curiosity what are the Right statistics?

The number one statistic to measure QB performance is adjusted net yards per pass attempt. It's calculated as follows:(Passing yards <plus> TDs x 20 <minus> INTs x 45 <minus> sack yards lost) divided by (pass attempts <plus> sacks). People that do calculate ANY/A usually use 10 "yards" per passing TD, but I've recently done some research that suggests upping the number to 20. Regardless, it's the best metric for a couple of reasons.

1) People use to say completion percentage was too skewed towards WCO and yards per completion was too skewed towards vertical passing games. By multiplying the two numbers, you get a metric that's relatively fair to use for any offense. Guys in WCO can compile high yards per attempt numbers and guys in vertical passing offenses can get high YPA numbers. It depends on how good the QB and the offense is.

2) But other things are important besides yards and attempts. Things like touchdowns and interceptions. So you need to give bonus yards for TDs and take away yards for INTs.

3) And then sacks need to be included. A guy who avoids three sacks by throwing in completions is more valuable than a guy who gets sacked three times. But you wouldn't know that if you just used yards per attempt.

So ANY/A (adjusted net yards per attempt) is the best measure of passing effectiveness. It's way better than things like QB Rating, completion percentage, or yards per attempt. Obviously it's team dependent and QBs that play on teams with good offensive lines and good receivers will have an advantage over QBs on teams with bad lines and bad receivers. But any statistic is susceptible to that problem. But if you just want to measure passing effectiveness, ANY/A is the way to go.

Ryan is in the top five in ANY/A with Rivers, Brees, Romo and Warner. Flacco is not in the top fifteen.

Flacco's very good, but he's not Matt Ryan.

Why do you use a multiplier of 20 (or 10, as you say some do) for TD passes & 45 for INTs? What I mean is, why those & not, say, 16.8 & 41.2? Also, you say this is a "QB measure" but I suspect you really mean it's a "Passer measure" because there's no mention of a QB's rushing stats unless you think those don't matter.

There is a rushing measure used, but I ignored it here because neither of these QBs are rushers.Explanation for 10 and 45 come from the Hidden Game of Football. The shortest explanation is that an INT generally costs a team about 45 yards of field position over what would happen with an incompletion. For a TD, think of it this way -- a 30 yard TD pass isn't much better than a 29 yard pass down to the one yard line. After doing some math, that last yard gained is worth about 10 yards.

I'll go into a bit more explanation if you like on Wednesday when I do a full write-up on Ryan and Flacco.

There is a lot of good discussion in this PFR Blog Post about the value of TDs and interceptions.Chase, I'm not aware that you have actually explained any analytical basis for the use of 10 yards for the TD bonus. In that blog post, Doug actually shows some analysis that shows it should be 14.5 yards. And, while the HGOF does show a basis for a 45 yard penalty for interceptions, it does not show any analytical basis for using 10 yards for TDs. You mentioned that you have done some research that suggests 20 yards is better... is that analysis posted somewhere?

Also, have you incorporated fumbles yet?

 

[tombonneau]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

Young & Leinart might have shown flashes of "it" during their rookie campaigns, but Ryan has consistently performed week-in-week-out at a top level and looks great doing it. We can debate the semantics of Eyeball Test all you want, and I'll agree that looking at a small sample size (e.g. Leinart vs. the Bears) and sweepingly applying the "Eyeball Test" to say "he is going to be great" can be wrong and woefully inaccurate. But I've been watching just about all the Falcons games this year, and along with your Holy Stats that back it up, Ryan passes the Eyeball Test for me.I'm not one to hyperbolize, but it would appear the same way Manning/Brady came along to transition the NFL out of the Elway/Young era, Ryan looks to be the frontrunner to be the masthead QB of the next generation.

 

[Chase Stuart]

This is why you have to look beyond statistics. Anyone who has seen them both play can see that Ryan is on a different level than Flacco. Nothing against Flacco, he has been a great rookie QB, but Ryan is playing better than any rookie QB since Marino.

All you had to do is watch yesterday's game to see it. His team down, the defense doing nothing for them, Ryan had a drive in the second half where he made about 3-4 "wow" throws. I was watching the game at the sports bar, and I swear, on that drive, every other pass, someone would nudge someone else and say "You've gotta see the pass Ryan just made." Classic Eyeball Test stuff.

I'll just say two things here.1) Ryan's statistics are much better than Flacco's. Use the right statistics, and you don't need to look beyond statistics.

2) Everyone said that Matt Leinart passed the Eyeball Test after a bunch of games his rookie year, including the one against the Bears. I'm not a big believer in the Eyeball Test, because things change pretty quickly when you use that test. Matt Leinart looked like he had "it", and Vince Young certainly had "it", right up until the point where they stopped having "it".

Out of curiosity what are the Right statistics?

The number one statistic to measure QB performance is adjusted net yards per pass attempt. It's calculated as follows:(Passing yards <plus> TDs x 20 <minus> INTs x 45 <minus> sack yards lost) divided by (pass attempts <plus> sacks). People that do calculate ANY/A usually use 10 "yards" per passing TD, but I've recently done some research that suggests upping the number to 20. Regardless, it's the best metric for a couple of reasons.

1) People use to say completion percentage was too skewed towards WCO and yards per completion was too skewed towards vertical passing games. By multiplying the two numbers, you get a metric that's relatively fair to use for any offense. Guys in WCO can compile high yards per attempt numbers and guys in vertical passing offenses can get high YPA numbers. It depends on how good the QB and the offense is.

2) But other things are important besides yards and attempts. Things like touchdowns and interceptions. So you need to give bonus yards for TDs and take away yards for INTs.

3) And then sacks need to be included. A guy who avoids three sacks by throwing in completions is more valuable than a guy who gets sacked three times. But you wouldn't know that if you just used yards per attempt.

So ANY/A (adjusted net yards per attempt) is the best measure of passing effectiveness. It's way better than things like QB Rating, completion percentage, or yards per attempt. Obviously it's team dependent and QBs that play on teams with good offensive lines and good receivers will have an advantage over QBs on teams with bad lines and bad receivers. But any statistic is susceptible to that problem. But if you just want to measure passing effectiveness, ANY/A is the way to go.

Ryan is in the top five in ANY/A with Rivers, Brees, Romo and Warner. Flacco is not in the top fifteen.

Flacco's very good, but he's not Matt Ryan.

Why do you use a multiplier of 20 (or 10, as you say some do) for TD passes & 45 for INTs? What I mean is, why those & not, say, 16.8 & 41.2? Also, you say this is a "QB measure" but I suspect you really mean it's a "Passer measure" because there's no mention of a QB's rushing stats unless you think those don't matter.

There is a rushing measure used, but I ignored it here because neither of these QBs are rushers.Explanation for 10 and 45 come from the Hidden Game of Football. The shortest explanation is that an INT generally costs a team about 45 yards of field position over what would happen with an incompletion. For a TD, think of it this way -- a 30 yard TD pass isn't much better than a 29 yard pass down to the one yard line. After doing some math, that last yard gained is worth about 10 yards.

I'll go into a bit more explanation if you like on Wednesday when I do a full write-up on Ryan and Flacco.

There is a lot of good discussion in this PFR Blog Post about the value of TDs and interceptions.Chase, I'm not aware that you have actually explained any analytical basis for the use of 10 yards for the TD bonus. In that blog post, Doug actually shows some analysis that shows it should be 14.5 yards. And, while the HGOF does show a basis for a 45 yard penalty for interceptions, it does not show any analytical basis for using 10 yards for TDs. You mentioned that you have done some research that suggests 20 yards is better... is that analysis posted somewhere?

Also, have you incorporated fumbles yet?

I haven't incorporated fumbles yet, but mostly because I'm lazy. I've figured out what I want to do with them, and when I unleash my next set of rankings (which will have the 20 pt TD bonus), they'll be there).Here's the explanation for the 20 yard TD bonus. Note: math geekiness inside.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=633

You may need to read http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=598]this and/or this first.

 

[Chase Stuart]

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=799

Best rookie seasons ever:

Because of the somewhat nebulous nature of how to define a rookie, I’m going to be overinclusive by counting the first season in which a player recorded a stat as his rookie year; however, for guys whose rookie seasons were not their draft year or if the player spent time in another professional football league first, I put two asterisks by their name.

Score								 year	att	pyd	ptd   pint  any/a1020   Dan Marino			 mia	1983	296	2210	20	 6	6.7 964	Jim Kelly**			buf	1986	480	3593	22	17	5.2 916	Charlie Conerly**	  nyg	1948	299	2175	22	13	6.1 814	Ben Roethlisberger	 pit	2004	295	2621	17	11	6.4 801	Greg Cook			  cin	1969	197	1854	15	11	5.8 777	Butch Songin**		 nwe	1960	392	2476	22	15	5.2 756	Marc Bulger**		  ram	2002	214	1826	14	 6	7.1 743	Warren Moon**		  oti	1984	450	3338	12	14	4.9 722	Jeff Garcia**		  sfo	1999	375	2544	11	11	5.3 699	Joe Namath			 nyj	1965	340	2220	18	15	5.1 634	Johnny Unitas**		clt	1956	198	1498	 9	10	5.7 620	Charlie Batch		  det	1998	303	2178	11	 6	5.3 595	Byron Leftwich		 jax	2003	418	2819	14	16	4.9 586	Tom Flores**		   rai	1960	252	1738	12	12	5.2 570	Bob Celeri**		   nyy	1951	238	1797	12	15	5.2 509	Aaron Brooks**		 nor	2000	194	1514	 9	 6	5.9 482	Dieter Brock**		 ram	1985	365	2658	16	13	4.5 472	Fran Tarkenton		 min	1961	280	1997	18	17	5.0 460	Matt Leinart		   crd	2006	377	2547	11	12	4.9 457	Paul Governali**	   byk	1946	192	1293	13	10	5.1 452	Vince Young			oti	2006	357	2199	12	13	4.2 451	Norm Van Brocklin	  ram	1949	 58	 601	 6	 2	9.8 444	Sid Luckman			chi	1939	 51	 636	 5	 4	9.9 441	Mark Rypien**		  was	1988	208	1730	18	13	5.5 438	M.C. Reynolds		  crd	1958	195	1422	11	11	5.3

Ryan scores an 1185 right now, and is just about a lock to finish the year ahead of Marino. Full methodology explanation available at the link.

 

[PatrickT]

NFL network is replaying the Falcons/Saints game. Anyone still needing convincing should take a look. Especially watch the drive where he overcame two holding penalties and a false start to drive for the FG. I think that was late in the 3rd.

 

[twr]

NFL network is replaying the Falcons/Saints game. Anyone still needing convincing should take a look. Especially watch the drive where he overcame two holding penalties and a false start to drive for the FG. I think that was late in the 3rd.

i drafted him at 1.5(even though i have big ben), and was probably one of the few falcons fans that were happy to see us draft him. people said i drafted him too early, and maybe i did, but hey i got my guy! go birdys

 

[renesauz]

Ryan scores an 1185 right now, and is just about a lock to finish the year ahead of Marino. Full methodology explanation available at the link.

And where does Flacco fall?

 

[FUBAR]

NFL network is replaying the Falcons/Saints game. Anyone still needing convincing should take a look. Especially watch the drive where he overcame two holding penalties and a false start to drive for the FG. I think that was late in the 3rd.

he clearly failed by not getting a touchdown. BUST

 

[Worm]

Where does Ryan go in redrafts next year? Top 10 QB? Top 6-8?

If you take out Ryan's first 4 weeks where he started out slow (rookie, getting used to the speed of the game, etc.), and extrapolate his other 9 weeks out, he would be at about QB6 right now(standard FBG scoring), just behind Rivers and just ahead of McNabb.

 

[Paper Lions]

I've watched Ryan a bunch this year, and he looks like he could be one of the great ones. He looks that good.

 

[TBIST]

Ryan is averagin over 8 yards per an attempt and a 2 to 1 touchdown to interception ratio. Flacco's is 6.85 an attempt and 13 tds to 10 ints. Flacco may have a higher ceiling because of his strong arm, but I think Ryan is in one tier higher than Flacco.