In 2006, I took a stab at ranking every quarterback in NFL history. Two years later, I acquired more data and made enough improvements to merit publishing an updated and more accurate list of the best quarterbacks the league has ever seen. In 2009, I tweaked the formula again, and published a set of career rankings, along with a set of strength of schedule, era and weather adjustments, and finally career rankings which include those adjustments and playoff performances.
If nothing else, that was three years ago, so the series was due for an update. I’ve also acquired more data, enabling me to tweak the formula to better reflect player performance. But let’s start today with an explanation of the methodology I’m using. To rank a group of players, you need to decide which metric you’re ordering the list by. I’ll get to all of the criteria I’m not using in a little bit, but the formula does use each of the following: pass attempts, passing touchdowns, passing yards, interceptions, sacks, sack yards lost, fumbles, fumbles recovered, rush attempts, rushing yards and rushing touchdowns. Most importantly, the formula is adjusted for era and league.
So where do we begin? We start with plain old yards per attempt. I then incorporate sack data by removing sack yards from the numerator and adding sacks to the denominator1. To include touchdowns and pass attempts, I gave a quarterback 20 yards for each passing touchdown and subtracted 45 yards for each interception. This calculation — (Pass Yards + 20 * PTD – 45 * INT – Sack Yards Lost) / (Sacks + Pass Attempts) forms the basis for Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt, one of the key metrics I use to evaluate quarterbacks.For purposes of this study, I did some further tweaking. I’m including rushing touchdowns, because our goal is to measure quarterbacks as players. There’s no reason to separate rushing and passing touchdowns from a value standpoint, so all passing and rushing touchdowns are worth 20 yards and are calculated in the numerator of Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt. To be consistent, I also include rushing touchdowns in the denominator of the equation. This won’t change anything for most quarterbacks, but feels right to me. A touchdown is a touchdown.
Fumbles are an overlooked aspect of quarterback play. The book “The Hidden Game of Football” values a fumble at -50 yards, making them slightly more costly than interceptions (THGOF also first derived the -45 yard penalty for interceptions). Now I don’t have ‘fumbles lost’ data but I do have information on “fumbles” and “fumbles recovered” going back to 1945; the difference between those two could be characterized as net fumbles. However, just because a quarterback fumbles and does not recover the ball does not mean his team loses possession (and remember, he is already being penalized for the sack and the sack yards lost).
For those of you who haven’t given a bunch of thought to fumbles data, here are some numbers from 2000 to 2011:
- 52% of all fumbles are by quarterbacks
- 25% of all quarterback fumbles are ultimately recovered by the quarterback, and an additional 3% bounce out of bounds, making them relatively harmless.
- Who generally recovers the other 72%? A defensive player recovers roughly 44% of all fumbles, leaving the remaining to be recovered by the offense (offensive lineman are responsible for recovering 15% of quarterback fumbles, while 13% are grabbed by an offensive skill position player). This means that roughly 60% of all quarterback fumbles not recovered by the quarterback are recovered by the defense.
Therefore the value of “net fumbles” — the number of fumbles by a quarterback minus the number of fumbles he recovered — is -30 yards, since, on average, a fumble lost is worth -50 yards. So we can update the formula to:
[(PYD + 20*(PTD + RTD) - 45*INT - SKYDLST - 30*(FUM-FumRec)) / (ATT + SK +RTD)]
That calculates each QB’s value per play; we then compare that number to the league average, and multiply the difference by his total number of plays (i.e., ATT + SK + RTD) to get each QB’s value added over average. The last step is to add a rushing component. I still haven’t figured out a very good way to handle quarterback rushing, but what I’ve done in the past is to add all QB rushing yards over 4.0 yards per carry. It still doesn’t feel very scientific, but the results have been noncontroversial, so I’ll continue to use it until I think of something better. I’m going to call final per-play measure of quarterback value added “converted yards per play” or CYP. Once you have each quarterback’s CYP, you then compare it to the league average. I take the CYP for each quarterback, subtract it by the average baseline for that season, and multiply the difference by the number of plays that quarterback had. This does a nice job of balancing the trade-off between compilers and guys that excelled for a short period of time. I have also added in adjustments for shortened seasons, for non-NFL leagues, and for the wartime era from 1943 to 1945.
But enough about methodology for now: let’s take a look at the 2011 results:
QB | Tm | Att | Yd | TD/INT | Sk/Yd | Rsh-Yd-TD | Fum/FR | CYP | VAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Rodgers | GNB | 502 | 4643 | 45/6 | 36/219 | 60-257-3 | 5-2 | 9.3 | 2063 |
| Drew Brees | NOR | 657 | 5476 | 46/14 | 24/158 | 21-86-1 | 1-0 | 8.2 | 1838 |
| Tom Brady | NWE | 611 | 5235 | 39/12 | 32/173 | 43-109-3 | 6-3 | 8.2 | 1704 |
| Tony Romo | DAL | 522 | 4184 | 31/10 | 36/227 | 22-46-1 | 7-6 | 7.4 | 1009 |
| Eli Manning | NYG | 589 | 4933 | 29/16 | 28/199 | 35-15-1 | 9-3 | 7.2 | 997 |
| Matthew Stafford | DET | 663 | 5038 | 41/16 | 36/257 | 22-78-0 | 5-1 | 6.8 | 869 |
| Cam Newton | CAR | 517 | 4051 | 21/17 | 35/260 | 126-706-14 | 5-3 | 6.5 | 705 |
| Matt Ryan | ATL | 566 | 4177 | 29/12 | 26/173 | 37-84-2 | 5-2 | 6.7 | 680 |
| Matt Schaub | HOU | 292 | 2479 | 15/6 | 16/98 | 15-9-2 | 3-1 | 7.7 | 661 |
| Michael Vick | PHI | 423 | 3303 | 18/14 | 23/126 | 76-589-1 | 10-4 | 6.1 | 528 |
| Philip Rivers | SDG | 582 | 4624 | 27/20 | 30/198 | 26-36-1 | 9-3 | 6.4 | 480 |
| Ben Roethlisberger | PIT | 513 | 4077 | 21/14 | 40/269 | 31-70-0 | 9-3 | 6.2 | 323 |
| Carson Palmer | OAK | 328 | 2753 | 13/16 | 17/119 | 16-20-1 | 2-1 | 6.3 | 225 |
| Alex Smith | SFO | 445 | 3144 | 17/5 | 44/263 | 52-179-2 | 7-4 | 6 | 194 |
| Jay Cutler | CHI | 314 | 2319 | 13/7 | 23/159 | 18-55-1 | 7-4 | 6 | 140 |
| Matt Hasselbeck | TEN | 518 | 3571 | 18/14 | 19/153 | 20-52-0 | 4-1 | 5.7 | 44 |
| Kyle Orton | 2tm | 252 | 1758 | 9/9 | 10/54 | 11-13-0 | 4-0 | 5.2 | -114 |
| Andy Dalton | CIN | 516 | 3398 | 20/13 | 24/160 | 37-152-1 | 5-0 | 5.4 | -114 |
| Joe Flacco | BAL | 542 | 3610 | 20/12 | 31/203 | 39-88-1 | 11-4 | 5.4 | -151 |
| Matt Moore | MIA | 347 | 2497 | 16/9 | 36/229 | 32-65-2 | 14-3 | 4.9 | -274 |
| Kevin Kolb | ARI | 253 | 1955 | 9/8 | 30/219 | 17-65-0 | 8-0 | 4.7 | -277 |
| Dan Orlovsky | IND | 193 | 1201 | 6/4 | 14/84 | 6-5-0 | 7-1 | 4.2 | -288 |
| Ryan Fitzpatrick | BUF | 569 | 3832 | 24/23 | 22/148 | 56-215-0 | 7-4 | 5.1 | -289 |
| Tim Tebow | DEN | 271 | 1729 | 12/6 | 33/225 | 122-660-6 | 14-3 | 4.1 | -313 |
| John Skelton | ARI | 275 | 1913 | 11/14 | 23/162 | 28-128-0 | 4-2 | 4.3 | -383 |
| Curtis Painter | IND | 243 | 1541 | 6/9 | 16/104 | 17-107-0 | 5-1 | 4 | -389 |
| Matt Cassel | KAN | 269 | 1713 | 10/9 | 22/120 | 25-99-0 | 5-0 | 4.3 | -402 |
| Tarvaris Jackson | SEA | 450 | 3091 | 14/13 | 42/293 | 40-108-1 | 9-4 | 4.8 | -416 |
| Rex Grossman | WAS | 458 | 3151 | 16/20 | 25/201 | 20-11-1 | 8-2 | 4.6 | -521 |
| Christian Ponder | MIN | 291 | 1853 | 13/13 | 30/164 | 28-219-0 | 6-0 | 3.7 | -522 |
| Mark Sanchez | NYJ | 543 | 3474 | 26/18 | 39/243 | 37-103-6 | 10-1 | 4.7 | -527 |
| Colt McCoy | CLE | 463 | 2733 | 14/11 | 32/173 | 61-212-0 | 11-5 | 4.4 | -631 |
| Josh Freeman | TAM | 551 | 3592 | 16/22 | 29/164 | 55-238-4 | 9-2 | 4.5 | -654 |
| Sam Bradford | STL | 357 | 2164 | 6/6 | 36/248 | 18-26-0 | 10-2 | 3.9 | -695 |
| Blaine Gabbert | JAX | 413 | 2214 | 12/11 | 40/293 | 48-98-0 | 14-4 | 3 | -1207 |
Those who overrate counting stats were likely to put Drew Brees ahead of Aaron Rodgers last year, but there was no contest as to which quarterback produced the most dominant statistics. You might be surprised to see Tony Romo 4th on the list — I know I was — but he had better numbers than Eli Manning in both touchdowns, interceptions and fumbles, which was enough to beat out Eli Manning’s edge in yards per attempt. Romo is a polarizing figure, but how many know that he had 31 TDs and just 10 INTs last year? Few remember how efficient Matt Schaub was last season: on a per-play basis, he came in only behind the big three (he also ranked 4th in ANY/A in 2011).
Of course, the point of this system is to be able to compare players across eras. More on this tomorrow, but for now, here’s a look at the top 100 single-season performances:
Year | Team | QB | Att | Pyd | TD | INT | Sk | Skyd | Rsh | Ryd | RTD | NetFum | CYP | VALUE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1984 | MIA | Dan Marino | 564 | 5084 | 48 | 17 | 13 | 120 | 28 | -7 | 0 | 4 | 8.7 | 2436 |
| 2004 | IND | Peyton Manning | 497 | 4557 | 49 | 10 | 13 | 101 | 25 | 38 | 0 | 2 | 9.7 | 2314 |
| 2007 | NWE | Tom Brady | 578 | 4806 | 50 | 8 | 21 | 128 | 37 | 98 | 2 | 5 | 8.7 | 2192 |
| 2011 | GNB | Aaron Rodgers | 502 | 4643 | 45 | 6 | 36 | 219 | 60 | 257 | 3 | 3 | 9.3 | 2063 |
| 1953 | CLE | Otto Graham | 258 | 2722 | 11 | 9 | 26 | 209 | 43 | 143 | 6 | 3 | 8.1 | 1879 |
| 2011 | NOR | Drew Brees | 657 | 5476 | 46 | 14 | 24 | 158 | 21 | 86 | 1 | 1 | 8.2 | 1838 |
| 2006 | IND | Peyton Manning | 557 | 4397 | 31 | 9 | 14 | 86 | 23 | 36 | 4 | 2 | 7.9 | 1740 |
| 1943 | CHI | Sid Luckman | 202 | 2194 | 28 | 12 | 22 | -40 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 1739 | ||
| 1992 | SFO | Steve Young | 402 | 3465 | 25 | 7 | 29 | 152 | 76 | 537 | 4 | 6 | 7.8 | 1727 |
| 1994 | SFO | Steve Young | 461 | 3969 | 35 | 10 | 31 | 163 | 58 | 293 | 7 | 3 | 8.2 | 1706 |
| 2011 | NWE | Tom Brady | 611 | 5235 | 39 | 12 | 32 | 173 | 43 | 109 | 3 | 3 | 8.2 | 1704 |
| 1982 | SDG | Dan Fouts | 330 | 2883 | 17 | 11 | 12 | 94 | 9 | 8 | 1 | -1 | 7.8 | 1694 |
| 1976 | BAL | Bert Jones | 343 | 3104 | 24 | 9 | 29 | 284 | 38 | 214 | 2 | 2 | 7.7 | 1675 |
| 1999 | STL | Kurt Warner | 499 | 4353 | 41 | 13 | 29 | 201 | 23 | 92 | 1 | 9 | 7.8 | 1631 |
| 1998 | MIN | Randall Cunningham | 425 | 3704 | 34 | 10 | 20 | 132 | 32 | 132 | 1 | 2 | 8.4 | 1585 |
| 2000 | SFO | Jeff Garcia | 561 | 4278 | 31 | 10 | 24 | 155 | 72 | 414 | 4 | 3 | 7.3 | 1570 |
| 1970 | SFO | John Brodie | 378 | 2941 | 24 | 10 | 8 | 67 | 9 | 29 | 2 | 1 | 7.5 | 1548 |
| 2004 | MIN | Daunte Culpepper | 548 | 4717 | 39 | 11 | 46 | 238 | 88 | 406 | 2 | 9 | 7.6 | 1506 |
| 1984 | SFO | Joe Montana | 432 | 3630 | 28 | 10 | 22 | 138 | 39 | 118 | 2 | 2 | 7.9 | 1498 |
| 1981 | CIN | Ken Anderson | 479 | 3754 | 29 | 10 | 25 | 140 | 46 | 320 | 1 | 3 | 7.3 | 1489 |
| 1981 | SDG | Dan Fouts | 609 | 4802 | 33 | 17 | 19 | 134 | 22 | 56 | 0 | 7 | 6.9 | 1471 |
| 2003 | IND | Peyton Manning | 566 | 4267 | 29 | 10 | 18 | 107 | 28 | 26 | 0 | 2 | 7.2 | 1459 |
| 1967 | WAS | Sonny Jurgensen | 508 | 3747 | 31 | 16 | 18 | 151 | 15 | 46 | 2 | 5 | 6.4 | 1455 |
| 1964 | BAL | Johnny Unitas | 305 | 2824 | 19 | 6 | 34 | 241 | 37 | 162 | 2 | 1 | 7.9 | 1453 |
| 1942 | GNB | Cecil Isbell | 268 | 2021 | 24 | 14 | 36 | 83 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 1450 | ||
| 1986 | MIA | Dan Marino | 623 | 4746 | 44 | 23 | 17 | 119 | 12 | -3 | 0 | 4 | 6.8 | 1450 |
| 2010 | NWE | Tom Brady | 492 | 3900 | 36 | 4 | 25 | 175 | 31 | 30 | 1 | 2 | 8.2 | 1434 |
| 2009 | SDG | Philip Rivers | 486 | 4254 | 28 | 9 | 25 | 167 | 26 | 50 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 1413 |
| 2009 | NOR | Drew Brees | 514 | 4388 | 34 | 11 | 20 | 135 | 22 | 33 | 2 | 8 | 7.9 | 1412 |
| 1993 | SFO | Steve Young | 462 | 4023 | 29 | 16 | 31 | 160 | 69 | 407 | 2 | 6 | 7.2 | 1400 |
| 1953 | RAM | Norm Van Brocklin | 286 | 2393 | 19 | 14 | 11 | 94 | 8 | 11 | 0 | 2 | 6.7 | 1395 |
| 1975 | CIN | Ken Anderson | 377 | 3169 | 21 | 11 | 32 | 247 | 49 | 188 | 2 | 3 | 6.8 | 1385 |
| 1991 | WAS | Mark Rypien | 421 | 3564 | 28 | 11 | 7 | 59 | 15 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 7.9 | 1385 |
| 1983 | WAS | Joe Theismann | 459 | 3714 | 29 | 11 | 34 | 242 | 37 | 234 | 1 | 1 | 7.2 | 1378 |
| 1960 | CLE | Milt Plum | 250 | 2297 | 21 | 5 | 35 | 283 | 17 | -24 | 2 | 2 | 7.6 | 1373 |
| 2005 | IND | Peyton Manning | 453 | 3747 | 28 | 10 | 17 | 81 | 33 | 45 | 0 | 5 | 7.7 | 1366 |
| 1998 | SFO | Steve Young | 517 | 4170 | 36 | 12 | 48 | 234 | 70 | 454 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 1364 |
| 1963 | NYG | Y.A. Tittle | 367 | 3145 | 36 | 14 | 30 | 268 | 18 | 99 | 2 | 1 | 7.5 | 1363 |
| 1988 | CIN | Boomer Esiason | 388 | 3572 | 28 | 14 | 30 | 245 | 43 | 248 | 1 | 1 | 7.7 | 1356 |
| 2008 | NOR | Drew Brees | 635 | 5069 | 34 | 17 | 13 | 92 | 22 | -1 | 0 | 4 | 7.4 | 1341 |
| 1989 | SFO | Joe Montana | 386 | 3521 | 26 | 8 | 33 | 198 | 49 | 227 | 3 | 6 | 8 | 1338 |
| 1967 | NYJ | Joe Namath | 491 | 4007 | 26 | 28 | 27 | 270 | 6 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 5.8 | 1335 |
| 2006 | NOR | Drew Brees | 554 | 4418 | 26 | 11 | 18 | 105 | 42 | 32 | 0 | 7 | 7.2 | 1323 |
| 2001 | STL | Kurt Warner | 546 | 4830 | 36 | 22 | 38 | 233 | 28 | 60 | 0 | 8 | 7 | 1312 |
| 2000 | IND | Peyton Manning | 571 | 4413 | 33 | 15 | 20 | 131 | 37 | 116 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 1309 |
| 1949 | CHI | Johnny Lujack | 312 | 2658 | 23 | 22 | 13 | 101 | 8 | 64 | 2 | 1 | 6.2 | 1290 |
| 1959 | BAL | Johnny Unitas | 367 | 2899 | 32 | 14 | 23 | 181 | 29 | 145 | 2 | 5 | 6.7 | 1286 |
| 2000 | MIN | Daunte Culpepper | 474 | 3937 | 33 | 16 | 34 | 181 | 89 | 470 | 7 | 6 | 7.1 | 1280 |
| 1968 | OAK | Daryle Lamonica | 416 | 3245 | 25 | 15 | 26 | 216 | 19 | 98 | 1 | 3 | 6.3 | 1275 |
| 2009 | GNB | Aaron Rodgers | 541 | 4434 | 30 | 7 | 50 | 306 | 58 | 316 | 5 | 6 | 7.3 | 1267 |
| 1989 | RAM | Jim Everett | 518 | 4310 | 29 | 17 | 29 | 214 | 25 | 31 | 1 | 0 | 7.2 | 1260 |
| 2009 | MIN | Brett Favre | 531 | 4202 | 33 | 7 | 34 | 247 | 9 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 7.5 | 1256 |
| 2009 | HOU | Matt Schaub | 583 | 4770 | 29 | 15 | 25 | 149 | 48 | 57 | 0 | 2 | 7.3 | 1255 |
| 1967 | SDG | John Hadl | 427 | 3365 | 24 | 22 | 10 | 99 | 37 | 107 | 3 | 5 | 6.1 | 1253 |
| 1961 | PHI | Sonny Jurgensen | 416 | 3723 | 32 | 24 | 26 | 212 | 20 | 27 | 0 | 4 | 6.7 | 1251 |
| 1980 | CLE | Brian Sipe | 554 | 4132 | 30 | 14 | 23 | 217 | 20 | 55 | 1 | 2 | 6.7 | 1241 |
| 1947 | WAS | Sammy Baugh | 354 | 2938 | 25 | 15 | 25 | 47 | 2 | 8 | 7.2 | 1241 | ||
| 1979 | DAL | Roger Staubach | 461 | 3586 | 27 | 11 | 36 | 240 | 37 | 172 | 0 | 2 | 6.7 | 1237 |
| 2009 | IND | Peyton Manning | 571 | 4500 | 33 | 16 | 10 | 74 | 19 | -13 | 0 | 2 | 7.4 | 1237 |
| 2004 | PHI | Donovan McNabb | 469 | 3875 | 31 | 8 | 32 | 192 | 41 | 220 | 3 | 7 | 7.5 | 1235 |
| 2010 | SDG | Philip Rivers | 541 | 4710 | 30 | 13 | 38 | 227 | 29 | 52 | 0 | 5 | 7.5 | 1221 |
| 1975 | MIN | Fran Tarkenton | 425 | 2994 | 25 | 13 | 27 | 245 | 16 | 108 | 2 | -2 | 6.1 | 1220 |
| 2009 | DAL | Tony Romo | 550 | 4483 | 26 | 9 | 34 | 196 | 35 | 105 | 1 | 4 | 7.4 | 1211 |
| 1968 | NYJ | Joe Namath | 380 | 3147 | 15 | 17 | 16 | 118 | 5 | 11 | 2 | 1 | 6.5 | 1198 |
| 1973 | PHI | Roman Gabriel | 460 | 3219 | 23 | 12 | 31 | 219 | 12 | 10 | 1 | 4 | 5.7 | 1196 |
| 2008 | SDG | Philip Rivers | 478 | 4009 | 34 | 11 | 25 | 151 | 31 | 84 | 0 | 6 | 7.7 | 1195 |
| 1974 | CIN | Ken Anderson | 328 | 2667 | 18 | 10 | 36 | 292 | 43 | 314 | 2 | 2 | 6.2 | 1192 |
| 1969 | OAK | Daryle Lamonica | 426 | 3302 | 34 | 25 | 11 | 100 | 13 | 36 | 1 | 1 | 6.3 | 1191 |
| 1974 | OAK | Ken Stabler | 310 | 2469 | 26 | 12 | 18 | 141 | 12 | -2 | 1 | 2 | 6.9 | 1188 |
| 1967 | BAL | Johnny Unitas | 436 | 3428 | 20 | 16 | 24 | 189 | 22 | 89 | 0 | 1 | 6.3 | 1188 |
| 1991 | SFO | Steve Young | 279 | 2517 | 17 | 8 | 13 | 79 | 66 | 415 | 4 | 2 | 8.2 | 1185 |
| 2005 | CIN | Carson Palmer | 509 | 3836 | 32 | 12 | 19 | 105 | 34 | 41 | 1 | 4 | 7.1 | 1182 |
| 1995 | GNB | Brett Favre | 570 | 4413 | 38 | 13 | 33 | 217 | 39 | 181 | 3 | 8 | 6.9 | 1175 |
| 1966 | DAL | Don Meredith | 344 | 2805 | 24 | 12 | 35 | 257 | 38 | 242 | 5 | 4 | 6.4 | 1170 |
| 1966 | KAN | Len Dawson | 284 | 2527 | 26 | 10 | 23 | 213 | 24 | 167 | 0 | 5 | 7.3 | 1169 |
| 1999 | IND | Peyton Manning | 533 | 4135 | 26 | 15 | 14 | 116 | 35 | 73 | 2 | 4 | 6.9 | 1169 |
| 2002 | OAK | Rich Gannon | 618 | 4689 | 26 | 10 | 36 | 214 | 50 | 156 | 3 | 6 | 6.7 | 1154 |
| 2003 | KAN | Trent Green | 523 | 4039 | 24 | 12 | 20 | 130 | 26 | 83 | 2 | 5 | 6.9 | 1144 |
| 2007 | IND | Peyton Manning | 515 | 4040 | 31 | 14 | 21 | 124 | 20 | -5 | 3 | 3 | 7.2 | 1140 |
| 1983 | SFO | Joe Montana | 515 | 3910 | 26 | 12 | 33 | 224 | 61 | 284 | 2 | 3 | 6.6 | 1138 |
| 1962 | NYG | Y.A. Tittle | 375 | 3224 | 33 | 20 | 16 | 127 | 17 | 108 | 2 | 4 | 7.1 | 1132 |
| 1976 | OAK | Ken Stabler | 291 | 2737 | 27 | 17 | 19 | 203 | 7 | -2 | 1 | 4 | 7.1 | 1129 |
| 1976 | MIN | Fran Tarkenton | 412 | 2961 | 17 | 8 | 25 | 221 | 27 | 45 | 1 | 2 | 6.1 | 1129 |
| 2002 | KAN | Trent Green | 470 | 3690 | 26 | 13 | 26 | 141 | 31 | 225 | 1 | 0 | 7.1 | 1127 |
| 2010 | GNB | Aaron Rodgers | 475 | 3922 | 28 | 11 | 31 | 193 | 64 | 356 | 4 | 3 | 7.4 | 1125 |
| 1971 | DAL | Roger Staubach | 211 | 1882 | 15 | 4 | 23 | 175 | 41 | 343 | 2 | 5 | 7.3 | 1124 |
| 1961 | HOU | George Blanda | 362 | 3330 | 36 | 22 | 10 | 128 | 7 | 12 | 0 | 3 | 7.6 | 1122 |
| 1967 | OAK | Daryle Lamonica | 425 | 3228 | 30 | 20 | 37 | 323 | 22 | 110 | 4 | 2 | 5.6 | 1121 |
| 1998 | NYJ | Vinny Testaverde | 421 | 3256 | 29 | 7 | 19 | 140 | 24 | 104 | 1 | 4 | 7.4 | 1120 |
| 1990 | HOU | Warren Moon | 584 | 4689 | 33 | 13 | 36 | 252 | 55 | 215 | 2 | 14 | 6.6 | 1115 |
| 1980 | PHI | Ron Jaworski | 451 | 3529 | 27 | 12 | 27 | 213 | 27 | 95 | 1 | 2 | 6.8 | 1114 |
| 1948 | PHI | Tommy Thompson | 246 | 1965 | 25 | 11 | 12 | 46 | 1 | 0 | 8.1 | 1113 | ||
| 1950 | RAM | Norm Van Brocklin | 233 | 2061 | 18 | 14 | 12 | 93 | 15 | 22 | 1 | 4 | 6.5 | 1112 |
| 2009 | NWE | Tom Brady | 565 | 4398 | 28 | 13 | 16 | 86 | 29 | 44 | 1 | 4 | 7.2 | 1109 |
| 1984 | STL | Neil Lomax | 560 | 4614 | 28 | 16 | 49 | 377 | 35 | 184 | 3 | 9 | 6.3 | 1096 |
| 1990 | KAN | Steve DeBerg | 444 | 3444 | 23 | 4 | 22 | 191 | 21 | -5 | 0 | 6 | 7.2 | 1092 |
| 1978 | DAL | Roger Staubach | 413 | 3190 | 25 | 16 | 32 | 219 | 42 | 182 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 1085 |
| 1977 | BAL | Bert Jones | 393 | 2686 | 17 | 11 | 26 | 221 | 28 | 146 | 2 | 1 | 5.5 | 1084 |
| 1966 | GNB | Bart Starr | 251 | 2257 | 14 | 3 | 24 | 181 | 21 | 104 | 2 | 7 | 7.4 | 1084 |
| 1977 | DAL | Roger Staubach | 361 | 2620 | 18 | 9 | 30 | 219 | 51 | 171 | 3 | 5 | 5.8 | 1083 |
And now, the huge caveat: It’s important to remember that this is just a measure of each team’s passing game, assigned to the quarterback on the field for those plays. Obviously the quality of the offensive line, the ability of the receivers, the versatility of the tight ends and running backs, the philosophy of the coaches, the strength of the schedule, and good old randomness have a significant impact on the above numbers. The reason for these posts is to accurately measure quarterback statistics, and nothing else. Once we have strong measures of QB performance, we can then judge QBs based on how much of their success (or lack thereof) we want to assign to the QB and how much to other people/factors.
And, of course, even if supporting casts are the same, numbers don’t tell the full story. The point here is simply to get the most out of the numbers we have.
- I have individual sack data for every quarterback since 1969. For seasons before then, I have team sack data going back to 1949. For seasons before 1950, I ignored sacks; for seasons between 1950 and 1969, I gave each quarterback an approximate number of sacks, giving him the pro-rated portion of sacks allowed by the percentage of pass attempts he threw for the team. While imperfect, I thought this “fix” to be better than to ignore the data completely, especially for years where one quarterback was responsible for the vast majority of his team’s pass attempts. [↩]

{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
If my math is right, eight of the 100 “most valuable” seasons belong to Peyton Manning. Nobody else has more than five (Steve Young).
In one month I get both a new Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time poll AND a new entry in Chase Stuart’s The Greatest QB of All-Time series?! O frabjous day (well, month)!
I think that’s enough to make up for the bar exam sucking away a few months out of my life forever before that.
Appreciate the love, Shattenjager.
Not to be persnickety, but I see sack data for Johnny Lujack in 1949. Which is great to have (as estimated) but occurs outside of the range of 1950 to 1969 in which you estimated individual sack data where it was not precisely available.
Great list. If my eyes don’t decive me, Joe Namanth’s 1967 season is the only one in which the ration of Td’s to Int.’s is below 1.0 (TD as numerator, Int. as Denominator).
You know, now that I think about it, I think I did have 1949 sack data (not in front of my database now) but maybe not complete. As always, you guys are keeping me on my toes. If it was anyway but you, Tim, it would be persnickety, but I’ll give you a pass.
My eyes tell me you missed one more season: Namath’s 1968.
For the 2011 results, something is wrong with the the ranking by TD/INT ratio. Matt Cassel’s 10/9 sits at the top, followed by Skelton’s 11/14. Just thought you should know something was off with it.
Yeah, that’s a table sorting plugin issue; not sure what I can do about that. I will look into it, though.
The number of these that have happened recently is kind of staggering. By my count, 19 (or 19% of the 100 best seasons) of these have happened during or after the 2000 season, despite that time period only representing about…oh, about 17% of the time period represented by those seasons covered by this list (every season since 1942, the oldest of these top 100 seasons).
Oops, disregard that last post. I was only looking at the top 50. The real numbers are 33% of the top 100 greatest seasons ever compiled in a mere 17% of the timeline in question. That’s more the profound statement I was looking for.
Yeah, on the surface, that 33% number does seem a bit high. I will note that even though from the years 1942 to 2011, the 2000s represents just 17% of the years, it represents 23% of the team-seasons. But the bigger reason for the discrepancy is the increase in pass attempts. Being great on 500 attempts is better than being great on 300 attempts. Even with the pro-rating for fewer than 16 game seasons, the increase in pass attempts is a big part of the disproportionate treatment; personally, I’m okay with that.
It all just highlights how ridiculously hard it is to truly compare QBs across eras, I suppose. I’m betting that we will never really have a definitive statistical analysis AND consensus on who was the greatest QB ever (though my vote goes to Montana, every time). There are simply too many factors playing into success. For instance, can you imagine the numbers Dan Marino would have put up were he the one throwing to jerry Rice and John Taylor? Or if he had Emmitt Smith running the ball. Or if he faced one fewer elite pass defences a season. Or if…this could really go on forever. It’s just too much to account for, and that is frustrating.
Way, way late to this, but I just stumbled across it, so why not? Part of the reason for the skew toward the later era (despite the era adjustment via baseline) could very well be the number of games per season. Multiplying by a factor of 16/14 for 60s through 77 and by a larger corresponding factor for earlier years would disperse the best seasons across eras better…if you haven’t accounted for this already. It would also make Fouts’ strike-shortened 82 year look ridiculous…and there’s the question of how you deal w/ 87.
Other reasons for the concentration of good seasons on the last decade or so would be the pass-heavy nature of the game. Even w/ normalization for schedule length, any system that uses attempts/plays will favor recent players. You can’t adjust for this in a linear manner because there was too much variance in terms of how pass heavy teams were in earlier eras. The penalty for lower QB attempts/game early on is somewhat mitigated by another form of variance anyway: efficiency. If you’re comparing against the league avg. for a given year, players weren’t as tightly bunched, so that gives guys like Luckman and Graham an opportunity to stand out regardless.
One other thing: it’s been brought up by others before, but Manning’s 2004 season looks even more statistically freakish when you consider the time he sat on the bench in blowouts (7 quarters) compared to Brady (3 quarters) and Marino (roughly 2, if I remember correctly). The final regular season game v DEN in particular where Manning played a token series really put a dent in his numbers. If we were to assume that he would have shredded DEN the same way he did the following week in the playoffs had he been unleashed in a meaningless final regular season game, he could have been looking at a season value of roughly 2630.
{ 9 trackbacks }