Philip Rivers: 27-8 as a starting QB (1 Viewer)

[tommyGunZ]

2006: 14-2 regular season, 0-1 in the playoffs.

2007: 11-5 regular season, 2-0 in the playoffs thus far.

Cumlative: 27-8 career record as a starter

Is this the greatest run to start a career through 35 games of any QB in history? Yudkin, can you help us out here - I don't know how to use profootballreference.com to search for this info.

Obviously Rivers has tremendous talent surrounding him, but when will he start getting credit for being the upper echelon QB that his record indicates he is?

 

[Mr Capicollo]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

 

[Phlash]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Ben also won his ring his second year in the league.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I am pretty sure Kurt Warner started 28-7 in St. Louis, going 16-3 in '99 (winning the Super Bowl, as well as being MVP of the regular season and SB), 8-4 in '00 (they were 2-3 in the games he missed mid-season), and starting 4-0 in '01.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Ben also won his ring his second year in the league.

So Rivers isn't even the most impressive young starter in the last four years. tGunz sure was onto something though.

 

[tommyGunZ]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

 

[Tau837]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

27-6 counts both regular season and playoff results in Ben's first two seasons. So Gunz is counting them... not sure where you got that question from.That said, 27-6 with a 5-1 playoff record, including a Super Bowl victory, is obviously better than Rivers' record so far. Plus, Ben was in his first two seasons, and didn't have the benefit of two years on the bench, like Rivers did. For the record, Ben lost the first 3 games he played in his third season, so the 31-6 above was incorrect.

And there may be a few others with more impressive records, like Warner. And probably some older guys... Otto Graham?

IMO the real point isn't whether or not Rivers has started with the best record, but that the record he has started with is quite impressive, and he deserves plenty of credit for that.

 

[David Yudkin]

Don't know . . . and not sure where/how to check either. Doug might know.

Part of the issue will be how to define what a win is. Does Rivers get any credit (positive or negative) for his 4 games played in 04 and 05? How about a game like yesterday where he was not on the field when the Chargers went on to take the lead and win the game. Do you have to start? Do you have to finish? Do you only have to have appeared in the game at all? How about playing as a holder on kicks?

I still woundn't know where to check regardless of the answers to those questions.

 

[Tau837]

Don't know . . . and not sure where/how to check either. Doug might know.Part of the issue will be how to define what a win is. Does Rivers get any credit (positive or negative) for his 4 games played in 04 and 05? How about a game like yesterday where he was not on the field when the Chargers went on to take the lead and win the game. Do you have to start? Do you have to finish? Do you only have to have appeared in the game at all? How about playing as a holder on kicks?I still woundn't know where to check regardless of the answers to those questions.

I think counting games started is reasonable. Going deeper could be useful, but probably would not change the results much for QBs who have started a reasonable sample set of games. And going deeper requires a definition of some ruleset (e.g., perhaps like pitchers getting wins in baseball) and data that may not be easily accessible. In any such ruleset, I'm sure playing only as a holder on kicks does not qualify. Gunz cited Rivers' record as a starter, since he did not start in 2004 or 2005.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

27-6 counts both regular season and playoff results in Ben's first two seasons. So Gunz is counting them... not sure where you got that question from.

I see 27-4.They went 15-1 and 11-5 his first two seasons as a starter. Considering he didn't play in each game (remember he didn't start the first game in 2004, Maddox did), there's no way he compiled 6 losses his first two years (they only lost one playoff game).

He was 14-1 (including playoffs) his first year.

He was 13-3 (including playoffs) his second year.

That's 27-4 overall including a 5-1 record with a SB win.

So no, 27-8 isn't the greatest start in NFL history.

 

[Tau837]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

27-6 counts both regular season and playoff results in Ben's first two seasons. So Gunz is counting them... not sure where you got that question from.

I see 27-4.They went 15-1 and 11-5 his first two seasons as a starter. Considering he didn't play in each game (remember he didn't start the first game in 2004, Maddox did), there's no way he compiled 6 losses his first two years (they only lost one playoff game).

He was 14-1 (including playoffs) his first year.

He was 13-3 (including playoffs) his second year.

That's 27-4 overall including a 5-1 record with a SB win.

So no, 27-8 isn't the greatest start in NFL history.

I got 27-6 from pro-football-reference.com game logs, which only list games in which Ben played. According to that source, he was 13-1 in the 2004 regular season, 1-1 in the 2004 postseason, 9-4 in the 2005 regular season, and 4-0 in the 2005 postseason. However, as you point out, he didn't start the first game of his rookie season. I assume he started the rest of the games. So his record should probably be viewed as 27-5 to start, including the 5-1 postseason run and Super Bowl win.You cut out the part where I said Ben's start was better, so I assume you aren't rolling your eyes at me.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

27-6 counts both regular season and playoff results in Ben's first two seasons. So Gunz is counting them... not sure where you got that question from.

I see 27-4.They went 15-1 and 11-5 his first two seasons as a starter. Considering he didn't play in each game (remember he didn't start the first game in 2004, Maddox did), there's no way he compiled 6 losses his first two years (they only lost one playoff game).

He was 14-1 (including playoffs) his first year.

He was 13-3 (including playoffs) his second year.

That's 27-4 overall including a 5-1 record with a SB win.

So no, 27-8 isn't the greatest start in NFL history.

I got 27-6 from pro-football-reference.com game logs, which only list games in which Ben played. According to that source, he was 13-1 in the 2004 regular season, 1-1 in the 2004 postseason, 9-4 in the 2005 regular season, and 4-0 in the 2005 postseason. However, as you point out, he didn't start the first game of his rookie season. I assume he started the rest of the games. So his record should probably be viewed as 27-5 to start, including the 5-1 postseason run and Super Bowl win.You cut out the part where I said Ben's start was better, so I assume you aren't rolling your eyes at me.

No, the homer who started this thread.

 

[Tom Baker]

The bigger question: at what point does he regress to the mean?

 

[Anarchy99]

By my math (and using stats as a starter only which is probably not the best stat), Brady is now 98-26 counting regular and post-season starts (.793).

If you add in the game he replaced Bledsoe and won and eliminated a game against MIA where he came in for one series (and the Pats played third stringers and lost), that becomes 99-25 and would put him one game away from maintaining an .800 winning percentage across his 7 years as a starter.

But I suspect that there would be a lot of gray zone in trying to figure out a QB's record, as Peyton Manning will end up having more losses in games where he barely played and the Colts went on to lose without him. In Manning's case, his record in those games is something like 1-4 or 1-5 depending upon where you draw the line (a series? a quarter? a half?)

 

[dgreen]

I believe Marino was 9-3 (9-2; 0-1) his rookie year and 16-3 (14-2; 2-1) his second year for a combined 25-6 (0.806).

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Got to give Volek the win yesterday, at least using MLB rules.

 

[Anarchy99]

Got to give Volek the win yesterday, at least using MLB rules.

IIRC, it's based on games started not games finished (or else the backups that take kneel downs on the final play would get credit for the victory).

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Got to give Volek the win yesterday, at least using MLB rules.

IIRC, it's based on games started not games finished (or else the backups that take kneel downs on the final play would get credit for the victory).

Not exactly. Like MLB (for pitchers) and NHL (for goalies) the winning QB should be the QB that takes the lead and never relinquishes it. Using the "starter" criteria Carson Palmer would have gotten a loss against the Steelers in 2005 despite throwing one pass for 55 yards.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Got to give Volek the win yesterday, at least using MLB rules.

IIRC, it's based on games started not games finished (or else the backups that take kneel downs on the final play would get credit for the victory).

Not exactly. Like MLB (for pitchers) and NHL (for goalies) the winning QB should be the QB that takes the lead and never relinquishes it. Using the "starter" criteria Carson Palmer would have gotten a loss against the Steelers in 2005 despite throwing one pass for 55 yards.

What about if the QB had nothing to do with getting the lead? For example, say the Bears get a kickoff return from Hester to start the game, Grossman gets hurt on the first play of their first actual possession when they are still leading 7-0, and then Griese gets them 28 points and they win 35-14. Who is the winning QB?

 

[dgreen]

Got to give Volek the win yesterday, at least using MLB rules.

IIRC, it's based on games started not games finished (or else the backups that take kneel downs on the final play would get credit for the victory).

Not exactly. Like MLB (for pitchers) and NHL (for goalies) the winning QB should be the QB that takes the lead and never relinquishes it. Using the "starter" criteria Carson Palmer would have gotten a loss against the Steelers in 2005 despite throwing one pass for 55 yards.

What about if the QB had nothing to do with getting the lead? For example, say the Bears get a kickoff return from Hester to start the game, Grossman gets hurt on the first play of their first actual possession when they are still leading 7-0, and then Griese gets them 28 points and they win 35-14. Who is the winning QB?

That's why football is considered the most team oriented.I think "starts" is fine simply because it really won't change the final records all that much. It's a must in baseball to do it the way they do because the starting pitcher rarely ever finishes the game.

 

[Pai Mei]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Ben also won his ring his second year in the league.

No he didn't.

 

[dickey moe]

Greatest start to a career in history?

 

[dickey moe]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Ben also won his ring his second year in the league.

No he didn't.

What?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Ben also won his ring his second year in the league.

No he didn't.

What?

Remember what we're dealing with here.

 

[TheFanatic]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

27-6 counts both regular season and playoff results in Ben's first two seasons. So Gunz is counting them... not sure where you got that question from.

I see 27-4.They went 15-1 and 11-5 his first two seasons as a starter. Considering he didn't play in each game (remember he didn't start the first game in 2004, Maddox did), there's no way he compiled 6 losses his first two years (they only lost one playoff game).

He was 14-1 (including playoffs) his first year.

He was 13-3 (including playoffs) his second year.

That's 27-4 overall including a 5-1 record with a SB win.

So no, 27-8 isn't the greatest start in NFL history.

Still, it's an impressive run. Not the best in NFL history, but the kid is a winner. Normally I'm not all that impressed with Rivers but he looked real good yesterday... Maybe it has something to do with actually having WR's. Jackson is not WR1 material, but with Chambers there he sees more man coverage...

 

[Anarchy99]

So guys like JimMcMahon and Trent Dilfer were all time great QBs because they played on teams that won on the strength of their defense or all time great RBs?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

So guys like JimMcMahon and Trent Dilfer were all time great QBs because they played on teams that won on the strength of their defense or all time great RBs?

This is not an argument I think New England fans should be making.

 

[jesseasi]

Rivers is the best starter in history that is also a cry baby and punk.

Watch Rivers when things don't go his way or when a call goes against him - he is a cry baby.

Watch Rivers against Denver then yesterday at Indy - he is a punk.

Chargers will not win with Rivers. Give me Volek. Volek had the winning drive yesterday - thank goodness Rivers was out of the game in crunch time.

 

[tommyGunZ]

So guys like JimMcMahon and Trent Dilfer were all time great QBs because they played on teams that won on the strength of their defense or all time great RBs?

Wow - certainly not a post I'd expect from you Dave. Were Dilfer and McMahon 27-8 in their first 35 games as a starter?

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

Rivers is the best starter in history that is also a cry baby and punk.Watch Rivers when things don't go his way or when a call goes against him - he is a cry baby.Watch Rivers against Denver then yesterday at Indy - he is a punk.Chargers will not win with Rivers. Give me Volek. Volek had the winning drive yesterday - thank goodness Rivers was out of the game in crunch time.

What flavor Haterade you drinking, sour grape?

 

[DawnBTVS]

Otto Graham started 18 of 28 games in 1946 and 1947. Cleveland went 12-2 and 12-1-1 in those 2 years. No idea how his record was as a starter though but odds are it's comparable to others, even if he lost all 3 games and tied for one.

That'd give him at least a record of: 14-3-1 (77.8%)

 

[jesseasi]

Rivers is the best starter in history that is also a cry baby and punk.Watch Rivers when things don't go his way or when a call goes against him - he is a cry baby.Watch Rivers against Denver then yesterday at Indy - he is a punk.Chargers will not win with Rivers. Give me Volek. Volek had the winning drive yesterday - thank goodness Rivers was out of the game in crunch time.

What flavor Haterade you drinking, sour grape?

I am a Chargers Season Ticket holder. I call it like it is. Put any other QB in the NFL back there and they are as good if not better than Rivers. He has one of the best offensive lines, the best TE, the best RB, and average WR's (now with Chambers) and he is still just mediocre as a starting QB. Volek stepped in yesterday and drove that team right down for the go ahead game winning score.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Rivers is the best starter in history that is also a cry baby and punk.Watch Rivers when things don't go his way or when a call goes against him - he is a cry baby.Watch Rivers against Denver then yesterday at Indy - he is a punk.Chargers will not win with Rivers. Give me Volek. Volek had the winning drive yesterday - thank goodness Rivers was out of the game in crunch time.

What flavor Haterade you drinking, sour grape?

I am a Chargers Season Ticket holder. I call it like it is. Put any other QB in the NFL back there and they are as good if not better than Rivers. He has one of the best offensive lines, the best TE, the best RB, and average WR's (now with Chambers) and he is still just mediocre as a starting QB. Volek stepped in yesterday and drove that team right down for the go ahead game winning score.

He's 27-8. That's "mediocre"?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Otto Graham started 18 of 28 games in 1946 and 1947. Cleveland went 12-2 and 12-1-1 in those 2 years. No idea how his record was as a starter though but odds are it's comparable to others, even if he lost all 3 games and tied for one.That'd give him at least a record of: 14-3-1 (77.8%)

Otto Graham was so far ahead of his peers in the QB department, it's ridiculous. He's the Jim Brown of QBs.

 

[Mr. PadresLakers]

Rivers is the best starter in history that is also a cry baby and punk.

Watch Rivers when things don't go his way or when a call goes against him - he is a cry baby.

Watch Rivers against Denver then yesterday at Indy - he is a punk.

Chargers will not win with Rivers. Give me Volek. Volek had the winning drive yesterday - thank goodness Rivers was out of the game in crunch time.

What flavor Haterade you drinking, sour grape?

I am a Chargers Season Ticket holder. I call it like it is. Put any other QB in the NFL back there and they are as good if not better than Rivers. He has one of the best offensive lines, the best TE, the best RB, and average WR's (now with Chambers) and he is still just mediocre as a starting QB. Volek stepped in yesterday and drove that team right down for the go ahead game winning score.

It wouldn't be the first time you have been wrong...My two cent rant about how the Chargers are falling... Norv does suck

 

[jonessed]

Rivers is the best starter in history that is also a cry baby and punk.

Watch Rivers when things don't go his way or when a call goes against him - he is a cry baby.

Watch Rivers against Denver then yesterday at Indy - he is a punk.

Chargers will not win with Rivers. Give me Volek. Volek had the winning drive yesterday - thank goodness Rivers was out of the game in crunch time.

What flavor Haterade you drinking, sour grape?

I am a Chargers Season Ticket holder. I call it like it is. Put any other QB in the NFL back there and they are as good if not better than Rivers. He has one of the best offensive lines, the best TE, the best RB, and average WR's (now with Chambers) and he is still just mediocre as a starting QB. Volek stepped in yesterday and drove that team right down for the go ahead game winning score.

SDs offensive line has been sub-par this year. Rivers has played well when he has had time.Volek completed two passes. One of which was a screen that had netted 25+ YAC. I give him credit for coming in there and performing under pressure, but come on.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

Rivers is the best starter in history that is also a cry baby and punk.Watch Rivers when things don't go his way or when a call goes against him - he is a cry baby.Watch Rivers against Denver then yesterday at Indy - he is a punk.Chargers will not win with Rivers. Give me Volek. Volek had the winning drive yesterday - thank goodness Rivers was out of the game in crunch time.

What flavor Haterade you drinking, sour grape?

I am a Chargers Season Ticket holder. I call it like it is. Put any other QB in the NFL back there and they are as good if not better than Rivers. He has one of the best offensive lines, the best TE, the best RB, and average WR's (now with Chambers) and he is still just mediocre as a starting QB. Volek stepped in yesterday and drove that team right down for the go ahead game winning score.

Lemon flavor? Did you see that TD to Chambers? Thing of beauty.

 

[TommyGilmore]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

27-6 counts both regular season and playoff results in Ben's first two seasons. So Gunz is counting them... not sure where you got that question from.

I see 27-4.They went 15-1 and 11-5 his first two seasons as a starter. Considering he didn't play in each game (remember he didn't start the first game in 2004, Maddox did), there's no way he compiled 6 losses his first two years (they only lost one playoff game).

He was 14-1 (including playoffs) his first year.

He was 13-3 (including playoffs) his second year.

That's 27-4 overall including a 5-1 record with a SB win.

So no, 27-8 isn't the greatest start in NFL history.

I got 27-6 from pro-football-reference.com game logs, which only list games in which Ben played. According to that source, he was 13-1 in the 2004 regular season, 1-1 in the 2004 postseason, 9-4 in the 2005 regular season, and 4-0 in the 2005 postseason. However, as you point out, he didn't start the first game of his rookie season. I assume he started the rest of the games. So his record should probably be viewed as 27-5 to start, including the 5-1 postseason run and Super Bowl win.

He was 9-3 in 2005 (he did not play in Weeks 6, 9, 10 or 11 -- all losses).

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Is this the greatest run to start a career through 35 games of any QB in history?

early favorite for biggest homer post of the year.

 

[IM666]

Is this the greatest run to start a career through 35 games of any QB in history?

early favorite for biggest homer post of the year.

Aaron, I like your :e: Avatar better.

 

[Mr. PadresLakers]

Is this the greatest run to start a career through 35 games of any QB in history?

early favorite for biggest homer post of the year.

You must have missed the one about LT's 3 yard long arms.

 

[Tau837]

I think Big Ben started 31-6.

Looks like he was 27-6 before the 8-8 2006 season. Since they started '06 2-6, I doubt Ben got to 31-6.

Oh, so you're suddenly not counting playoff wins?

27-6 counts both regular season and playoff results in Ben's first two seasons. So Gunz is counting them... not sure where you got that question from.

I see 27-4.They went 15-1 and 11-5 his first two seasons as a starter. Considering he didn't play in each game (remember he didn't start the first game in 2004, Maddox did), there's no way he compiled 6 losses his first two years (they only lost one playoff game).

He was 14-1 (including playoffs) his first year.

He was 13-3 (including playoffs) his second year.

That's 27-4 overall including a 5-1 record with a SB win.

So no, 27-8 isn't the greatest start in NFL history.

I got 27-6 from pro-football-reference.com game logs, which only list games in which Ben played. According to that source, he was 13-1 in the 2004 regular season, 1-1 in the 2004 postseason, 9-4 in the 2005 regular season, and 4-0 in the 2005 postseason. However, as you point out, he didn't start the first game of his rookie season. I assume he started the rest of the games. So his record should probably be viewed as 27-5 to start, including the 5-1 postseason run and Super Bowl win.

He was 9-3 in 2005 (he did not play in Weeks 6, 9, 10 or 11 -- all losses).

Good point. For some reason, pfr has a the week 11 game in his game log, but no stats, which I didn't notice before. Looks like 27-4 is right.