Football question

[hoopsaustin]

Jackson Arnold QBR: 47.9
John Mateer QBR: 68.2

His advanced metrics are about as close to Baker Mayfield as they are Jackson Arnold. Not comparable.

I can't find baker's college QBR but his career would be 119 according to Grok making me a conversion. So mateer would be much much closer to JA

Rating at sports reference:
Ja 125.9
Mateer 145.5

BM 175.4

So closer to JA also

 

[Eielson]

I can't find baker's college QBR but his career would be 119 according to Grok making me a conversion. So mateer would be much much closer to JA

Rating at sports reference:
Ja 125.9
Mateer 145.5

BM 175.4

So closer to JA also

QBR doesn't go above 100. You're looking at passer rating, which is a much less comprehensive stat that most have moved away from.

Baker was 80.4, 91.8, and 92.3.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

QBR doesn't go above 100. You're looking at passer rating, which is a much less comprehensive stat that most have moved away from.

Baker was 80.4, 91.8, and 92.3.

I still prefer passer rating to QBR. QBR seems to put a lot of emphasis on the qb run. Most of the time when comparing QBs, it is to look at how they are as a passer and it seems like passer rating does a better job of that than QBR

 

[Boom Soon]

Jackson Arnold QBR: 47.9
John Mateer QBR: 68.2

His advanced metrics are about as close to Baker Mayfield as they are Jackson Arnold. Not comparable.

Yeah I’m gonna go with the eye test on this one.

 

[CoachTalk]

It would be, but not for the reason that you think..

If mateer is a 6.5ish/10 QB, hawkins is like a 5.5/10.

Excluding jackson Arnold, mateer is our worst QB since Trevor knight.

What gives you confidence that hawk is close to mateer?

 

[Eielson]

Yeah I’m gonna go with the eye test on this one.

When every objective data point wildly contradicts your eye test, it's probably time to question what your eye test is worth.

 

[Boom Soon]

When every objective data point wildly contradicts your eye test, it's probably time to question what your eye test is worth.

I watch Mateer play bad week after week and I say he’s a bad quarterback. And so does 99.9% of Sooner fans. I’ll go with that. I never once brought up Baker. I said we were saying the exact same stuff about JA last year as we are Mateer this year.

 

[jmizzy4ou]

Some of these takes are ABSOLUTELY WILD!!!! .....did someone really say make a QB change in a playoff game?

This reminds me of Switzer talking about feeding the monster. The monster is never satisfied. A couple of years ago, Sooner fans were throwing dirt on OUr grave. Last year, Venables could never get us in contention, was the chatter. We are one game away from a possible playoff birth, and people are still wanting to radically change the offense and bring in the backup who they wanted to kill about 1/2 a season ago??

What has PlayStation & Xbox done to the football fans, LOL.... this is who we are and will be for the rest of this season. PLEASE, try to sit back, relax, and enjoy a possible PLAYOFF birth!!! Who wouldn't have taken that 11 games ago??

 

[Eielson]

I watch Mateer play bad week after week and I say he’s a bad quarterback. And so does 99.9% of Sooner fans. I’ll go with that. I never once brought up Baker. I said we were saying the exact same stuff about JA last year as we are Mateer this year.

And I'm saying that their QBR is 20 points different, our offensive rating went from 16th in the SEC to 9th, and his SEC record is 5-2 vs 2-10. They simply arent comparable.

 

[Boom Soon]

And I'm saying that their QBR is 20 points different, our offensive rating went from 16th in the SEC to 9th, and his SEC record is 5-2 vs 2-10. They simply arent comparable.

They are extremely comparable! My goodness man. You must not watch football. Data only tells half the story. They have the same tendencies and limitations. Poor/slow decision making. A tendency to bail out of the pocket too early. Inaccurate downfield. Solid runners.

Mateer has some better weapons and better scheme with Arbuckle. So maybe that inflates the data some. But I’m gonna actually watch the game and you can just stare at your data each week.

 

[daqman]

so in mateer's last start ....his qbr was 67.6 and his passer rating was 117.1
in hawk's last start...his qbr was 69.7 and his rating was 156.3

so the stats point to hawk being the better player and there's no way to disprove this assertion because it is based on facts

 

[Boom Soon]

so in mateer's last start ....his qbr was 67.6 and his passer rating was 117.1
in hawk's last start...his qbr was 69.7 and his rating was 156.3

so the stats point to hawk being the better player and there's no way to disprove this assertion because it is based on facts

@Eielson let’s jump on the Hawkins bandwagon!

 

[Eielson]

They are extremely comparable! My goodness man. You must not watch football. Data only tells half the story. They have the same tendencies and limitations. Poor/slow decision making. A tendency to bail out of the pocket too early. Inaccurate downfield. Solid runners.

Give me one piece of objective data that supports your claim. Anything at all other than the eye test of somebody who likely has never coached, called plays, or played QB.

Mateer has some better weapons and better scheme with Arbuckle. So maybe that inflates the data some. But I’m gonna actually watch the game and you can just stare at your data each week.

So you're saying that if Arnold was with a different playcaller and had WRs like Cam Coleman, he'd do better?

I guess technically he did improve from 16th to 15th in conference.

 

[Eielson]

so in mateer's last start ....his qbr was 67.6 and his passer rating was 117.1
in hawk's last start...his qbr was 69.7 and his rating was 156.3

so the stats point to hawk being the better player and there's no way to disprove this assertion because it is based on facts

Hawkins' QBR was 56.7 last year, which would put him right below Arnold at 16th in conference.

 

[daqman]

Hawkins' QBR was 56.7 last year, which would put him right below Arnold at 16th in conference.

what was hawks qbr in peewee ball?

 

[Eielson]

what was hawks qbr in peewee ball?

We are discussing college football, so I provided college stats.

 

[Boom Soon]

Give me one piece of objective data that supports your claim. Anything at all other than the eye test of somebody who likely has never coached, called plays, or played QB.

Oh dude zip it. You’ve got statistic tunnel vision. That’s what I tell my students ( I’m a teacher and a coach fyi) is a “category error.”I’m comparing behavioral patterns of both quarterbacks, not achievements. You know, like how scouts actually WATCH film of players instead of just looking at box scores?? A player can have different production but similar tendencies.

I guess you should call Venables and let him know he can turn off the film room. Just look at the data.

Anyways here’s my objective data pointing to JM being a bad quarterback. 8 touchdowns to 7 interceptions. That’s baaaaaaaaad data right there my guy.

Oh wait looking at JA. He had 12 tds last year to only 3 interceptions. Is the data pointing to him being better than Mateer?

Oh shoot I dug into the data even more. JA only threw one interception this year. So JM has thrown twice as many interceptions in one year as JA has thrown in two! Wow!!!! Man, the data never lies. Get JA back in Norman ASAP!!!

You see how stupid this is?

 

[Eielson]

Oh dude zip it. You’ve got statistic tunnel vision. That’s what I tell my students ( I’m a teacher and a coach fyi) is a “category error.”

That's not even close to what category error means, so I hope you stop telling kids that.

You see how stupid this is?

That's an excellent description of what I just read.

 

[Boom Soon]

That's not even close to what category error means, so I hope you stop telling kids that.



That's an excellent description of what I just read.

Yeah you got nothing. Thank you for playing.

You’re the one that wanted to play the data game. I was just comparing the tendencies of both qbs and how they’re similar. We should have never had this time wasting conversation.

 

[hoopsaustin]

QBR doesn't go above 100. You're looking at passer rating, which is a much less comprehensive stat that most have moved away from.

Baker was 80.4, 91.8, and 92.3.

Where'd you find it at?