Trent Edwards Better Than JP? (1 Viewer)

[EBF]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Only one season as a full time starter, in which he showed promise, is not to me, "plenty of chances." He almost got the team to the playoffs the only year he was the FT starter. He passed for over 3,000 yards, 62.5% completion, 19TDs, 14INTs, 84.9 rating. Great? No, but pretty good for first time starting. Mind you Losman also had a different OC his first three years.

IMO, he has all the makings to be a better QB than Edwards, he just needs some better coaching, and patience.

Right on. The Bills may have one of the worst cases of what munchkin refereed to as the fascination with backups. JP had a serviceable OL for all of 8 games in 2006 (when they moved Peters to LT) and had us in the playoff hunt. He is a fiery leader, a big play machine, has a very strong arm, and is a real hard working guy and teammate. That fellow Bills fans have thrown him under the bus after 3 OCs and inept coaching is borderline sickening.

I remember watching as Buffalo almost upset the Cowboys last year. Edwards, the darling of Buffalo and the 'second coming' led us to 3 points. 3 points! And all anyone could talk about afterwords was how 'poised' he was. If JP had been in that game we would have kicked the tar out of them. He led us to another 3 (or 7) in the Jets game, only to be won by JP in the 4th on a big play.

What does not get mentioned enough is the philosophy of the coaching staff. They appear to favor a QB that can lead them to a last minute FG to win the game 6-3. Problem is, that just doesn't work. Not if you want your team to exceed the dead center of mediocrity. But a guy like JP, who can get the ball stripped, pick it up and run around for 2 minutes, and then throw a 60 TD pass just makes them too nervous. I'm really afraid our offense is doomed by Juron's philosophy.

But I have a feeling this is going to be a moot point. Aside from the broken leg in his 1st training camp (and last years cheap shot on his knee) Losman has been extremely durable. Probably the toughest QB we've had since Kelly. Edwards OTOH spent the majority of his college career in the training room. Relative to JP he is a delicate flower that will crumble far too often to have a consistent starting gig. If JP doesn't beat him outright in TC, then look for him to start the majority of the season filling in for an injured Edwards.

Losman isn't nearly the playmaker you make him out be. If he was, he wouldn't have lost his job. I don't have much to say on this topic that I haven't already said, but I think it will be clear 2-3 years from now that Edwards is better than Losman.

 

[gump]

Losman only beat the...fins

I was at this game. Losman looked as bad as any QB I have seen since Dilfer. He couldn't complete screen passes without making the RB work for it.It seems to me Losman was regressing.

 

[T Bell]

Losman only beat the...fins

I was at this game. Losman looked as bad as any QB I have seen since Dilfer. He couldn't complete screen passes without making the RB work for it.It seems to me Losman was regressing.

Constantly changing offenses and coaching/QB'ign philosophies can do that. It's a concern I have with Jason Campbell.

 

[FUBAR]

I suspect coaches get it right at a higher rate than their critics, but it's purely subjective and anecdotal to say they get it right at a much higher rate than the critics. There are only 3 or 4 legitimate QB controversies a season, where it's really a coin flip call. I don't think coaches get it right anywhere near 70% of the time in those situations.

Perhaps we can judge this for ourselves?Instead of looking back, where we'd probably be able to show both sides of this - I'm sure there are some critics who were "right" on many calls, but good luck finding any critic who was right most of the time, let's look forward. I'm probably missing some controversies, but off hand the Jets, Dolphins, Chiefs, 49ers, and Bears are the 4 true controversies I see. Some will mention Minnesota, Cleveland, Baltimore, and Atlanta, but I don't consider those teams as controversies. First, a rookie isn't a good candidate for a true controversy as they often simply take time to learn the playbook or the coaches won't want to rush them, even if they believe they're the better QB. Anderson has the job (for now), as does TJ. With Miami, I won't consider choosing to bench Henne as indicative of the staff's feeling on him. I'd start a new thread, but I would like your input on upcoming controversies before I make a poll.

 

[Chase Stuart]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Only one season as a full time starter, in which he showed promise, is not to me, "plenty of chances." He almost got the team to the playoffs the only year he was the FT starter. He passed for over 3,000 yards, 62.5% completion, 19TDs, 14INTs, 84.9 rating. Great? No, but pretty good for first time starting. Mind you Losman also had a different OC his first three years.

IMO, he has all the makings to be a better QB than Edwards, he just needs some better coaching, and patience.

He's 27, he's been in the league for 4 years, and he's still painfully mediocre. The people who have watched his games over the years have already laid out the reasons why he isn't a quality QB. He doesn't have the "it" factor at the position. He has deficient instincts and sub par mental skills. Edwards is far superior to him in those categories, which is why he'll be the starter on opening day. Losman is just another in a long line of Boller, Leftwich, Harrington, Ramsey, and Carr. People will make excuses for him, but in the end, he just isn't a very good NFL quarterback.

This is just a conclusion, not an argument. You might be right, but it's not convincing at all to say that some player doesn't have the "it" factor.

 

[EBF]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Only one season as a full time starter, in which he showed promise, is not to me, "plenty of chances." He almost got the team to the playoffs the only year he was the FT starter. He passed for over 3,000 yards, 62.5% completion, 19TDs, 14INTs, 84.9 rating. Great? No, but pretty good for first time starting. Mind you Losman also had a different OC his first three years.

IMO, he has all the makings to be a better QB than Edwards, he just needs some better coaching, and patience.

He's 27, he's been in the league for 4 years, and he's still painfully mediocre. The people who have watched his games over the years have already laid out the reasons why he isn't a quality QB. He doesn't have the "it" factor at the position. He has deficient instincts and sub par mental skills. Edwards is far superior to him in those categories, which is why he'll be the starter on opening day. Losman is just another in a long line of Boller, Leftwich, Harrington, Ramsey, and Carr. People will make excuses for him, but in the end, he just isn't a very good NFL quarterback.

This is just a conclusion, not an argument. You might be right, but it's not convincing at all to say that some player doesn't have the "it" factor.

As far as I know, there's no piss test for intangibles. Obviously I can't prove that he doesn't have the "it" factor. However, I think the stats speak for themselves. Below is a list of current NFL QB's who have started in the league for at least three seasons (not necessarily consecutive seasons, just three total seasons or more as a starter). Under each player name you'll see his QB rating for his first three years in the league including and after his first season as a starter. You will also see his average QB rating for those three years and his career QB rating. Finally, I have shown the difference between his three year average and his career rating.Tom Brady

2001 - 86.5

2002 - 85.7

2003 - 85.9

Average: 86.0

Career: 92.9

Difference: +6.9

Mark Brunell

1995 - 82.6

1996 - 84.0

1997 - 91.2

Average: 85.9

Career: 84.2

Difference: -1.7

Drew Brees

2002 - 76.9

2003 - 67.5

2004 - 104.8

Average: 83.1

Career: 87.9

Difference: +3.8

Marc Bulger

2002 - 101.5

2003 - 81.4

2004 - 93.7

Average: 92.2

Career: 88.1

Difference: -4.1

David Carr

2002 - 62.8

2003 - 69.5

2004 - 83.5

Average: 71.9

Career: 74.4

Difference: +2.5

Kerry Collins

1995 - 61.9

1996 - 79.4

1997 - 55.7

Average: 65.7

Career: 73.3

Difference: +7.6

Jake Delhomme

2003 - 80.6

2004 - 87.3

2005 - 88.1

Average: 85.3

Career: 85.2

Difference: -0.1

Jeff Garcia

1999 - 77.9

2000 - 97.6

2001 - 94.8

Average: 90.1

Career: 87.2

Difference: -2.9

Brian Griese

1999 - 75.6

2000 - 102.9

2001 - 78.5

Average: 85.7

Career: 83.6

Difference: -2.1

Joey Harrington

2002 - 59.9

2003 - 63.9

2004 - 77.5

Average: 67.1

Career: 69.4

Difference: +2.3

Matt Hasselbeck

2001 - 70.9

2002 - 87.8

2003 - 88.8

Average: 82.5

Career: 86.2

Difference: +3.7

Jon Kitna

1999 - 77.7

2000 - 75.6

2001 - 61.1

Average: 71.5

Career: 76.8

Difference: +5.3

Byron Leftwich

2003 - 73.0

2004 - 82.2

2005 - 89.3

Average: 81.5

Career: 79.7

Difference: -1.8

Eli Manning

2004 - 55.4

2005 - 75.9

2006 - 77.0

Average: 69.4

Career: 73.4

Difference: +4.0

Peyton Manning

1998 - 71.2

1999 - 90.7

2000 - 94.7

Average: 85.5

Career: 94.7

Difference: +9.2

Donovan McNabb

1999 - 60.1

2000 - 77.8

2001 - 84.3

Average: 74.1

Career: 85.8

Difference: +11.7

Carson Palmer

2004 - 77.3

2005 - 101.1

2006 - 93.9

Average: 90.8

Career: 90.1

Difference: -0.7

Chad Pennington

2002 - 104.2

2003 - 82.9

2004 - 91.0

Average: 92.7

Career: 88.9

Difference: -3.8

Ben Roethlisberger

2004 - 98.1

2005 - 98.6

2006 - 75.4

Average: 90.7

Career: 92.5

Difference: +1.8

Kurt Warner

1999 - 109.2

2000 - 98.3

2001 - 101.4

Average: 103.0

Career: 93.2

Difference: -9.8

Range of Differences: -9.8 to +11.7

What this means is that the most any of these QB's improved his career QB rating after his first three seasons as a starter was McNabb's +11.7. The most any of these guys regressed was Warner's -9.8 drop. So based on recent history, you wouldn't expect a QB to improve his career rating by more than 11.7 after his first three seasons as a starter and you wouldn't expect him to regress by more than 9.8.

Average Difference: +1.59

What his means is that the average QB on this list improved his career QB rating by 1.59 after his first three years as a starter. So this suggests that on average, a QB will make slight improvement after his first three years.

With this information in mind, let's see how Losman stacks up:

JP Losman

2005 - 64.9

2006 - 84.9

2007 - 76.9

Average: 75.6

If Losman improves the average amount, he will eventually push his career QB rating up to 77.2. If his improvements equals that of Donovan McNabb, the most improved player on my list after his first three years, Losman will eventually push his career QB rating to 87.3. However, McNabb is the only player on my list to improve by double digits and one of only two players to improve by more than 8 points. To me this suggests that 82-83 would be a realistic best case scenario for Losman.

Using career QB rating to gauge a QB's improvement is an imperfect method since the career QB rating is sagged down by the developmental earlier years. The best seasons by guys like Brady and McNabb far exceed their average rating during their first three years. So if you want to look at it that way, you could argue that Losman is capable of performing much better than he has thus far. However, I'm skeptical of his ability to do so for reasons which I've laid out below.

Most of the guys we think of today as "solid" QB's were substantially better than Losman during their first three years of heavy PT:

Bulger - 92.2

Palmer - 90.8

Roethlisberger - 90.7

Garcia - 90.1

Brady - 86.0

Brunell - 85.9

Peyton - 85.5

Delhomme - 85.3

Brees - 83.1

Hasselbeck - 82.5

McNabb is really the only current elite NFL QB to emerge from the 65-80 range. Most of the other guys in there are retreads, busts, and journeymen like Kerry Collins, David Carr, and Jon Kitna. Some people might point to Eli Manning as another example of QB overcoming a slow start, but his career numbers are quite bad despite his recent Super Bowl win. He isn't yet a good QB even if he did play well for a stretch of a few critical games.

All in all, this data confirms what I've believed for a long time: what you see is usually what you get with a QB. The first three years of heavy playing time generally offer a pretty good indication of the player he'll become. So while we can't rule out Losman making the kind of improvements McNabb and Manning made, I don't think the numbers offer any cause for optimism. I suspect his career will far somewhere in the range between David Carr and Jon Kitna.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

wow EBF thats alot of work to show JP losman is average. great work

 

[Banger]

wow EBF thats alot of work to show JP losman is average. great work

I thought the same thing....but interesting post nonetheless.. Without the starting role, like McNabb/Manning had, he has little chance to improve....

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

wow EBF thats alot of work to show JP losman is average. great work

I thought the same thing....but interesting post nonetheless.. Without the starting role, like McNabb/Manning had, he has little chance to improve....

I appreciate his effort. but he reached a conclusion that we all knew.I dont think edwards will really amount to that much either

 

[EBF]

wow EBF thats alot of work to show JP losman is average. great work

I thought the same thing....but interesting post nonetheless.. Without the starting role, like McNabb/Manning had, he has little chance to improve....

I appreciate his effort. but he reached a conclusion that we all knew.

I dont think edwards will really amount to that much either

I thought so. I thought saying JP Losman sucks is like saying the sky is blue. Apparently I was wrong. As for Edwards, it's just too early to pass judgment. Maybe he sucks. Maybe he's great. We should know within 1-2 years.

 

[Chase Stuart]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Only one season as a full time starter, in which he showed promise, is not to me, "plenty of chances." He almost got the team to the playoffs the only year he was the FT starter. He passed for over 3,000 yards, 62.5% completion, 19TDs, 14INTs, 84.9 rating. Great? No, but pretty good for first time starting. Mind you Losman also had a different OC his first three years.

IMO, he has all the makings to be a better QB than Edwards, he just needs some better coaching, and patience.

He's 27, he's been in the league for 4 years, and he's still painfully mediocre. The people who have watched his games over the years have already laid out the reasons why he isn't a quality QB. He doesn't have the "it" factor at the position. He has deficient instincts and sub par mental skills. Edwards is far superior to him in those categories, which is why he'll be the starter on opening day. Losman is just another in a long line of Boller, Leftwich, Harrington, Ramsey, and Carr. People will make excuses for him, but in the end, he just isn't a very good NFL quarterback.

This is just a conclusion, not an argument. You might be right, but it's not convincing at all to say that some player doesn't have the "it" factor.

As far as I know, there's no piss test for intangibles. Obviously I can't prove that he doesn't have the "it" factor. However, I think the stats speak for themselves. Below is a list of current NFL QB's who have started in the league for at least three seasons (not necessarily consecutive seasons, just three total seasons or more as a starter). Under each player name you'll see his QB rating for his first three years in the league including and after his first season as a starter. You will also see his average QB rating for those three years and his career QB rating. Finally, I have shown the difference between his three year average and his career rating.Tom Brady

2001 - 86.5

2002 - 85.7

2003 - 85.9

Average: 86.0

Career: 92.9

Difference: +6.9

Mark Brunell

1995 - 82.6

1996 - 84.0

1997 - 91.2

Average: 85.9

Career: 84.2

Difference: -1.7

Drew Brees

2002 - 76.9

2003 - 67.5

2004 - 104.8

Average: 83.1

Career: 87.9

Difference: +3.8

Marc Bulger

2002 - 101.5

2003 - 81.4

2004 - 93.7

Average: 92.2

Career: 88.1

Difference: -4.1

David Carr

2002 - 62.8

2003 - 69.5

2004 - 83.5

Average: 71.9

Career: 74.4

Difference: +2.5

Kerry Collins

1995 - 61.9

1996 - 79.4

1997 - 55.7

Average: 65.7

Career: 73.3

Difference: +7.6

Jake Delhomme

2003 - 80.6

2004 - 87.3

2005 - 88.1

Average: 85.3

Career: 85.2

Difference: -0.1

Jeff Garcia

1999 - 77.9

2000 - 97.6

2001 - 94.8

Average: 90.1

Career: 87.2

Difference: -2.9

Brian Griese

1999 - 75.6

2000 - 102.9

2001 - 78.5

Average: 85.7

Career: 83.6

Difference: -2.1

Joey Harrington

2002 - 59.9

2003 - 63.9

2004 - 77.5

Average: 67.1

Career: 69.4

Difference: +2.3

Matt Hasselbeck

2001 - 70.9

2002 - 87.8

2003 - 88.8

Average: 82.5

Career: 86.2

Difference: +3.7

Jon Kitna

1999 - 77.7

2000 - 75.6

2001 - 61.1

Average: 71.5

Career: 76.8

Difference: +5.3

Byron Leftwich

2003 - 73.0

2004 - 82.2

2005 - 89.3

Average: 81.5

Career: 79.7

Difference: -1.8

Eli Manning

2004 - 55.4

2005 - 75.9

2006 - 77.0

Average: 69.4

Career: 73.4

Difference: +4.0

Peyton Manning

1998 - 71.2

1999 - 90.7

2000 - 94.7

Average: 85.5

Career: 94.7

Difference: +9.2

Donovan McNabb

1999 - 60.1

2000 - 77.8

2001 - 84.3

Average: 74.1

Career: 85.8

Difference: +11.7

Carson Palmer

2004 - 77.3

2005 - 101.1

2006 - 93.9

Average: 90.8

Career: 90.1

Difference: -0.7

Chad Pennington

2002 - 104.2

2003 - 82.9

2004 - 91.0

Average: 92.7

Career: 88.9

Difference: -3.8

Ben Roethlisberger

2004 - 98.1

2005 - 98.6

2006 - 75.4

Average: 90.7

Career: 92.5

Difference: +1.8

Kurt Warner

1999 - 109.2

2000 - 98.3

2001 - 101.4

Average: 103.0

Career: 93.2

Difference: -9.8

Range of Differences: -9.8 to +11.7

What this means is that the most any of these QB's improved his career QB rating after his first three seasons as a starter was McNabb's +11.7. The most any of these guys regressed was Warner's -9.8 drop. So based on recent history, you wouldn't expect a QB to improve his career rating by more than 11.7 after his first three seasons as a starter and you wouldn't expect him to regress by more than 9.8.

Average Difference: +1.59

What his means is that the average QB on this list improved his career QB rating by 1.59 after his first three years as a starter. So this suggests that on average, a QB will make slight improvement after his first three years.

With this information in mind, let's see how Losman stacks up:

JP Losman

2005 - 64.9

2006 - 84.9

2007 - 76.9

Average: 75.6

If Losman improves the average amount, he will eventually push his career QB rating up to 77.2. If his improvements equals that of Donovan McNabb, the most improved player on my list after his first three years, Losman will eventually push his career QB rating to 87.3. However, McNabb is the only player on my list to improve by double digits and one of only two players to improve by more than 8 points. To me this suggests that 82-83 would be a realistic best case scenario for Losman.

Using career QB rating to gauge a QB's improvement is an imperfect method since the career QB rating is sagged down by the developmental earlier years. The best seasons by guys like Brady and McNabb far exceed their average rating during their first three years. So if you want to look at it that way, you could argue that Losman is capable of performing much better than he has thus far. However, I'm skeptical of his ability to do so for reasons which I've laid out below.

Most of the guys we think of today as "solid" QB's were substantially better than Losman during their first three years of heavy PT:

Bulger - 92.2

Palmer - 90.8

Roethlisberger - 90.7

Garcia - 90.1

Brady - 86.0

Brunell - 85.9

Peyton - 85.5

Delhomme - 85.3

Brees - 83.1

Hasselbeck - 82.5

McNabb is really the only current elite NFL QB to emerge from the 65-80 range. Most of the other guys in there are retreads, busts, and journeymen like Kerry Collins, David Carr, and Jon Kitna. Some people might point to Eli Manning as another example of QB overcoming a slow start, but his career numbers are quite bad despite his recent Super Bowl win. He isn't yet a good QB even if he did play well for a stretch of a few critical games.

All in all, this data confirms what I've believed for a long time: what you see is usually what you get with a QB. The first three years of heavy playing time generally offer a pretty good indication of the player he'll become. So while we can't rule out Losman making the kind of improvements McNabb and Manning made, I don't think the numbers offer any cause for optimism. I suspect his career will far somewhere in the range between David Carr and Jon Kitna.

This, of course, is a lot better than "he doesn't have an 'it' factor."It's far from perfect, though, for two big reasons.

One, you improperly averaged the QB's QB rating. Two, QB Rating isn't the best tool to rank the QBs. I'll work on this in a second, although I don't suspect I'll see drastically different results.

 

[Chase Stuart]

There are 28 QBs that meet the following criteria:

1) Were active in 2007

2) Had been a starting QB for three seasons in the NFL

3) Threw 150 passes or more in three consecutive seasons, with the first season being the first time in the QB's career with 150 passes

4) Threw passes in a fourth season after that

Like mentioned earlier, Donovan McNabb has shown the most improvement, and Kurt Warner the biggest decline. I looked at the QB's adjusted yards per attempt ratio in his first three seasons with 150 passes, and then the QB's adjusted yards per attempt ratio for the remainder of his career.

Here's the list. The first column shows the player's AY/A in his first three seasons with 150 passes; the second column shows his AY/A the rest of his career; the third column shows his additional career attempts the rest of his career.

1st3	car	  diff	add att	5.20	6.89	 1.69	2454	Donovan McNabb5.97	7.27	 1.30	2098	Tom Brady4.50	5.72	 1.22	5590	Vinny Testaverde6.27	7.32	 1.05	3726	Peyton Manning4.65	5.70	 1.05	4076	Kerry Collins4.57	5.54	 0.96	 330	Kyle Boller6.27	7.09	 0.81	1538	Daunte Culpepper5.77	6.58	 0.81	1706	Drew Brees6.33	6.96	 0.63	2395	Trent Green5.60	6.18	 0.58	7179	Brett Favre4.38	4.88	 0.50	1066	Joey Harrington6.88	7.37	 0.49	 404	Ben Roethlisberger5.72	6.15	 0.43	3083	Steve McNair5.82	6.09	 0.27	 474	Charlie Batch4.99	5.13	 0.14	1807	Trent Dilfer5.28	5.38	 0.11	2864	Jon Kitna6.33	6.40	 0.07	1856	Matt Hasselbeck5.18	5.04	-0.14	 529	Eli Manning6.01	5.82	-0.19	1370	Brian Griese6.75	6.42	-0.34	1253	Marc Bulger6.44	6.07	-0.37	 517	Jake Delhomme6.58	6.07	-0.51	 575	Carson Palmer6.06	5.53	-0.53	1437	Gus Frerotte5.47	4.91	-0.56	1001	David Carr6.68	6.04	-0.64	1860	Jeff Garcia5.97	4.99	-0.98	 241	Byron Leftwich6.78	5.65	-1.13	 828	Chad Pennington8.05	6.29	-1.76	1556	Kurt Warner5.88	6.05	 0.18			Average

Losman averaged 5.58 AY/A through his first three seasons with 150 attempts, 2005-2007. That's slightly below average of the QBs in this study, and it's slightly below league average. Obviously McNabb made big strides after his first three seasons, but Tom Brady did, too. Testaverde and Kerry Collins both went from bad to about average. Drew Brees went from average to very good. And Brett Favre and Steve McNair -- guys who certainly had the 'it' factor -- went from very similar to Losman to league MVP.

 

[alg]

wow EBF thats alot of work to show JP losman is average. great work

I thought the same thing....but interesting post nonetheless.. Without the starting role, like McNabb/Manning had, he has little chance to improve....

I appreciate his effort. but he reached a conclusion that we all knew.

I dont think edwards will really amount to that much either

I thought so. I thought saying JP Losman sucks is like saying the sky is blue. Apparently I was wrong. As for Edwards, it's just too early to pass judgment. Maybe he sucks. Maybe he's great. We should know within 1-2 years.

There is one great flaw in your use in stats regarding JP, though I think they were great and useful in general. Namely, of the 3 years of your sample for JP, he only played in one (2006) where he wasn't getting jacked around by inept coaches putting him in and out of the lineup. He was also subject to a very bad OL by NFL standards.In JPs case, I do not feel stats are going to get the job done. He simply has not had a chance to play and develop properly. Unfortunately he may never get the chance.

 

[TheOriginalDoubledown]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Would it be fair to compare him to an 8 yr QB? Based on the bold statement would you say the same about an 8 year veteran with these stats:comp patt comp% PaY YPA PTD INT QBR

221 378 58.5 2392 6.33 11 15 70.3

These are Bulgers numbers from last year. Not saying he didn't have problems with injurys, but realistically we can dig up all kinds of excuses for poor play by the Qb's in BUF as well. In fact you could almost make the case that Bulger and Losman had very similar years last year except that Bulger didn't lose his starting job to the rookie once the seaon was in the tank. Well and the fact that Losman played better than Bulger according to the stats anyways.

I guess I'm just curious if the reason people are so critical of Losman is because he has Edwards (whom the coaches seem to like better) on the same team or if it's really just because saying he sucks is like saying the sky is blue.

 

[munchkin]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Would it be fair to compare him to an 8 yr QB? Based on the bold statement would you say the same about an 8 year veteran with these stats:comp patt comp% PaY YPA PTD INT QBR

221 378 58.5 2392 6.33 11 15 70.3

These are Bulgers numbers from last year. Not saying he didn't have problems with injurys, but realistically we can dig up all kinds of excuses for poor play by the Qb's in BUF as well. In fact you could almost make the case that Bulger and Losman had very similar years last year except that Bulger didn't lose his starting job to the rookie once the seaon was in the tank. Well and the fact that Losman played better than Bulger according to the stats anyways.

I guess I'm just curious if the reason people are so critical of Losman is because he has Edwards (whom the coaches seem to like better) on the same team or if it's really just because saying he sucks is like saying the sky is blue.

Well this is a large part of it. We either have to believe the coaches want to win and feel that Edwards gives them the best chance to do so or some of us here can analyze the situation more clearly and that analysis points to Losman as being the better QB. Time will tell who is correct. If Losman does not get a chance to play in Buffalo he will likely get picked up or traded down the road and given the opportunity to excel somewhere else.

I think the numbers are kind of hard to sort through. I don't see where Losman is a kid wonder but he has not pulled a D Anderson rabbit out of the hat either. I know Losman doesn't have the players around him that Anderson did/does but a QB with perceived talent behind him will only be given a limited amount of time to produce. This may not be fair but coaches are all on a short leash and are some times put in a position to make premature decisions regarding playing time.

 

[EBF]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Would it be fair to compare him to an 8 yr QB? Based on the bold statement would you say the same about an 8 year veteran with these stats:comp patt comp% PaY YPA PTD INT QBR

221 378 58.5 2392 6.33 11 15 70.3

These are Bulgers numbers from last year. Not saying he didn't have problems with injurys, but realistically we can dig up all kinds of excuses for poor play by the Qb's in BUF as well. In fact you could almost make the case that Bulger and Losman had very similar years last year except that Bulger didn't lose his starting job to the rookie once the seaon was in the tank. Well and the fact that Losman played better than Bulger according to the stats anyways.

When Losman has three consecutive years with a QB rating over 90, I'll give him the same benefit of the doubt that I give Marc Bulger. Bulger had a 101.5 QB rating in his first season of heavy playing time. Losman's was below 70. Yes, you can think of many excuses to explain Losman's poor play, but in this situation I'll cite the definition of Occam's razor that someone put forth on these boards the other day: the simplest solution is the best. When a guy has thrown 800 passes in the NFL and never looked better than mediocre, the simple solution is that he isn't a very good QB.

Personally, I think there's a slight chance that Losman could progress and develop into a halfway serviceable starter like Kerry Collins or Jon Kitna, but I think the odds of him becoming a true franchise QB are quite small.

I guess I'm just curious if the reason people are so critical of Losman is because he has Edwards (whom the coaches seem to like better) on the same team or if it's really just because saying he sucks is like saying the sky is blue.

People are critical of Losman because he hasn't played well. Notice you don't see any hardcore Bills fans rushing in to defend him. The only people still high on him are guys who own him in dynasty leagues and/or whose exposure to him is limited to a handful of games in the NFL and college. The people who have watched him play on a regular basis understand why he's planted firmly on the bench.

 

[basenjiwarrior]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Would it be fair to compare him to an 8 yr QB? Based on the bold statement would you say the same about an 8 year veteran with these stats:comp patt comp% PaY YPA PTD INT QBR

221 378 58.5 2392 6.33 11 15 70.3

These are Bulgers numbers from last year. Not saying he didn't have problems with injurys, but realistically we can dig up all kinds of excuses for poor play by the Qb's in BUF as well. In fact you could almost make the case that Bulger and Losman had very similar years last year except that Bulger didn't lose his starting job to the rookie once the seaon was in the tank. Well and the fact that Losman played better than Bulger according to the stats anyways.

When Losman has three consecutive years with a QB rating over 90, I'll give him the same benefit of the doubt that I give Marc Bulger. Bulger had a 101.5 QB rating in his first season of heavy playing time. Losman's was below 70. Yes, you can think of many excuses to explain Losman's poor play, but in this situation I'll cite the definition of Occam's razor that someone put forth on these boards the other day: the simplest solution is the best. When a guy has thrown 800 passes in the NFL and never looked better than mediocre, the simple solution is that he isn't a very good QB.

Personally, I think there's a slight chance that Losman could progress and develop into a halfway serviceable starter like Kerry Collins or Jon Kitna, but I think the odds of him becoming a true franchise QB are quite small.

I guess I'm just curious if the reason people are so critical of Losman is because he has Edwards (whom the coaches seem to like better) on the same team or if it's really just because saying he sucks is like saying the sky is blue.

People are critical of Losman because he hasn't played well. Notice you don't see any hardcore Bills fans rushing in to defend him. The only people still high on him are guys who own him in dynasty leagues and/or whose exposure to him is limited to a handful of games in the NFL and college. The people who have watched him play on a regular basis understand why he's planted firmly on the bench.

Hardcore Bills fan here. Have seen every snap Losman has taken in the preseason and the regular season.You are right on as usual EBF.

Losman panicks under pressure...and I mean panicks, is supposedly a moble Qb-but can't throw well on the run, he is a very poor decision maker, he is apparently is incapable of making progressions as he constantly locks onto his primary target.

Buffalo would have loved to dump him for a pick this offseason,the price was low, many teams were looking for starters and backups. Yet no one apparently had him on their radar. That is telling.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Would it be fair to compare him to an 8 yr QB? Based on the bold statement would you say the same about an 8 year veteran with these stats:comp patt comp% PaY YPA PTD INT QBR

221 378 58.5 2392 6.33 11 15 70.3

These are Bulgers numbers from last year. Not saying he didn't have problems with injurys, but realistically we can dig up all kinds of excuses for poor play by the Qb's in BUF as well. In fact you could almost make the case that Bulger and Losman had very similar years last year except that Bulger didn't lose his starting job to the rookie once the seaon was in the tank. Well and the fact that Losman played better than Bulger according to the stats anyways.

When Losman has three consecutive years with a QB rating over 90, I'll give him the same benefit of the doubt that I give Marc Bulger. Bulger had a 101.5 QB rating in his first season of heavy playing time. Losman's was below 70. Yes, you can think of many excuses to explain Losman's poor play, but in this situation I'll cite the definition of Occam's razor that someone put forth on these boards the other day: the simplest solution is the best. When a guy has thrown 800 passes in the NFL and never looked better than mediocre, the simple solution is that he isn't a very good QB.

Personally, I think there's a slight chance that Losman could progress and develop into a halfway serviceable starter like Kerry Collins or Jon Kitna, but I think the odds of him becoming a true franchise QB are quite small.

I guess I'm just curious if the reason people are so critical of Losman is because he has Edwards (whom the coaches seem to like better) on the same team or if it's really just because saying he sucks is like saying the sky is blue.

People are critical of Losman because he hasn't played well. Notice you don't see any hardcore Bills fans rushing in to defend him. The only people still high on him are guys who own him in dynasty leagues and/or whose exposure to him is limited to a handful of games in the NFL and college. The people who have watched him play on a regular basis understand why he's planted firmly on the bench.

Hardcore Bills fan here. Have seen every snap Losman has taken in the preseason and the regular season.You are right on as usual EBF.

Losman panicks under pressure...and I mean panicks, is supposedly a moble Qb-but can't throw well on the run, he is a very poor decision maker, he is apparently is incapable of making progressions as he constantly locks onto his primary target.

Buffalo would have loved to dump him for a pick this offseason,the price was low, many teams were looking for starters and backups. Yet no one apparently had him on their radar. That is telling.

Can you support this evidence?

 

[css2373]

Here is some footage of Edwards:

Draft recap:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe5gIxBVrXM

Lee Evans hookup:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwiwJeeHWFw

1st start:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kuW2WLPhiY

 

[Chaos Commish]

Buffalo would have loved to dump him for a pick this offseason,the price was low, many teams were looking for starters and backups. Yet no one apparently had him on their radar. That is telling.

Can you support this evidence?

I don't think he can. Iirc, Losman saw the writing on the wall and asked to be traded. The Bills were not interested in shopping him. They want him to carry on as a Bill, continue competing and be a good teammate -- as a young veteran backup to the even younger, lesser experienced, lower drafted prospect. I read the results of Losman asking to be moved as an subtle endorsement of him by the Bills. They weren't ready to make a full commitment to Edwards. Edwards is penciled in boldly, but it isn't in ink yet, and they want JP to stick around if they need him. That seems like a smart approach to me.

 

[Chase Stuart]

There are 28 QBs that meet the following criteria:1) Were active in 20072) Had been a starting QB for three seasons in the NFL3) Threw 150 passes or more in three consecutive seasons, with the first season being the first time in the QB's career with 150 passes4) Threw passes in a fourth season after thatLike mentioned earlier, Donovan McNabb has shown the most improvement, and Kurt Warner the biggest decline. I looked at the QB's adjusted yards per attempt ratio in his first three seasons with 150 passes, and then the QB's adjusted yards per attempt ratio for the remainder of his career.Here's the list. The first column shows the player's AY/A in his first three seasons with 150 passes; the second column shows his AY/A the rest of his career; the third column shows his additional career attempts the rest of his career.

1st3	car	  diff	add att	5.20	6.89	 1.69	2454	Donovan McNabb5.97	7.27	 1.30	2098	Tom Brady4.50	5.72	 1.22	5590	Vinny Testaverde6.27	7.32	 1.05	3726	Peyton Manning4.65	5.70	 1.05	4076	Kerry Collins4.57	5.54	 0.96	 330	Kyle Boller6.27	7.09	 0.81	1538	Daunte Culpepper5.77	6.58	 0.81	1706	Drew Brees6.33	6.96	 0.63	2395	Trent Green5.60	6.18	 0.58	7179	Brett Favre4.38	4.88	 0.50	1066	Joey Harrington6.88	7.37	 0.49	 404	Ben Roethlisberger5.72	6.15	 0.43	3083	Steve McNair5.82	6.09	 0.27	 474	Charlie Batch4.99	5.13	 0.14	1807	Trent Dilfer5.28	5.38	 0.11	2864	Jon Kitna6.33	6.40	 0.07	1856	Matt Hasselbeck5.18	5.04	-0.14	 529	Eli Manning6.01	5.82	-0.19	1370	Brian Griese6.75	6.42	-0.34	1253	Marc Bulger6.44	6.07	-0.37	 517	Jake Delhomme6.58	6.07	-0.51	 575	Carson Palmer6.06	5.53	-0.53	1437	Gus Frerotte5.47	4.91	-0.56	1001	David Carr6.68	6.04	-0.64	1860	Jeff Garcia5.97	4.99	-0.98	 241	Byron Leftwich6.78	5.65	-1.13	 828	Chad Pennington8.05	6.29	-1.76	1556	Kurt Warner5.88	6.05	 0.18			Average

Losman averaged 5.58 AY/A through his first three seasons with 150 attempts, 2005-2007. That's slightly below average of the QBs in this study, and it's slightly below league average. Obviously McNabb made big strides after his first three seasons, but Tom Brady did, too. Testaverde and Kerry Collins both went from bad to about average. Drew Brees went from average to very good. And Brett Favre and Steve McNair -- guys who certainly had the 'it' factor -- went from very similar to Losman to league MVP.

Thoughts, EBF?

 

[EBF]

There are 28 QBs that meet the following criteria:1) Were active in 20072) Had been a starting QB for three seasons in the NFL3) Threw 150 passes or more in three consecutive seasons, with the first season being the first time in the QB's career with 150 passes4) Threw passes in a fourth season after thatLike mentioned earlier, Donovan McNabb has shown the most improvement, and Kurt Warner the biggest decline. I looked at the QB's adjusted yards per attempt ratio in his first three seasons with 150 passes, and then the QB's adjusted yards per attempt ratio for the remainder of his career.Here's the list. The first column shows the player's AY/A in his first three seasons with 150 passes; the second column shows his AY/A the rest of his career; the third column shows his additional career attempts the rest of his career.

1st3	car	  diff	add att	5.20	6.89	 1.69	2454	Donovan McNabb5.97	7.27	 1.30	2098	Tom Brady4.50	5.72	 1.22	5590	Vinny Testaverde6.27	7.32	 1.05	3726	Peyton Manning4.65	5.70	 1.05	4076	Kerry Collins4.57	5.54	 0.96	 330	Kyle Boller6.27	7.09	 0.81	1538	Daunte Culpepper5.77	6.58	 0.81	1706	Drew Brees6.33	6.96	 0.63	2395	Trent Green5.60	6.18	 0.58	7179	Brett Favre4.38	4.88	 0.50	1066	Joey Harrington6.88	7.37	 0.49	 404	Ben Roethlisberger5.72	6.15	 0.43	3083	Steve McNair5.82	6.09	 0.27	 474	Charlie Batch4.99	5.13	 0.14	1807	Trent Dilfer5.28	5.38	 0.11	2864	Jon Kitna6.33	6.40	 0.07	1856	Matt Hasselbeck5.18	5.04	-0.14	 529	Eli Manning6.01	5.82	-0.19	1370	Brian Griese6.75	6.42	-0.34	1253	Marc Bulger6.44	6.07	-0.37	 517	Jake Delhomme6.58	6.07	-0.51	 575	Carson Palmer6.06	5.53	-0.53	1437	Gus Frerotte5.47	4.91	-0.56	1001	David Carr6.68	6.04	-0.64	1860	Jeff Garcia5.97	4.99	-0.98	 241	Byron Leftwich6.78	5.65	-1.13	 828	Chad Pennington8.05	6.29	-1.76	1556	Kurt Warner5.88	6.05	 0.18			Average

Losman averaged 5.58 AY/A through his first three seasons with 150 attempts, 2005-2007. That's slightly below average of the QBs in this study, and it's slightly below league average. Obviously McNabb made big strides after his first three seasons, but Tom Brady did, too. Testaverde and Kerry Collins both went from bad to about average. Drew Brees went from average to very good. And Brett Favre and Steve McNair -- guys who certainly had the 'it' factor -- went from very similar to Losman to league MVP.

Thoughts, EBF?

I've never heard of the stat adjusted yards per attempt and I have no clue what it means. My guess is that it's some sort of attempt to compensate for the quality of the supporting cast or game situations to make the yards per attempt statistic more objective. Either way, the results are inconclusive. Losman is close to David Carr and Jon Kitna. He's also close to Brett Favre and Donovan McNabb. So people who don't like him can say he's Carr and people who like him can say he's Favre. There's no way to prove it one way or another. Personally, I've been tracking the Buffalo QB situation for a while and my take is that Losman lacks the mental intangibles and instincts needed to be a solid starting quarterback in the NFL. I think the staff knows this and I think they were pulling for Edwards from the preseason on. It's been pretty clear that they've favored him throughout the process. I don't think this is unfair. I think their up close experience with these players has lead them to believe that Edwards is the better option. He's smarter, more poised, and more accurate. That's critical at a position where success has more to do with quick thinking and sound decision making than throwing 60 yard bombs from your knees. The main stats I use to evaluate a quarterback are QB rating and yards per attempt. Losman has thrown over 800 passes in the NFL and has shown minimal signs of progress. If he were going to become an effective passer then I think he probably would've turned the corner by now. There's always a slight chance that things will click within the next couple of years and he'll surprise people, but I would bet against that at this point in time. I see his career following a Jon Kitna/Kerry Collins type of path. He'll bounce around the league as a backup and occasionally surface as a starter, but he'll never be a guy that a team really feels good building around. Can I prove this? Not really. It's an opinion. I've laid out my reasons and I don't feel obligated to justify them any further.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I've never heard of the stat adjusted yards per attempt and I have no clue what it means. My guess is that it's some sort of attempt to compensate for the quality of the supporting cast or game situations to make the yards per attempt statistic more objective. Either way, the results are inconclusive. Losman is close to David Carr and Jon Kitna. He's also close to Brett Favre and Donovan McNabb. So people who don't like him can say he's Carr and people who like him can say he's Favre. There's no way to prove it one way or another. Personally, I've been tracking the Buffalo QB situation for a while and my take is that Losman lacks the mental intangibles and instincts needed to be a solid starting quarterback in the NFL. I think the staff knows this and I think they were pulling for Edwards from the preseason on. It's been pretty clear that they've favored him throughout the process. I don't think this is unfair. I think their up close experience with these players has lead them to believe that Edwards is the better option. He's smarter, more poised, and more accurate. That's critical at a position where success has more to do with quick thinking and sound decision making than throwing 60 yard bombs from your knees. The main stats I use to evaluate a quarterback are QB rating and yards per attempt. Losman has thrown over 800 passes in the NFL and has shown minimal signs of progress. If he were going to become an effective passer then I think he probably would've turned the corner by now. There's always a slight chance that things will click within the next couple of years and he'll surprise people, but I would bet against that at this point in time. I see his career following a Jon Kitna/Kerry Collins type of path. He'll bounce around the league as a backup and occasionally surface as a starter, but he'll never be a guy that a team really feels good building around. Can I prove this? Not really. It's an opinion. I've laid out my reasons and I don't feel obligated to justify them any further.

Adjusted yards per attempt is simply passing yards per attempt, with a 45 yard penalty for INTs and a 10 yard bonus for TDs. It is an improvement on yards per attempt, and it is certainly an improvement on passer rating. AY/A is probably the best raw statistic to use to grade a QB, if you're only using one number.That said, consider Favre's numbers in his first two seasons:620/993, 6530, 37/37. That's 6.57 Y/A and an even TD/INT metric.Now look at Losman in his first three seasons starting:492/832, 5595, 31/28. That's 6.72 AY/A and a better than even TD/INT ratio.I don't think it's unfair to say Losman's career is all but written. Yes, Favre was two years younger than Losman at this stage, but he was also throwing to Sterling Sharpe. That's a pretty huge advantage. And Losman doesn't have to wind up being anywhere near Favre-level to be better than Trent Edwards.I think you're writing off Losman a bit too early. A good number of QBs improve after three years, Losman hasn't been too bad through three years, and some of the best QBs in league history had similar ratios to Losman at this stage.

 

[FUBAR]

Adjusted yards per attempt is simply passing yards per attempt, with a 45 yard penalty for INTs and a 10 yard bonus for TDs. It is an improvement on yards per attempt, and it is certainly an improvement on passer rating. AY/A is probably the best raw statistic to use to grade a QB, if you're only using one number.

Who came up with the -45 / 10 concept? It seems fair enough, but why those numbers? Many times when people look at the stats, they look to see if TDs > INT, or otherwise. a 2:1 ratio seems pretty strong IMO, 4.5:1 seems excessive and seems to overly benefit those who "play it safe" while dragging down those QBs who have to play make-up ball more often.

 

[EBF]

Favre's QB ratings in his first three seasons were 85.3, 72.2, and 90.0. He had already turned the corner by his fourth year in the league.

You accuse me of writing off Losman too early, yet you use the phrase "And Losman doesn't have to wind up being anywhere near Favre-level to be better than Trent Edwards." It's odd that you're reluctant to pass judgment on Losman while being quick to pass judgment on Edwards considering that Edwards has been in the NFL for a much shorter amount of time. For all we know Edwards is the next Peyton Manning. Their rookie year stats are similar.

Peyton Manning

QB Rating - 71.2

Completion % - 56.7

Yards/Attempt - 6.5

TD:INT Ratio - .93:1

Trent Edwards

QB Rating - 70.4

Completion % - 56.1

Yards/Attempt - 6.1

TD:INT Ratio - .88:1

Like I said, you can find reasons to believe in Losman if that's the way your heart pulls you. I've already laid out my thoughts on him. I think he lacks the mental skills required for consistent success at the position. I don't think coaching can fix this and I think he'll always be a frustrating player for whichever team is forced to rely on him. I see him as closer to Kitna/Carr/Collins than McNabb/Favre/McNair.

As for Edwards, he's more of an unknown, but I think he offers a better set of intangibles and mental skills. I think he is cut from the same cloth as Hasselbeck and Brees. I won't guarantee that kind of success for him, but I do think he has a much better chance of developing into a consistent winner than Losman does. I think the Bills made the right decision to make him their guy. Time will tell.

 

[FavreCo]

Edwards is a better all around QB. Loserman is FAR better at feeding the ball to Lee Evans. If Loserman is in there, start Evans with total confidence. If Edwards is in there, start Evans and hope for points.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Favre's QB ratings in his first three seasons were 85.3, 72.2, and 90.0. He had already turned the corner by his fourth year in the league.

You accuse me of writing off Losman too early, yet you use the phrase "And Losman doesn't have to wind up being anywhere near Favre-level to be better than Trent Edwards." It's odd that you're reluctant to pass judgment on Losman while being quick to pass judgment on Edwards considering that Edwards has been in the NFL for a much shorter amount of time. For all we know Edwards is the next Peyton Manning. Their rookie year stats are similar.

Peyton Manning

QB Rating - 71.2

Completion % - 56.7

Yards/Attempt - 6.5

TD:INT Ratio - .93:1

Trent Edwards

QB Rating - 70.4

Completion % - 56.1

Yards/Attempt - 6.1

TD:INT Ratio - .88:1

Like I said, you can find reasons to believe in Losman if that's the way your heart pulls you. I've already laid out my thoughts on him. I think he lacks the mental skills required for consistent success at the position. I don't think coaching can fix this and I think he'll always be a frustrating player for whichever team is forced to rely on him. I see him as closer to Kitna/Carr/Collins than McNabb/Favre/McNair.

As for Edwards, he's more of an unknown, but I think he offers a better set of intangibles and mental skills. I think he is cut from the same cloth as Hasselbeck and Brees. I won't guarantee that kind of success for him, but I do think he has a much better chance of developing into a consistent winner than Losman does. I think the Bills made the right decision to make him their guy. Time will tell.

I'm not passing any judgment on Edwards; I'm simply saying I don't think he'll wind up as good as Brett Favre, or even really that close. I don't think that's a knock on Edwards.As for Favre, you're using his third season. With Losman, you focused on his 800 attempts, which is why I looked at when Favre had passed that mark -- after two years.

I don't think Losman will end up like Favre, or McNair. He's probably going to be closer to Kitna or Collins. All I'm saying is that the jury is very much still out on Losman. I don't think he lacks the mental skills required for success, and I think he's a coachable player. If he lands in the right situation, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him succeed.

As for Edwards, he's obviously an unknown. The odds of him ending up as good as either Hasselbeck or Brees are a bit long, but it wouldn't really surprise me, either.

And I think we know a lot to say that Edwards won't be the next Peyton Manning. But that's not really a knock on Edwards, either.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Adjusted yards per attempt is simply passing yards per attempt, with a 45 yard penalty for INTs and a 10 yard bonus for TDs. It is an improvement on yards per attempt, and it is certainly an improvement on passer rating. AY/A is probably the best raw statistic to use to grade a QB, if you're only using one number.

Who came up with the -45 / 10 concept? It seems fair enough, but why those numbers? Many times when people look at the stats, they look to see if TDs > INT, or otherwise. a 2:1 ratio seems pretty strong IMO, 4.5:1 seems excessive and seems to overly benefit those who "play it safe" while dragging down those QBs who have to play make-up ball more often.

A 2:1 ratio is pretty strong. The league average is well below that.-45/10 is not the same as 4.5:1.

The idea comes from the hidden game of football, a book which derived those numbers. Here's something Doug Drinen wrote a bit back explaining the 10 yards bonus for TDs; the same logic can be used to explain the 45 yard penalty.

It’s clear that there is no static TD-to-yard translation that is going to be right for all situations. Some touchdowns are worth more than others, and some yards are worth more than others. We’re trying to hit the average here.

Now, the key to understanding this is to realize that we’re not saying that a TD is equivalent to ten yards. We’re saying that the marginal value of a TD, compared to a non-TD pass of the same yardage in the same situation, is about the same as the marginal value of ten generic yards. Here is a hypothetical situation, which has been sterilized to remove some of the issues in the disclaimer mentioned above.

It’s the first game of the season, the first drive of the game. Your team is on offense. You and your opponent are evenly matched. You have first-and-ten at your own 30 yard line. Which would you rather see on the next play?

* A 69-yard pass that puts you at 1st-and-goal at the one,

* A 70-yard TD pass, followed by a 15-yard excessive celebration penalty (so you’ll kick off from the 15 instead of the 30)?

If you have to think about it — if it’s not immediately clear — then you must think that the marginal value of the TD, compared to a same-yardage pass that is not a TD, is worth approximately 15 yards. Try this experiment next weekend: take every TD pass you see and ask yourself, “if I were coaching the offensive team, and I could trade that TD for the ball at the one and 10 yards of field position on my opponent’s next possession, would I do it?” Better yet, write down how many yards of field position you would trade to erase that TD and put the ball at the one instead. Average those numbers.

I don’t know if ten is exactly the right answer, but it feels about right.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Only one season as a full time starter, in which he showed promise, is not to me, "plenty of chances." He almost got the team to the playoffs the only year he was the FT starter. He passed for over 3,000 yards, 62.5% completion, 19TDs, 14INTs, 84.9 rating. Great? No, but pretty good for first time starting. Mind you Losman also had a different OC his first three years.

IMO, he has all the makings to be a better QB than Edwards, he just needs some better coaching, and patience.

He's 27, he's been in the league for 4 years, and he's still painfully mediocre. The people who have watched his games over the years have already laid out the reasons why he isn't a quality QB. He doesn't have the "it" factor at the position. He has deficient instincts and sub par mental skills. Edwards is far superior to him in those categories, which is why he'll be the starter on opening day. Losman is just another in a long line of Boller, Leftwich, Harrington, Ramsey, and Carr. People will make excuses for him, but in the end, he just isn't a very good NFL quarterback.

This is just a conclusion, not an argument. You might be right, but it's not convincing at all to say that some player doesn't have the "it" factor.

As far as I know, there's no piss test for intangibles. Obviously I can't prove that he doesn't have the "it" factor. However, I think the stats speak for themselves. Below is a list of current NFL QB's who have started in the league for at least three seasons (not necessarily consecutive seasons, just three total seasons or more as a starter). Under each player name you'll see his QB rating for his first three years in the league including and after his first season as a starter. You will also see his average QB rating for those three years and his career QB rating. Finally, I have shown the difference between his three year average and his career rating.Tom Brady

2001 - 86.5

2002 - 85.7

2003 - 85.9

Average: 86.0

Career: 92.9

Difference: +6.9

Mark Brunell

1995 - 82.6

1996 - 84.0

1997 - 91.2

Average: 85.9

Career: 84.2

Difference: -1.7

Drew Brees

2002 - 76.9

2003 - 67.5

2004 - 104.8

Average: 83.1

Career: 87.9

Difference: +3.8

Marc Bulger

2002 - 101.5

2003 - 81.4

2004 - 93.7

Average: 92.2

Career: 88.1

Difference: -4.1

David Carr

2002 - 62.8

2003 - 69.5

2004 - 83.5

Average: 71.9

Career: 74.4

Difference: +2.5

Kerry Collins

1995 - 61.9

1996 - 79.4

1997 - 55.7

Average: 65.7

Career: 73.3

Difference: +7.6

Jake Delhomme

2003 - 80.6

2004 - 87.3

2005 - 88.1

Average: 85.3

Career: 85.2

Difference: -0.1

Jeff Garcia

1999 - 77.9

2000 - 97.6

2001 - 94.8

Average: 90.1

Career: 87.2

Difference: -2.9

Brian Griese

1999 - 75.6

2000 - 102.9

2001 - 78.5

Average: 85.7

Career: 83.6

Difference: -2.1

Joey Harrington

2002 - 59.9

2003 - 63.9

2004 - 77.5

Average: 67.1

Career: 69.4

Difference: +2.3

Matt Hasselbeck

2001 - 70.9

2002 - 87.8

2003 - 88.8

Average: 82.5

Career: 86.2

Difference: +3.7

Jon Kitna

1999 - 77.7

2000 - 75.6

2001 - 61.1

Average: 71.5

Career: 76.8

Difference: +5.3

Byron Leftwich

2003 - 73.0

2004 - 82.2

2005 - 89.3

Average: 81.5

Career: 79.7

Difference: -1.8

Eli Manning

2004 - 55.4

2005 - 75.9

2006 - 77.0

Average: 69.4

Career: 73.4

Difference: +4.0

Peyton Manning

1998 - 71.2

1999 - 90.7

2000 - 94.7

Average: 85.5

Career: 94.7

Difference: +9.2

Donovan McNabb

1999 - 60.1

2000 - 77.8

2001 - 84.3

Average: 74.1

Career: 85.8

Difference: +11.7

Carson Palmer

2004 - 77.3

2005 - 101.1

2006 - 93.9

Average: 90.8

Career: 90.1

Difference: -0.7

Chad Pennington

2002 - 104.2

2003 - 82.9

2004 - 91.0

Average: 92.7

Career: 88.9

Difference: -3.8

Ben Roethlisberger

2004 - 98.1

2005 - 98.6

2006 - 75.4

Average: 90.7

Career: 92.5

Difference: +1.8

Kurt Warner

1999 - 109.2

2000 - 98.3

2001 - 101.4

Average: 103.0

Career: 93.2

Difference: -9.8

Range of Differences: -9.8 to +11.7

What this means is that the most any of these QB's improved his career QB rating after his first three seasons as a starter was McNabb's +11.7. The most any of these guys regressed was Warner's -9.8 drop. So based on recent history, you wouldn't expect a QB to improve his career rating by more than 11.7 after his first three seasons as a starter and you wouldn't expect him to regress by more than 9.8.

Average Difference: +1.59

What his means is that the average QB on this list improved his career QB rating by 1.59 after his first three years as a starter. So this suggests that on average, a QB will make slight improvement after his first three years.

With this information in mind, let's see how Losman stacks up:

JP Losman

2005 - 64.9

2006 - 84.9

2007 - 76.9

Average: 75.6

If Losman improves the average amount, he will eventually push his career QB rating up to 77.2. If his improvements equals that of Donovan McNabb, the most improved player on my list after his first three years, Losman will eventually push his career QB rating to 87.3. However, McNabb is the only player on my list to improve by double digits and one of only two players to improve by more than 8 points. To me this suggests that 82-83 would be a realistic best case scenario for Losman.

Using career QB rating to gauge a QB's improvement is an imperfect method since the career QB rating is sagged down by the developmental earlier years. The best seasons by guys like Brady and McNabb far exceed their average rating during their first three years. So if you want to look at it that way, you could argue that Losman is capable of performing much better than he has thus far. However, I'm skeptical of his ability to do so for reasons which I've laid out below.

Most of the guys we think of today as "solid" QB's were substantially better than Losman during their first three years of heavy PT:

Bulger - 92.2

Palmer - 90.8

Roethlisberger - 90.7

Garcia - 90.1

Brady - 86.0

Brunell - 85.9

Peyton - 85.5

Delhomme - 85.3

Brees - 83.1

Hasselbeck - 82.5

McNabb is really the only current elite NFL QB to emerge from the 65-80 range. Most of the other guys in there are retreads, busts, and journeymen like Kerry Collins, David Carr, and Jon Kitna. Some people might point to Eli Manning as another example of QB overcoming a slow start, but his career numbers are quite bad despite his recent Super Bowl win. He isn't yet a good QB even if he did play well for a stretch of a few critical games.

All in all, this data confirms what I've believed for a long time: what you see is usually what you get with a QB. The first three years of heavy playing time generally offer a pretty good indication of the player he'll become. So while we can't rule out Losman making the kind of improvements McNabb and Manning made, I don't think the numbers offer any cause for optimism. I suspect his career will far somewhere in the range between David Carr and Jon Kitna.

This is a great and thoughtful post. However, I think it is shaded it a bit by the contemporary moment. About 7 or 8 years ago, many people were pointing to the late blooming success of players like Steve McNair, Rich Gannon, Steve Young, Steve Beurline, Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe (redux), John Elway, and late comers like Kurt Warner and Jeff Garcia and pointed out that many QB's don't figure the game out until they are close to 30. Now, we have swung the other way.It is tricky. Crappy guys start out crappy and stay crappy. However, a fair amount of guys start off crappy and develop into decent players.

 

[EBF]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Only one season as a full time starter, in which he showed promise, is not to me, "plenty of chances." He almost got the team to the playoffs the only year he was the FT starter. He passed for over 3,000 yards, 62.5% completion, 19TDs, 14INTs, 84.9 rating. Great? No, but pretty good for first time starting. Mind you Losman also had a different OC his first three years.

IMO, he has all the makings to be a better QB than Edwards, he just needs some better coaching, and patience.

He's 27, he's been in the league for 4 years, and he's still painfully mediocre. The people who have watched his games over the years have already laid out the reasons why he isn't a quality QB. He doesn't have the "it" factor at the position. He has deficient instincts and sub par mental skills. Edwards is far superior to him in those categories, which is why he'll be the starter on opening day. Losman is just another in a long line of Boller, Leftwich, Harrington, Ramsey, and Carr. People will make excuses for him, but in the end, he just isn't a very good NFL quarterback.

This is just a conclusion, not an argument. You might be right, but it's not convincing at all to say that some player doesn't have the "it" factor.

As far as I know, there's no piss test for intangibles. Obviously I can't prove that he doesn't have the "it" factor. However, I think the stats speak for themselves. Below is a list of current NFL QB's who have started in the league for at least three seasons (not necessarily consecutive seasons, just three total seasons or more as a starter). Under each player name you'll see his QB rating for his first three years in the league including and after his first season as a starter. You will also see his average QB rating for those three years and his career QB rating. Finally, I have shown the difference between his three year average and his career rating.Tom Brady

2001 - 86.5

2002 - 85.7

2003 - 85.9

Average: 86.0

Career: 92.9

Difference: +6.9

Mark Brunell

1995 - 82.6

1996 - 84.0

1997 - 91.2

Average: 85.9

Career: 84.2

Difference: -1.7

Drew Brees

2002 - 76.9

2003 - 67.5

2004 - 104.8

Average: 83.1

Career: 87.9

Difference: +3.8

Marc Bulger

2002 - 101.5

2003 - 81.4

2004 - 93.7

Average: 92.2

Career: 88.1

Difference: -4.1

David Carr

2002 - 62.8

2003 - 69.5

2004 - 83.5

Average: 71.9

Career: 74.4

Difference: +2.5

Kerry Collins

1995 - 61.9

1996 - 79.4

1997 - 55.7

Average: 65.7

Career: 73.3

Difference: +7.6

Jake Delhomme

2003 - 80.6

2004 - 87.3

2005 - 88.1

Average: 85.3

Career: 85.2

Difference: -0.1

Jeff Garcia

1999 - 77.9

2000 - 97.6

2001 - 94.8

Average: 90.1

Career: 87.2

Difference: -2.9

Brian Griese

1999 - 75.6

2000 - 102.9

2001 - 78.5

Average: 85.7

Career: 83.6

Difference: -2.1

Joey Harrington

2002 - 59.9

2003 - 63.9

2004 - 77.5

Average: 67.1

Career: 69.4

Difference: +2.3

Matt Hasselbeck

2001 - 70.9

2002 - 87.8

2003 - 88.8

Average: 82.5

Career: 86.2

Difference: +3.7

Jon Kitna

1999 - 77.7

2000 - 75.6

2001 - 61.1

Average: 71.5

Career: 76.8

Difference: +5.3

Byron Leftwich

2003 - 73.0

2004 - 82.2

2005 - 89.3

Average: 81.5

Career: 79.7

Difference: -1.8

Eli Manning

2004 - 55.4

2005 - 75.9

2006 - 77.0

Average: 69.4

Career: 73.4

Difference: +4.0

Peyton Manning

1998 - 71.2

1999 - 90.7

2000 - 94.7

Average: 85.5

Career: 94.7

Difference: +9.2

Donovan McNabb

1999 - 60.1

2000 - 77.8

2001 - 84.3

Average: 74.1

Career: 85.8

Difference: +11.7

Carson Palmer

2004 - 77.3

2005 - 101.1

2006 - 93.9

Average: 90.8

Career: 90.1

Difference: -0.7

Chad Pennington

2002 - 104.2

2003 - 82.9

2004 - 91.0

Average: 92.7

Career: 88.9

Difference: -3.8

Ben Roethlisberger

2004 - 98.1

2005 - 98.6

2006 - 75.4

Average: 90.7

Career: 92.5

Difference: +1.8

Kurt Warner

1999 - 109.2

2000 - 98.3

2001 - 101.4

Average: 103.0

Career: 93.2

Difference: -9.8

Range of Differences: -9.8 to +11.7

What this means is that the most any of these QB's improved his career QB rating after his first three seasons as a starter was McNabb's +11.7. The most any of these guys regressed was Warner's -9.8 drop. So based on recent history, you wouldn't expect a QB to improve his career rating by more than 11.7 after his first three seasons as a starter and you wouldn't expect him to regress by more than 9.8.

Average Difference: +1.59

What his means is that the average QB on this list improved his career QB rating by 1.59 after his first three years as a starter. So this suggests that on average, a QB will make slight improvement after his first three years.

With this information in mind, let's see how Losman stacks up:

JP Losman

2005 - 64.9

2006 - 84.9

2007 - 76.9

Average: 75.6

If Losman improves the average amount, he will eventually push his career QB rating up to 77.2. If his improvements equals that of Donovan McNabb, the most improved player on my list after his first three years, Losman will eventually push his career QB rating to 87.3. However, McNabb is the only player on my list to improve by double digits and one of only two players to improve by more than 8 points. To me this suggests that 82-83 would be a realistic best case scenario for Losman.

Using career QB rating to gauge a QB's improvement is an imperfect method since the career QB rating is sagged down by the developmental earlier years. The best seasons by guys like Brady and McNabb far exceed their average rating during their first three years. So if you want to look at it that way, you could argue that Losman is capable of performing much better than he has thus far. However, I'm skeptical of his ability to do so for reasons which I've laid out below.

Most of the guys we think of today as "solid" QB's were substantially better than Losman during their first three years of heavy PT:

Bulger - 92.2

Palmer - 90.8

Roethlisberger - 90.7

Garcia - 90.1

Brady - 86.0

Brunell - 85.9

Peyton - 85.5

Delhomme - 85.3

Brees - 83.1

Hasselbeck - 82.5

McNabb is really the only current elite NFL QB to emerge from the 65-80 range. Most of the other guys in there are retreads, busts, and journeymen like Kerry Collins, David Carr, and Jon Kitna. Some people might point to Eli Manning as another example of QB overcoming a slow start, but his career numbers are quite bad despite his recent Super Bowl win. He isn't yet a good QB even if he did play well for a stretch of a few critical games.

All in all, this data confirms what I've believed for a long time: what you see is usually what you get with a QB. The first three years of heavy playing time generally offer a pretty good indication of the player he'll become. So while we can't rule out Losman making the kind of improvements McNabb and Manning made, I don't think the numbers offer any cause for optimism. I suspect his career will far somewhere in the range between David Carr and Jon Kitna.

This is a great and thoughtful post. However, I think it is shaded it a bit by the contemporary moment. About 7 or 8 years ago, many people were pointing to the late blooming success of players like Steve McNair, Rich Gannon, Steve Young, Steve Beurline, Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe (redux), John Elway, and late comers like Kurt Warner and Jeff Garcia and pointed out that many QB's don't figure the game out until they are close to 30. Now, we have swung the other way.It is tricky. Crappy guys start out crappy and stay crappy. However, a fair amount of guys start off crappy and develop into decent players.

Some of those examples are misleading. Warner had a 109 QB rating in his first NFL season. Garcia had a QB rating of 97.6 in his second season. These guys were pretty good as soon as they stepped on the field. The problem is that they never got an opportunity until they were already pretty old. I don't have time right now to go back and look at guys like Gannon, Young, and Testaverde, but I suspect the story might be similar for a few of those guys.

Anyhow, I don't think anyone can definitively say Losman will always suck, but he hasn't been special so far. You can argue that he'll get better, but you could also argue the same thing about David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and any number of other retreads and washouts. Is it likely that Losman will emerge as a quality starter in the future? I would say no, even if there have been some cases of similar players accomplishing that feat.

The debate of Losman vs. Edwards is sort of the like the debate between someone like Jerry Porter vs. Sidney Rice in a dynasty league. You could probably argue that Rice will never be as good as Porter, but you already have a pretty good idea that Porter will never be a difference maker. So if you were looking for a difference maker, you would take Rice even though he might not be any better than Porter when the dust settles.

 

[Chase Stuart]

You can argue that he'll get better, but you could also argue the same thing about David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and any number of other retreads and washouts.

Losman isn't a retread.David Carr has 2206 attempts. Joey Harrington has 2538 attempts. Ramsey hasn't played that much, but he's been on three teams the last three years, and hasn't been a real factor at all since 2004.Losman isn't on a level even close to those guys. Has the book been written on Philip Rivers? Or Matt Schaub? Of course not. They were drafted in the same class, and also haven't really played that much. Losman has two full years of sucktitude or inactivity before he's David Carr or Patrick Ramsey.

 

[Chaos Commish]

You can argue that he'll get better, but you could also argue the same thing about David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and any number of other retreads and washouts.

Losman isn't a retread.David Carr has 2206 attempts. Joey Harrington has 2538 attempts. Ramsey hasn't played that much, but he's been on three teams the last three years, and hasn't been a real factor at all since 2004.Losman isn't on a level even close to those guys. Has the book been written on Philip Rivers? Or Matt Schaub? Of course not. They were drafted in the same class, and also haven't really played that much. Losman has two full years of sucktitude or inactivity before he's David Carr or Patrick Ramsey.

Boller has 1300 attempts. Is that a better example? How do you project JP for the future, Chase?

 

[Chase Stuart]

You can argue that he'll get better, but you could also argue the same thing about David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and any number of other retreads and washouts.

Losman isn't a retread.David Carr has 2206 attempts. Joey Harrington has 2538 attempts. Ramsey hasn't played that much, but he's been on three teams the last three years, and hasn't been a real factor at all since 2004.Losman isn't on a level even close to those guys. Has the book been written on Philip Rivers? Or Matt Schaub? Of course not. They were drafted in the same class, and also haven't really played that much. Losman has two full years of sucktitude or inactivity before he's David Carr or Patrick Ramsey.

Boller has 1300 attempts. Is that a better example? How do you project JP for the future, Chase?

Boller's got more attempts, but he's also been noticeably worse than Losman.I haven't given much thought to JP's future prospects, but I don't think they're clear. Just about any result wouldn't shock me, ranging from him making a Pro Bowl in 2010 to him being out of the league in 2010. He's in a pretty big group of players that could go either way.

 

[EBF]

You can argue that he'll get better, but you could also argue the same thing about David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and any number of other retreads and washouts.

Losman isn't a retread.David Carr has 2206 attempts. Joey Harrington has 2538 attempts. Ramsey hasn't played that much, but he's been on three teams the last three years, and hasn't been a real factor at all since 2004.

Losman isn't on a level even close to those guys. Has the book been written on Philip Rivers? Or Matt Schaub? Of course not. They were drafted in the same class, and also haven't really played that much. Losman has two full years of sucktitude or inactivity before he's David Carr or Patrick Ramsey.

Okay, I was mistaken. Losman isn't like David Carr or Joey Harrington. He's like a young David Carr or Joey Harrington. I understand your point though. It's early in his career and at this point his stats resemble a young McNabb/Favre/McNair as well as a young Kitna/Collins/Carr, so theoretically he could go either way.

I still say he's basically junk and will pretty much always be junk. I can see him becoming a decent stop-gap guy like Collins or Kitna, but I think the only way he'll ever get on the field in a Pro Bowl is with the help of an airplane and a parachute. IMO the idea of him becoming Favre or McNabb is a complete impossibility despite the fact that he hasn't quite sucked for long enough to officially be considered sucky.

 

[TheOriginalDoubledown]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Would it be fair to compare him to an 8 yr QB? Based on the bold statement would you say the same about an 8 year veteran with these stats:comp patt comp% PaY YPA PTD INT QBR

221 378 58.5 2392 6.33 11 15 70.3

These are Bulgers numbers from last year. Not saying he didn't have problems with injurys, but realistically we can dig up all kinds of excuses for poor play by the Qb's in BUF as well. In fact you could almost make the case that Bulger and Losman had very similar years last year except that Bulger didn't lose his starting job to the rookie once the seaon was in the tank. Well and the fact that Losman played better than Bulger according to the stats anyways.

When Losman has three consecutive years with a QB rating over 90, I'll give him the same benefit of the doubt that I give Marc Bulger. Bulger had a 101.5 QB rating in his first season of heavy playing time. Losman's was below 70. Yes, you can think of many excuses to explain Losman's poor play, but in this situation I'll cite the definition of Occam's razor that someone put forth on these boards the other day: the simplest solution is the best. When a guy has thrown 800 passes in the NFL and never looked better than mediocre, the simple solution is that he isn't a very good QB.

Personally, I think there's a slight chance that Losman could progress and develop into a halfway serviceable starter like Kerry Collins or Jon Kitna, but I think the odds of him becoming a true franchise QB are quite small.

I guess I'm just curious if the reason people are so critical of Losman is because he has Edwards (whom the coaches seem to like better) on the same team or if it's really just because saying he sucks is like saying the sky is blue.

People are critical of Losman because he hasn't played well. Notice you don't see any hardcore Bills fans rushing in to defend him. The only people still high on him are guys who own him in dynasty leagues and/or whose exposure to him is limited to a handful of games in the NFL and college. The people who have watched him play on a regular basis understand why he's planted firmly on the bench.

I think stats are easy to manipulate in order to get the picture to look like the image you already have in mind. You can take a sample of Qb's at 800 Pass Att and get one picture, switch it up to 20 starts and you get another one. Change it again to years in the league and it changes once again. Thats why I admitted that stats can be misleading in the initial post.Losman led in nearly every statistical category versus Edwards last year. I was told this wasn't a fair comparison considering one was a rookie and one was a 4 yr vet. I agree.

When I showed Bulger's stats from last year, and the situation for Bulger and Losman was rather similar, Losman had the better stats. The reply was that Bulger had successive yrs of great stats in the past (as though that made him a better QB). Perhaps, however the situation in which Bulger had those great yrs is nothing like the situation he had last year. It was much closer to the situation Losman and Edwards had to face last year. When Bulger was putting up all those great stats:

1) STL had 2 likely HOF wr's, and serviceable WR3 and Wr4

vrs: Buf has no HOF wr's and lets face it, their WR2 is no better than the WR4 in STL at that time.

2) STL had Mike Martz- we know what he does for QB's

vrs BUF had **** Jauron- need I say more?

3) STL had a pretty decent O line

vrs BUf has a terrible O line

4) STL had MArshall faulk and Steven Jackson

vrs Buf has Marshawn Lynch, he's going to be good, but he's no faulk or jackson yet

Now that the STL situation had regressed to closer to what buffalo has to work with....Bulger is looking a lot like Losman..maybe worse according to the stats; all things being as equal as they've ever been. Is this significant? I guess it depends on who you are asking.

I think EBF said it best when he essentially said (I'll paraphrase loosely)if you like Losman, you will find ways to make him shine in your mind and if you don't, saying Losman sucks is like saying the sky is blue.

As I mentioned, I really haven't been able to see much of Edwards or Losman play last year, but i did see Losman play in 2006 and he was exciting to watch. Not having either one in my fantasy leagues, nor Evans for that matter prevents me from leaning too closely on hope. I agree the coaches must see something in Edwards to make them want to give him a chance, but then again I don't have too much faith in ****'s Optometrist's diagnosis and prescription when it comes to QB evaluation.

Edwards only got the start last year after Losman got hurt, and then again after the season was in the tank for the Bills. Losman is playing in the last year of his rookie contract and Buffalo would probably like to see if they have enough in the bank if they have to let Losman go. All speculation of course. I know less than most, but just enough to have an opinion. I really enjoy the discussion though, so thanks to everyone who made it fun.

FWIW: I do have Bulger in my Dynasty league, although he's my backup to Carson Palmer (and previously Favre). His present situation makes him too streaky to start, but he's a fantastic bye week fill in due to the ability to have a monster game.

 

[Chase Stuart]

You can argue that he'll get better, but you could also argue the same thing about David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and any number of other retreads and washouts.

Losman isn't a retread.David Carr has 2206 attempts. Joey Harrington has 2538 attempts. Ramsey hasn't played that much, but he's been on three teams the last three years, and hasn't been a real factor at all since 2004.

Losman isn't on a level even close to those guys. Has the book been written on Philip Rivers? Or Matt Schaub? Of course not. They were drafted in the same class, and also haven't really played that much. Losman has two full years of sucktitude or inactivity before he's David Carr or Patrick Ramsey.

Okay, I was mistaken. Losman isn't like David Carr or Joey Harrington. He's like a young David Carr or Joey Harrington. I understand your point though. It's early in his career and at this point his stats resemble a young McNabb/Favre/McNair as well as a young Kitna/Collins/Carr, so theoretically he could go either way.

I still say he's basically junk and will pretty much always be junk. I can see him becoming a decent stop-gap guy like Collins or Kitna, but I think the only way he'll ever get on the field in a Pro Bowl is with the help of an airplane and a parachute. IMO the idea of him becoming Favre or McNabb is a complete impossibility despite the fact that he hasn't quite sucked for long enough to officially be considered sucky.

I can get on board with this.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Hardcore Bills fan here. Have seen every snap Losman has taken in the preseason and the regular season.You are right on as usual EBF.

I think I've seen every single snap that Losman has taken as a pro, and the guy just doesn't get it. Losman has lots of physical tools, and he seems like a nice guy who I'd like to see succeed in Buffalo, but he's just not that good. He consistently makes mental errors, and at this point in his career I don't see how that's supposed to change. I'm not married to Trent Edwards and while I'm hopeful, I'll admit that our 2010 starter may not be on our roster yet, but I'm fairly sure that JP isn't it.

 

[switz]

As far as I know, there's no piss test for intangibles. Obviously I can't prove that he doesn't have the "it" factor. However, I think the stats speak for themselves. Below is a list of current NFL QB's who have started in the league for at least three seasons (not necessarily consecutive seasons, just three total seasons or more as a starter). Under each player name you'll see his QB rating for his first three years in the league including and after his first season as a starter.

JP Losman

2005 - 64.9

2006 - 84.9 - only year as FT starter

2007 - 76.9

Average: 75.6

Most of the guys we think of today as "solid" QB's were substantially better than Losman during their first three years of heavy PT:

Bulger - 92.2

Palmer - 90.8

Roethlisberger - 90.7

Garcia - 90.1

Brady - 86.0

Brunell - 85.9

Peyton - 85.5

Delhomme - 85.3

Brees - 83.1

Hasselbeck - 82.5

I dunno - in his only year as FT starter he looks might similar to some darn good QBs on that list.

 

[EBF]

As far as I know, there's no piss test for intangibles. Obviously I can't prove that he doesn't have the "it" factor. However, I think the stats speak for themselves. Below is a list of current NFL QB's who have started in the league for at least three seasons (not necessarily consecutive seasons, just three total seasons or more as a starter). Under each player name you'll see his QB rating for his first three years in the league including and after his first season as a starter.

JP Losman

2005 - 64.9

2006 - 84.9 - only year as FT starter

2007 - 76.9

Average: 75.6

Most of the guys we think of today as "solid" QB's were substantially better than Losman during their first three years of heavy PT:

Bulger - 92.2

Palmer - 90.8

Roethlisberger - 90.7

Garcia - 90.1

Brady - 86.0

Brunell - 85.9

Peyton - 85.5

Delhomme - 85.3

Brees - 83.1

Hasselbeck - 82.5

I dunno - in his only year as FT starter he looks might similar to some darn good QBs on that list.

And in the next year he sucked and got benched.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

It's not really fair to compare the performance of a first year QB to that of a fourth year QB given the colossal learning curve at the position. Losman had a QB rating of 76.9 with more INT's than TD's and a yards per attempt average of 6.9. That's terrible for a fourth year passer. He's had plenty of chances over the past three years and the best he's been able to muster was mediocrity. They know they can't win with him, so they're giving the young guy a shot.

Only one season as a full time starter, in which he showed promise, is not to me, "plenty of chances." He almost got the team to the playoffs the only year he was the FT starter. He passed for over 3,000 yards, 62.5% completion, 19TDs, 14INTs, 84.9 rating. Great? No, but pretty good for first time starting. Mind you Losman also had a different OC his first three years.

IMO, he has all the makings to be a better QB than Edwards, he just needs some better coaching, and patience.

He's 27, he's been in the league for 4 years, and he's still painfully mediocre. The people who have watched his games over the years have already laid out the reasons why he isn't a quality QB. He doesn't have the "it" factor at the position. He has deficient instincts and sub par mental skills. Edwards is far superior to him in those categories, which is why he'll be the starter on opening day. Losman is just another in a long line of Boller, Leftwich, Harrington, Ramsey, and Carr. People will make excuses for him, but in the end, he just isn't a very good NFL quarterback.

This is just a conclusion, not an argument. You might be right, but it's not convincing at all to say that some player doesn't have the "it" factor.

As far as I know, there's no piss test for intangibles. Obviously I can't prove that he doesn't have the "it" factor. However, I think the stats speak for themselves. Below is a list of current NFL QB's who have started in the league for at least three seasons (not necessarily consecutive seasons, just three total seasons or more as a starter). Under each player name you'll see his QB rating for his first three years in the league including and after his first season as a starter. You will also see his average QB rating for those three years and his career QB rating. Finally, I have shown the difference between his three year average and his career rating.Tom Brady

2001 - 86.5

2002 - 85.7

2003 - 85.9

Average: 86.0

Career: 92.9

Difference: +6.9

Mark Brunell

1995 - 82.6

1996 - 84.0

1997 - 91.2

Average: 85.9

Career: 84.2

Difference: -1.7

Drew Brees

2002 - 76.9

2003 - 67.5

2004 - 104.8

Average: 83.1

Career: 87.9

Difference: +3.8

Marc Bulger

2002 - 101.5

2003 - 81.4

2004 - 93.7

Average: 92.2

Career: 88.1

Difference: -4.1

David Carr

2002 - 62.8

2003 - 69.5

2004 - 83.5

Average: 71.9

Career: 74.4

Difference: +2.5

Kerry Collins

1995 - 61.9

1996 - 79.4

1997 - 55.7

Average: 65.7

Career: 73.3

Difference: +7.6

Jake Delhomme

2003 - 80.6

2004 - 87.3

2005 - 88.1

Average: 85.3

Career: 85.2

Difference: -0.1

Jeff Garcia

1999 - 77.9

2000 - 97.6

2001 - 94.8

Average: 90.1

Career: 87.2

Difference: -2.9

Brian Griese

1999 - 75.6

2000 - 102.9

2001 - 78.5

Average: 85.7

Career: 83.6

Difference: -2.1

Joey Harrington

2002 - 59.9

2003 - 63.9

2004 - 77.5

Average: 67.1

Career: 69.4

Difference: +2.3

Matt Hasselbeck

2001 - 70.9

2002 - 87.8

2003 - 88.8

Average: 82.5

Career: 86.2

Difference: +3.7

Jon Kitna

1999 - 77.7

2000 - 75.6

2001 - 61.1

Average: 71.5

Career: 76.8

Difference: +5.3

Byron Leftwich

2003 - 73.0

2004 - 82.2

2005 - 89.3

Average: 81.5

Career: 79.7

Difference: -1.8

Eli Manning

2004 - 55.4

2005 - 75.9

2006 - 77.0

Average: 69.4

Career: 73.4

Difference: +4.0

Peyton Manning

1998 - 71.2

1999 - 90.7

2000 - 94.7

Average: 85.5

Career: 94.7

Difference: +9.2

Donovan McNabb

1999 - 60.1

2000 - 77.8

2001 - 84.3

Average: 74.1

Career: 85.8

Difference: +11.7

Carson Palmer

2004 - 77.3

2005 - 101.1

2006 - 93.9

Average: 90.8

Career: 90.1

Difference: -0.7

Chad Pennington

2002 - 104.2

2003 - 82.9

2004 - 91.0

Average: 92.7

Career: 88.9

Difference: -3.8

Ben Roethlisberger

2004 - 98.1

2005 - 98.6

2006 - 75.4

Average: 90.7

Career: 92.5

Difference: +1.8

Kurt Warner

1999 - 109.2

2000 - 98.3

2001 - 101.4

Average: 103.0

Career: 93.2

Difference: -9.8

Range of Differences: -9.8 to +11.7

What this means is that the most any of these QB's improved his career QB rating after his first three seasons as a starter was McNabb's +11.7. The most any of these guys regressed was Warner's -9.8 drop. So based on recent history, you wouldn't expect a QB to improve his career rating by more than 11.7 after his first three seasons as a starter and you wouldn't expect him to regress by more than 9.8.

Average Difference: +1.59

What his means is that the average QB on this list improved his career QB rating by 1.59 after his first three years as a starter. So this suggests that on average, a QB will make slight improvement after his first three years.

With this information in mind, let's see how Losman stacks up:

JP Losman

2005 - 64.9

2006 - 84.9

2007 - 76.9

Average: 75.6

If Losman improves the average amount, he will eventually push his career QB rating up to 77.2. If his improvements equals that of Donovan McNabb, the most improved player on my list after his first three years, Losman will eventually push his career QB rating to 87.3. However, McNabb is the only player on my list to improve by double digits and one of only two players to improve by more than 8 points. To me this suggests that 82-83 would be a realistic best case scenario for Losman.

Using career QB rating to gauge a QB's improvement is an imperfect method since the career QB rating is sagged down by the developmental earlier years. The best seasons by guys like Brady and McNabb far exceed their average rating during their first three years. So if you want to look at it that way, you could argue that Losman is capable of performing much better than he has thus far. However, I'm skeptical of his ability to do so for reasons which I've laid out below.

Most of the guys we think of today as "solid" QB's were substantially better than Losman during their first three years of heavy PT:

Bulger - 92.2

Palmer - 90.8

Roethlisberger - 90.7

Garcia - 90.1

Brady - 86.0

Brunell - 85.9

Peyton - 85.5

Delhomme - 85.3

Brees - 83.1

Hasselbeck - 82.5

McNabb is really the only current elite NFL QB to emerge from the 65-80 range. Most of the other guys in there are retreads, busts, and journeymen like Kerry Collins, David Carr, and Jon Kitna. Some people might point to Eli Manning as another example of QB overcoming a slow start, but his career numbers are quite bad despite his recent Super Bowl win. He isn't yet a good QB even if he did play well for a stretch of a few critical games.

All in all, this data confirms what I've believed for a long time: what you see is usually what you get with a QB. The first three years of heavy playing time generally offer a pretty good indication of the player he'll become. So while we can't rule out Losman making the kind of improvements McNabb and Manning made, I don't think the numbers offer any cause for optimism. I suspect his career will far somewhere in the range between David Carr and Jon Kitna.

This is a great and thoughtful post. However, I think it is shaded it a bit by the contemporary moment. About 7 or 8 years ago, many people were pointing to the late blooming success of players like Steve McNair, Rich Gannon, Steve Young, Steve Beurline, Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe (redux), John Elway, and late comers like Kurt Warner and Jeff Garcia and pointed out that many QB's don't figure the game out until they are close to 30. Now, we have swung the other way.It is tricky. Crappy guys start out crappy and stay crappy. However, a fair amount of guys start off crappy and develop into decent players.

Some of those examples are misleading. Warner had a 109 QB rating in his first NFL season. Garcia had a QB rating of 97.6 in his second season. These guys were pretty good as soon as they stepped on the field. The problem is that they never got an opportunity until they were already pretty old. I don't have time right now to go back and look at guys like Gannon, Young, and Testaverde, but I suspect the story might be similar for a few of those guys.

Anyhow, I don't think anyone can definitively say Losman will always suck, but he hasn't been special so far. You can argue that he'll get better, but you could also argue the same thing about David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and any number of other retreads and washouts. Is it likely that Losman will emerge as a quality starter in the future? I would say no, even if there have been some cases of similar players accomplishing that feat.

The debate of Losman vs. Edwards is sort of the like the debate between someone like Jerry Porter vs. Sidney Rice in a dynasty league. You could probably argue that Rice will never be as good as Porter, but you already have a pretty good idea that Porter will never be a difference maker. So if you were looking for a difference maker, you would take Rice even though he might not be any better than Porter when the dust settles.

EBF, sometimes you get prickly about anyone disagreeing with you. Nothing was intentionally misleading. Warner was cut from Packers camp in 2004. He had to work on his craft elsewhere. After working on it at professionsal level (not NFL but not college), he was ready to make the next step. Same thing for Garcia. Garcia couldn't get a sniff of the NFL. He worked in the CFL. I am not a big fan of passer rating, and while I think you averaged things incorrectly (you just averaged the years, as opposed to creating a total based from the totals stats of three years) I will use your system here to compare apples to apples.

Gannon

Omitting 87-89 where he had no starts

Year Rating

1990 68.9

1991 81.5

1992 72.9

Average 74.4

Career 84.7

4 Pro Bowls, 1 MVP

Testaverde

Year Rating

1987 60.2

1988 48.8

1989 68.9

Average 59.3

Career 75.0

Steve Young

Steve Young is tricky, because in year 3, he only had 69 attempts- and then looked mediocre again in year 4. I will include 3 and 4 year splits for him

Year Rating

1985 56.9

1986 65.5

1987 120.8

Average 81.06

1988 72.2

4 year average 78.8

Career 96.8

For the record, I agree with your assessment of Losman, and think he is lousy and will continue to be between lousy and mediocre. I think the fact that Edwards got the job that quickly speaks volumes about the Bill's opinion of him. I think you have great thoughts and research material well. However, I think sometimes in your search of trends you overly focus on very recent history, which may or may not provide a large enough sample size.