Ranking The Top 10 Most Clutch QBs (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

Tagovailoa and Cousins haters won't like this.

Ranking NFL's top 10 clutch QBs: No surprise at No. 1, Jared Goff cracks list, Tua Tagovailoa near the top

These are the 10 most clutch starting QBs in the NFL today

www.cbssports.com

 

[travdogg]

Neat list, but I'm gonna argue "clutch" isn't a real thing. Its all just semi-random variance, that's mostly luck than anything else. I mean great QB's are likely to perform better in higher pressure situations than non-great QBs, but I don't think a player performing differently in that type of situation is a useful metric, unless its showing that somebody absolutely can't handle pressure.

There are certainly a lot of QBs besides Mahomes I'd rather have than Cousins or especially Tua if I needed a score in the last 2 minutes.

 

[Joe Bryant]

There are certainly a lot of QBs besides Mahomes I'd rather have than Cousins or especially Tua if I needed a score in the last 2 minutes.

Interesting. Even when the data shows they've demonstrated they're the two best in that situation after Mahomes?

Sample size is always a question.

How many times would they need to demonstrate they're good there for you to change your mind?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Neat list, but I'm gonna argue "clutch" isn't a real thing. Its all just semi-random variance, that's mostly luck than anything else.

We'll disagree there in a big way. I think there are absolutely players who deliver big in key moments more than others.

In fact, with how we measure so much by championships and big games and not just compiling stats, I'd argue this is a huge component of how we value players.

 

[Keith1]

I realize it is for current players, but I saw the thread title and immediately Joe Montana popped into my mind.

 

[Bri]

Reid and/or BNME deserve about half of the Mahomes love. No doubt Patrick has made some incredible plays but there have also been plenty of drives that were so well called they looked easy.
Did ya see how Arthur kept the Falcons in almost every game last year despite the roster?
I'm not a fan of the Commanders team but with that defense, I'm real curious how many wins Bienemy can steal in the 4th Q.

Back OT loved Jim Kelly and in one of the most unbelievable ways, Josh Allen is eerily similar. No one wanted to give Kelly the ball with two minutes left and no one wants that against Allen. I think that is a sort of clutch respect. That the Bills will somehow allow another score in seconds and lose is not on Allen. He's a heckuva baller with the game on the line. If only someone told the Bills they can run the ball and use up the clock, their history would be so different.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Who is the active leader in GWD and comebacks? 8th and 6th all-time.

Not on the list. Understandable, hasn't even won a ring in almost 18 months.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Who is the active leader in GWD and comebacks? 8th and 6th all-time.

Not on the list. Understandable, hasn't even won a ring in almost 18 months.

From the article, he says this is how he calculated the data:

I broke those numbers down between a QBs career in the regular season, career in the playoffs, and 2022 performance. All of these were evenly weighted and used to churn out this top 10 list of the most clutch QB in the NFL.

Super Bowls are obviously important but I don't think he specifically factored them. Just all playoff performances.

 

[ratbast]

How many playoff appearances do Cousins and Tua have? Primetime Cousins ain’t clutch.

 

[travdogg]

There are certainly a lot of QBs besides Mahomes I'd rather have than Cousins or especially Tua if I needed a score in the last 2 minutes.

Interesting. Even when the data shows they've demonstrated they're the two best in that situation after Mahomes?

Sample size is always a question.

How many times would they need to demonstrate they're good there for you to change your mind?

I disagree with the data a bit. For example, I'd argue Tua's inability to get a 1st down, or hang onto the ball, cost Miami 3 games last year. Sure, the comeback against Baltimore was very impressive, but he was also looking like a guy who couldn't read a defense to save his life against the Chargers. Tua's sample size is probably too small to make an argument either way, but #2 is wild to me. He wouldn't be in my top-2 choices in his division right now.

Cousins I'll give a little more credit, I think he is perfectly fine in "clutch" moments, he just has entire games where lays eggs. His 8 4th quarter comebacks is a nice stat, but in a lot of games, it shouldn't have had to come to a comeback, more so over his career than last season. I'd certainly prefer Joe Burrow to either of them in a big moment, Josh Allen too (1 fluky bobbled snap notwithstanding)

Neat list, but I'm gonna argue "clutch" isn't a real thing. Its all just semi-random variance, that's mostly luck than anything else.

We'll disagree there in a big way. I think there are absolutely players who deliver big in key moments more than others.

In fact, with how we measure so much by championships and big games and not just compiling stats, I'd argue this is a huge component of how we value players.

I think the players who deliver in big moments are the ones who get to the big moments the most. Those typically correlate to just the best players/teams in general. I do agree stat compiling isn't always a good indicator of quality of play, but wins/losses aren't always either, especially for an individual player. Truthfully most "winning QBs" are probably a little overrated.

One great example of random variance I like is Tom Brady in the 2006 playoffs threw a likely game losing INT against the Chargers, except the intercepting player fumbled and NE recovered. Brady then leads a TD drive and NE ends up winning. Was that a clutch performance? Technically there was a 4th quarter comeback, but ultimately, I would argue it was just luck, and Brady (and Belichick) just happened to be in enough of those games where a big break was bound to swing a game here and there.

Another argument goes the other way. I think there is a reasonable argument Matt Ryan's 2016 (including playoffs) is one of the 5 best seasons of any QB in history. He won the MVP and was basically perfect for 11 quarters in the playoffs. Then he has a lost fumble (on a real galaxy brain playcall, passing on 3rd and 1 with a 16 point lead and 8 minutes left in the Super Bowl, when you were over 5 yards per carry in the game) and NE scores every possession the rest of the game in route to winning. Does that make Ryan not clutch? Or was that just misfortune? Ryan certainly had a lot of great performances that season, and many on high stakes games.

Ultimately, I think football is just too much of a team sport for anyone to truly be "clutch", I think there are certainly some people who crumble under pressure, but once you get past them, I think its more of a crapshoot. Maybe being clutch can exist in a more singular sport, like say a pitcher, or a golfer, but I think there is just too much random variance and dependence on others to truly get an idea of it for a QB, or really any NFL position short of maybe kicker.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ultimately, I think football is just too much of a team sport for anyone to truly be "clutch", I think there are certainly some people who crumble under pressure, but once you get past them, I think its more of a crapshoot.

Cool. Different opinions are what makes the game fun. Thanks for sharing yours. I don't agree and don't think it's a crapshoot.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I realize it is for current players, but I saw the thread title and immediately Joe Montana popped into my mind.

Joe was just so cool under pressure. Seemed to play the same no matter what the stakes were.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Joe was just so cool under pressure. Seemed to play the same no matter what the stakes were.

Agreed.

 

[massraider]

I realize it is for current players, but I saw the thread title and immediately Joe Montana popped into my mind.

When the Bengals scored that go ahead touchdown, everyone in the country said, ‘you left Joe too much time’.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I would say the list is accurate....and unfortunate. In Tiers, its Mahommes and everybody else.

It's unfortunate because the generation of QBs just prior to this one was littered with clutch performers (Brady, Brees, Manning, Big Ben, Rivers, Eli (in post season only, lol), etc etc.

Observation: part of being clutch is protecting leads...4th quarter comebacks is not the sole determinant.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I don't love JimmyG on this list.

He was a game manager. If anything he tried way too often to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory with an untimely pick. If anything the 49ers D was clutch and saved quite a few games JimmyG would have otherwise choked away.

He sure couldn't hit Emmanuel Sanders for a 35 yard pass with all the chips on the table - sailed it a mile over his head in fact. Now, the 40ers shouldn't have been in that position since they were up 2 scores and gave up a 3rd and 37 or whatever to Tyreek Hill.

I find his inclusion bizarre, but then I don't love the term "clutch" to begin with.

 

[Chaka]

How many times would they need to demonstrate they're good there for you to change your mind?

For Cousins? How about we start with one time while playing in front of a national audience?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

How many times would they need to demonstrate they're good there for you to change your mind?

For Cousins? How about we start with one time while playing in front of a national audience?

He definitely has a proclivity for shrinkage on the big stage.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I find his inclusion bizarre, but then I don't love the term "clutch" to begin with.

It's purely based on actual game stats. This isn't a subjective list.

 

[Ghost Rider]

It's a myth that prime time regular season games are more important than Sunday afternoon games, but good luck telling the Cousins haters that.

 

[Chaka]

How many times would they need to demonstrate they're good there for you to change your mind?

For Cousins? How about we start with one time while playing in front of a national audience?

He definitely has a proclivity for shrinkage on the big stage.

To be fair, the stadium was cold.

 

[Chaka]

It's a myth that prime time regular season games are more important than Sunday afternoon games, but good luck telling the Cousins haters that.

I'm very open to being corrected on this but don't Cousins's splits between nationally televised games and regional broadcasts suggest otherwise?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

How many times would they need to demonstrate they're good there for you to change your mind?

For Cousins? How about we start with one time while playing in front of a national audience?

He definitely has a proclivity for shrinkage on the big stage.

To be fair, the stadium was cold.

Happens to a lot of dudes.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

but good luck telling the Cousins haters that.

I don’t hate cousins at all. I kinda low key love the dude.

But he’s been terrible in nationally televised games. I’ve watched like 90% of them and he’s been just abjectly awful.

 

[Chaka]

I find his inclusion bizarre, but then I don't love the term "clutch" to begin with.

It's purely based on actual game stats. This isn't a subjective list.

It's still somewhat subjective. Didn't he use the 4th quarter comeback as one of his metrics? I mean, is taking a lead with 10 minutes remaining, or more, a 4th quarter comeback?

Why is that better than taking the final lead with three minutes remaining in the 3rd?

What if they don't expand on that lead? What if he throws two picks subsequently but the defense bails him out?

It's a nice attempt to create a definable data set but it is still very limited and still subjective.

Using Garoppolo as an example, the author pretty much gave lip service to him having, perhaps, the best overall defense in the league. Think Jared Goff would have enjoyed a little piece of that last year?

Too many variables in this sport to call this list anything but subjective.

 

[Chaka]

It's a myth that prime time regular season games are more important than Sunday afternoon games, but good luck telling the Cousins haters that.

And it's not a matter of "more important", although certain games are absolutely more important, just ask the Packers in week 17 (or any divisional game FTM), it's how many people are watching.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

It's purely based on actual game stats. This isn't a subjective list.

As an old FF BB geek, I can say with confidence that stats can tell a number of different stories depending on the input/output. But that’s a much larger discussion we don’t need to get into.

I’ve seen 300+ page topics debating whether “clutch” is a thing back in the day. (“Protection” too)

People far smarter than I am made a prettygood case that it’s not. Low bar, I realize, but I was convinced. I realize this is an appeal to the masses, but IIRC there’s content by statisticians out there if one were to search for it.

But we don’t need a 300+ page discussion about it. It’s a pretty good list otherwise.

 

[Ghost Rider]

but good luck telling the Cousins haters that.

I don’t hate cousins at all. I kinda low key love the dude.

But he’s been terrible in nationally televised games. I’ve watched like 90% of them and he’s been just abjectly awful.

I know, but if he loses a game on MNF and Dak Prescott loses a noon game on Sunday, they both count as one loss. It's not like Cousins losing in prime time means more in the standings (division and conference games notwithstanding).

 

[Jayded]

Feels like flawed methodology leveraged. How many opportunities were considered for the floor? Comparing 10 opportunities vs 100 could greatly favor or hurt the 10 vs peers of 100.

The other thing is it appears no context was taken to situation outside of 4th quarter. Should a divisional game carry more weight? Win and your in late regular season game? Playoff game? That doesn’t even mention availability that could help a guy like Kirk but appropriately punish a guy like Tua.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

It's still somewhat subjective. Didn't he use the 4th quarter comeback as one of his metrics? I mean, is taking a lead with 10 minutes remaining, or more, a 4th quarter comeback?

Exactly. Data in, data out. conclusions can be supported with the right set of data by omitting other data points.

Is “clutch” always when the game is on the line? Or is “clutch” any 3rd down to convert? Or 4th downs? So many clutch moments for a QB to execute to further a given drive during a game.

Heck, Todd Gurley, with nothing but wide open grass between him & the end zone, deliberately fell down in bounds. Tick tock game over. That was clutch, and he hurt his YPC by doing it.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I know, but if he loses a game on MNF and Dak Prescott loses a noon game on Sunday, they both count as one loss. It's not like Cousins losing in prime time means more in the standings (division and conference games notwithstanding).

A fair point.

It could be coincidental that Cousins has always choked in nationally broadcast games. His next one he might go out and just blow the roof off of the stadium.

It’s one of those things you can’t really say until he’s retired.

But anecdotally…yeah, it hasn’t been good

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Feels like flawed methodology leveraged. How many opportunities were considered for the floor? Comparing 10 opportunities vs 100 could greatly favor or hurt the 10 vs peers of 100.

The other thing is it appears no context was taken to situation outside of 4th quarter. Should a divisional game carry more weight? Win and your in late regular season game? Playoff game? That doesn’t even mention availability that could help a guy like Kirk but appropriately punish a guy like Tua.

All excellent points here. There are other factors in a team sport as well.

If JJ pulls a hammy in pregame warm-ups, & misses the game, how’s Cousins going to perform?

Or maybe a key OL.

Just so many factors to only look at specific outcomes and use them to define whether a QB is “clutch”. Hard to be clutch if your WR1 & starting LT are out, hypothetically speaking.

 

[Jayded]

Feels like flawed methodology leveraged. How many opportunities were considered for the floor? Comparing 10 opportunities vs 100 could greatly favor or hurt the 10 vs peers of 100.

The other thing is it appears no context was taken to situation outside of 4th quarter. Should a divisional game carry more weight? Win and your in late regular season game? Playoff game? That doesn’t even mention availability that could help a guy like Kirk but appropriately punish a guy like Tua.

All excellent points here. There are other factors in a team sport as well.

If JJ pulls a hammy in pregame warm-ups, & misses the game, how’s Cousins going to perform?

Or maybe a key OL.

Just so many factors to only look at specific outcomes and use them to define whether a QB is “clutch”. Hard to be clutch if your WR1 & starting LT are out, hypothetically speaking.

I think the EPA potentially considers that factor as I would hope the expected part falls off a cliff in those worst case scenarios.

The odder part I reread was the equal weighting of career regular season, career postseason, and 2022. Why recency bias it unless you’re trying to project going forward? Even if so, no way should playoff and regular season carry equal weight, career or 2022 alone.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Even if so, no way should playoff and regular season carry equal weight, career or 2022 alone.

Agreed.

Now we get into the weeds with “are there greater and lesser degrees of clutch” - 300 pages later…

lol

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I find his inclusion bizarre, but then I don't love the term "clutch" to begin with.

It's purely based on actual game stats. This isn't a subjective list.

It can be subjective if you look at stats that support a conclusion you’re looking to get to - like that “clutch” even exists.

I think the guys considered “clutch” traditionally (Elway, Montana, Brady…) are just the guys that were better than everyone else at all points during the game.

Let’s put it this way - which QB would you rather bet your life on leading a team to a 4th quarter score to win the game:

Joe Burrow or Kirk Cousins?
Tua or Josh Allen?

Give me Joe and Josh easily - don’t care what the “clutch” stats say there.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Also I’m not downplaying Tua’s abilities but the Hill/Waddle duo is the best at making plays for their QB in the league. I’m not sure he’d be as clutch if he was in say Carolina or Chicago last year.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Also I’m not downplaying Tua’s abilities but the Hill/Waddle duo is the best at making plays for their QB in the league. I’m not sure he’d be as clutch if he was in say Carolina or Chicago last year.

For sure. I think the team aspect and interdependence for football is understood. And why clutch status for individual sport players are even more celebrated.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It can be subjective if you look at stats that support a conclusion you’re looking to get to - like that “clutch” even exists.

I think the guys considered “clutch” traditionally (Elway, Montana, Brady…) are just the guys that were better than everyone else at all points during the game.

Cool. We'll just disagree there.

I guess the author could be doing the lame start with conclusion and then manufacture something to get the conclusion he's already decided thing. That's pretty lame. But It's certainly possible he might do that.

And for sure all points in the game count but the game-deciding crucial plays are a huge thing for lots of people. Me included. Fully get that not everyone sees it that way though.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I also think the "who would you want as your QB if you had to get a win" is another interesting way to look at players. It's a different question than the stats from the article but a fun question as well. "Who's actually the best QB?" and "What QB has the best stats in this criteria?" aren't necessarily the same thing.

Well, this exercise will be a little bit different. I let the numbers do the talking to answer these age-old questions. I used two stats:

1. QB conversion rate on game-tying or go-ahead drives in the fourth quarter and overtime
2. Expected points added (EPA) per play in these situations (looks at value added on all plays between rushes, passes, sacks and fumbles)

Essentially, how often does a QB lead his team down the field successfully in do-or-die situations, and how does he perform on those drives. I broke those numbers down between a QBs career in the regular season, career in the playoffs, and 2022 performance. All of these were evenly weighted and used to churn out this top 10 list of the most clutch QB in the NFL.

I did find the actual performance vs perception interesting.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I guess the author could be doing the lame start with conclusion and then manufacture something to get the conclusion he's already decided thing. That's pretty lame. But It's certainly possible he might do that.

I wasn’t saying that necessarily - more that he was looking to see what players could be considered clutch - and then going out and developing “formula” to determine who is or isn’t. People may define “clutch” differently or in many cases not consider it a real phenomena at all. Hence, still some level of subjectivity in the results.

 

[massraider]

People may define “clutch” differently

Yep, I am not too interested in stats that 'quantify' this.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

“Who's actually the best QB?" and "What QB has the best stats in this criteria?" aren't necessarily the same thing.

I agree with this, but I believe those “clutch” moments happen multiple times a game, and not only in the 4th quarter.

But that said, I do respect the work the author put into the article and it inspired what’s turned into a fun discussion.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I agree with this, but I believe those “clutch” moments happen multiple times a game, and not only in the 4th quarter.

Yes.
The Bengals are down 14 with 30 seconds left in the first half and the Browns getting the ball to start the second half. He completes a perfect pass on 4th and 8, and runs down, fake spikes, and throws a TD to Higgins in back of end zone. Bengals control the second half and win by 3.
No credit to Burrow for being clutch?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

The reality is the worst case here is that "clutch" is a completely made up thing that is nothing more than normal statistical variance.

The best case is that it exists, but is completely unquantifiable and ungradable either empirically or subjectively.

Empirically, the problems are many and easy to pick out. For starters, no one can agree on what empirical data justifies "clutchness". Is getting the go-ahead score with 14:57 left in the 4th quarter more "clutch" than getting the ball back with 4:37 left and a 1 point lead and picking up 3 first downs to seal the game, one of which came on 3rd and 15? Probably not, but there's pretty much no model that accounts for the latter scenario. And of course, as mentioned, is there a "clutchness" difference in getting the ball with 15:05 left in the game vs 14:57? With 5:05 vs 4:57? With 2:05 vs. 1:57?

With the small sample sizes you can change a couple of these variables in ways that still make total sense, and you would likely end up with COMPLETELY different lists.

Additionally, it's all very results based in ways where other players have a large effect on the results. Peyton Manning leads the Colts on a 2 minute drive to set up a 42 yard field goal against the Steelers in the playoffs, which Vanderjagt misses, and it counts as a failed comeback attempt for Manning. A week later Brady has the same scenario and sets Vinatieri up with a 49 yard field goal, which he makes, and Brady gets credited for a comeback conversion. Was leading a drive to set up a 49 yard field goal somehow more clutch than leading a drive to set up a 42 yard field goal? Of course not, but it gets counted as such in the models.

Over several thousand data points this would average out. But when we're talking about single digit numbers it doesn't.

Subjectively, not only does everyone have their own definition of what is "clutch", they have their own selective memories once they've made up their mind on whether a guy is clutch or not. A clutch guy gets only his conversions focused on, and never his failures. A "choker" is the opposite.

Then you see things being thrown around commonly, like in this very thread, where "some guys just play better in big moments" yet in many cases the guys being referenced empirically do not. Michael Jordan had a lower shooting percentage in the last 10 seconds of games than he did in the first 47:50 of games. Tom Brady's stats were SIGNIFICANTLY worse in the postseason than in the regular season.

And, just for fun, and to show how random it is, Tom Brady's stats were higher in the last 2 minutes of the first half of games than it was in the last 2 minutes of the 4th quarter of games.

I can buy that there is some merit to guys being less nervous than others in high pressure situations. The problem comes in determining what those situations are, determining how much of the variance in extremely small sample size was actually due to nervousness (compared to just normal variance). I don't buy that some guys magically play BETTER than normal in those situations or "rise to the occasional" or any of that, which is almost always both variance and selective memories.

 

[eighsse2]

The reality is the worst case here is that "clutch" is a completely made up thing that is nothing more than normal statistical variance.

The best case is that it exists, but is completely unquantifiable and ungradable either empirically or subjectively.

Empirically, the problems are many and easy to pick out. For starters, no one can agree on what empirical data justifies "clutchness". Is getting the go-ahead score with 14:57 left in the 4th quarter more "clutch" than getting the ball back with 4:37 left and a 1 point lead and picking up 3 first downs to seal the game, one of which came on 3rd and 15? Probably not, but there's pretty much no model that accounts for the latter scenario. And of course, as mentioned, is there a "clutchness" difference in getting the ball with 15:05 left in the game vs 14:57? With 5:05 vs 4:57? With 2:05 vs. 1:57?

With the small sample sizes you can change a couple of these variables in ways that still make total sense, and you would likely end up with COMPLETELY different lists.

Additionally, it's all very results based in ways where other players have a large effect on the results. Peyton Manning leads the Colts on a 2 minute drive to set up a 42 yard field goal against the Steelers in the playoffs, which Vanderjagt misses, and it counts as a failed comeback attempt for Manning. A week later Brady has the same scenario and sets Vinatieri up with a 49 yard field goal, which he makes, and Brady gets credited for a comeback conversion. Was leading a drive to set up a 49 yard field goal somehow more clutch than leading a drive to set up a 42 yard field goal? Of course not, but it gets counted as such in the models.

Over several thousand data points this would average out. But when we're talking about single digit numbers it doesn't.

Subjectively, not only does everyone have their own definition of what is "clutch", they have their own selective memories once they've made up their mind on whether a guy is clutch or not. A clutch guy gets only his conversions focused on, and never his failures. A "choker" is the opposite.

Then you see things being thrown around commonly, like in this very thread, where "some guys just play better in big moments" yet in many cases the guys being referenced empirically do not. Michael Jordan had a lower shooting percentage in the last 10 seconds of games than he did in the first 47:50 of games. Tom Brady's stats were SIGNIFICANTLY worse in the postseason than in the regular season.

And, just for fun, and to show how random it is, Tom Brady's stats were higher in the last 2 minutes of the first half of games than it was in the last 2 minutes of the 4th quarter of games.

I can buy that there is some merit to guys being less nervous than others in high pressure situations. The problem comes in determining what those situations are, determining how much of the variance in extremely small sample size was actually due to nervousness (compared to just normal variance). I don't buy that some guys magically play BETTER than normal in those situations or "rise to the occasional" or any of that, which is almost always both variance and selective memories.

Once our robot overlords surpass human intelligence, they can tell us what clutchness is. If they want to.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Then you see things being thrown around commonly, like in this very thread, where "some guys just play better in big moments" yet in many cases the guys being referenced empirically do not. Michael Jordan had a lower shooting percentage in the last 10 seconds of games than he did in the first 47:50 of games. Tom Brady's stats were SIGNIFICANTLY worse in the postseason than in the regular season.

That's exactly what we're talking about here. Actual stats matter. And often they don't align with perception.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't buy that some guys magically play BETTER than normal in those situations or "rise to the occasional" or any of that, which is almost always both variance and selective memories.

Interesting. I don't think it's "magic" at all. Actually the opposite.

I totally buy that some people rise to the occasion and deliver when it matters the most. I've seen that in all walks of life as well. Not just sports.

 

[Todem]

Just a horse**** list in an age of horse**** sabermetrics, clickbait hyperbole articles.

Yeah….I am gonna pick Tua over Burrow….that alone is a complete joke.

If I gotta score in 2 minutes to win a post season game

1. Mahomes
2. Burrow

Then there is the rest right now for my money.

You can point to whatever…..my eyes tell me those two guys are on a completely different level than everyone playing the position today.

I think Josh Allen, Justin Herbert and Trevor Lawrence are on the cusp of true clutch greatness.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I totally buy that some people rise to the occasion and deliver when it matters the most. I've seen that in all walks of life as well. Not just sports.

Due respect, but “when it matters most” would very much seem to be in the eye of the beholder. So long as a narrow definition is applied to the term, the limited data will support it.

That JimmyG adorns this list seems like proof that the inputs are flawed. Folks who’ve watched JimmyG play his entire career with the Niners (as I have) can tell you that with some degree of certainty.

In fact he’s very well known for the untimely interception, generally thrown at times in the games that most would define as needing a QB to be “clutch”, (by any definition). That the defense subsequently saved the win doesn’t make JimmyG any more clutch, it just makes him not the scapegoat for a horrific loss, narrowly averted.

This is my favorite quote on the subject, from a Psychology Today article.

So why can't statisticians find similar types of performance patterns among baseball and basketball players? The answer might be that team athletes are not performing in a vacuum. They're up against elite athletes who themselves are under the very same pressure. If everyone at the professional level is a clutch player, to some extent, then statistically it will seem as none of them are. Excellence pitted against excellence might yield something that looks a lot, in the crunching of numbers, like mediocrity.

Players make plays. Professional athletes made it to the pros as a distillation of larger pools of talent at lower levels.

For example, a defensive back who makes an interception in the 1st quarter of a game isn’t less “clutch” than a defensive back who makes an interception that ices the game in the 4th quarter. They both did the exact same thing on the field. That one interception was more valuable contextually doesn’t actually mean anything to the play itself. One player didn't actually outperform the other. It might even be the case that the 1st quarter interception was a better athletic play, where the 4th quarter interception might have been a wobbly duck off a tipped pass. The timing is what mattered most between the two plays, not whether the play was clutch.

In the latter case, the DL who hypothetically tipped the pass isn’t clutch either. He’s just a player making a football play at a time in the game that an observer might assign more value to.

The same logic applies to throwing a TD pass, receiving that TD pass, getting a sack, forcing a fumble, etc, etc, etc.

Plays that happen multiple times a game aren’t any more or less clutch because the observer assigns a set of values based on timing. The plays are just plays.

I look forward to the next 299 pages.

 

[Joe Bryant]

For example, a defensive back who makes an interception in the 1st quarter of a game isn’t less “clutch” than a defensive back who makes an interception that ices the game in the 4th quarter.

That's where we'll just completely disagree.