I had been pondering writing a blog on some of the many myths of quarterbacking. I planned to look into what perceptions people have about the level of play at the position versus that of the past as well as a few other topics. That changed a bit when I read the latest Bill Simmons article (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/071221) where he bemoans the sorry state of quarterbacking play in 2007 compared to the glorious 1980's. Spurred on by his insufficient anectdotal support, the scope of this piece has since exploded. I have now done a fairly comprehensive study on quarterback play since the Super Bowl era. The results are simply amazing. Strap yourselves in, this may blow your hair back a bit.
Let's look at one myth for today:
Myth 1:
Quarterbacks today are inferior to the great quarterbacks of the past.
Where the myth comes from:
Just look at the QB's from the eras.
Today: Tavaris Jackson, Matt Moore, Vinny Testaverde, Joey
Harrington, David Carr
The 90's: Aikman, Young, Elway, Moon, Marino, Favre
The 80's: Elway, Marino, Kelly, Esiason, Montana, Kosar, Moon, Simms,
Fouts
The 70's: Bradshaw, Tarkenton, Griese, Namath, Staubach, Tarkenton
The 60's: Blanda, Dawson, Jurgenson, Unitas, Tarkenton, Namath, Starr
Case closed. Right?
The whole problem with this argument is that it is anecdotal. You can't look at a handful of players and extrapolate their greatness to cover the entire era of quarterbacking. They were the exception, not the norm. If you want to evaluate overall quarterback play, you have to look at all quarterbacks, and how they perfomed as a group. So here it is. The comprehensive statistics of every pass thrown by every quarterback since 1966 (Super Bowl era). This is a summary of each teams average production from the qb position per game, per year.




Now let's dig into this. The first thing that jumps out is that from 1969-1978, teams were terrible at passing the ball. In fact they were worse than in the 60's! Quarterbacks were inefficient, turned the ball over frequently, and could barely complete half of their passes. The 70's quarterbacks sucked.
Now I hear the objections already. "Slow down, there! That was a different era! Three yards and a cloud of dust, remember? Teams ran the ball all the time, that's why they had worse numbers." Here is my answer to that. This was a different era. Teams did run the ball more. But, it was not nearly as dramatically different as faded memories, or glowing retrospectives would have you believe. Even at the most run oriented point in the NFL, 1973, teams still passed the ball 23 times a game. That's 388 attempts per 16 games. At that pace, a 16 game season would be 202/388, 2254 yards, 16.6 TD, 20.7 Int, 61.7 rating. That's terrible. Almost 400 pass attempts and they accomplished very little with them. That's not even the worst teams, that was on average! In 1974 the Atlanta Falcons, on the season, threw 4 TDs and 31 Ints. The '77 Buccaneers had 3 TD's and 30 Ints.
Sit back and think about that. What would your reaction be if your favorite team had that kind of quarterback play? Ten interceptions thrown for every touchdown. It's not even fathomable. A modern fan just can't comprehend a team having a passing game that bad. It's not like the Falcons were a running juggernaut that year either. Their leading rusher had 464 yards! Eli Manning? Please. He can throw 3 TD's in a game, and would take a season and a half to equal the Int's.
If you want to point out Tavaris Jackson, and Matt Moore as evidence that modern qb's are in crisis, you MUST include Bob Lee, Pat Sullivan, and Kim McQuiken (the 3 qb's of the 74 Falcons) as proof that 70's Qb's weren't so hot themselves."Three yards and a cloud of dust" would account for ALL stats dropping. That the interceptions stayed high is very telling. Qb's of the 70's threw MORE interceptions on LESS passes.
I hope by this point you are starting to see "why" teams ran the ball more in the 70's. They sucked at throwing, of course they would run more! It is not a badge of honor so we can now say "gee, so-and-so managed to throw for 141 yards a game when they never passed the ball, that's amazing!" No. Sorry. They passed slightly less, and when they did, terrible things happened. If teams were capable of throwing for more than 141 yards a game...they would have.
Let's move along to the 80's. I firmly, firmly believe that Bill Simmons is living in nostalgia, not reality, when he runs down the modern era qb's. The 80's qb's were not nearly as good as he remembers. The graphs above show that overall qb play has steadily improved, despite the increased complexity of defenses (3-4, tampa-2, etc) and the increased physical ability and size of defenders. Let's look at an individual season for great qb's from the 80's:
224/410, 54.6% comp, 3198 yards, 19 TD, 12 Int
That was the NFL MVP season for John Elway in 1987. What would that be by today's standards? Mediocre...at best. Joey Harrington in 2004:
274/489, 56% comp, 3047 yards, 19 TD, 12 Int
Scary what used to pass for MVP-quality QB play, isn't it? Let's look at the decade of the 80's as a whole and compare it to 2000-2007
% of time a team had more Interceptions than TD's:
80's: 48.6%
00's: 30.1%
Completion %
80's: 55.5%
00's: 59.5%
Passer Rating
80's: 71.8
00's: 78.2
Look, this could go on and on. By any measure--ANY--quarterbacks are playing better today than they ever have.
From here on, we can make a lot of excuses. Here are some of the prime candidates:
"Offenses have changed! West coast offense! Teams dink and dunk more!"
Answer: Defenses have changed too. To say that qb's benefit from friendlier offenses while ignoring the rapid improvement in defensive schemes is silly. If dinking and dunking were the reason for the improvement, we'd see that in the yards/attempt, right? Shorter passes = less ypa.
Yards/attempt:
80's: 6.4
00's: 6.4
Well, guess not. Hasn't changed a bit.
Here's another excuse: "Quarterbacks used to call their own plays, that's what made them great"
Answer: Playbooks have increased in complexity ten-fold. When your options were power-right, power-left, power-up-the-middle, or two pass plays, it was pretty simple to call your own plays. Now there is such a cat-and-mouse game in the playcalling that qb's need to focus on reading defenses rather than calling plays. Reading defenses has also skyrocketed in complexity. Have blitz-packages, zone coverages, and defensive schemes ever been harder to read than they are today? Of course not.
Another excuse: "Qb's were better leaders than they are today"
Anyone making this excuse is just grasping at straws. It's absurd. When you have to resort to intangible, unmeasurable attributes to refute solid facts that show the opposite, it only means you have dunked your head in the sand in an attempt to deny the existence of what is becoming clear.
Quarterbacks just don't make as many mistakes anymore. Less Int's on the same number of pass attempts as the 80's. Even the crappy QB's that are being trotted out in this era of quarterbacking are playing better than qb's were in the 80's. It's a hard truth, but fans need to come to the realization that everything that is gone is romanticized. Nothing is recognized until it's time has passed. You may refuse to believe the numbers if you wish, but 20 years from now, fans will talk about the 2000's as the Golden Age of Quarterback play, rattling off Manning, Brady, McNabb, Palmer, Roethlisberger, as though they were recounting the greatest to ever walk the earth. Even if there are quarterbacks playing even better right in front of their faces. They won't see them. Just like many today.




Marisa Miller
Meghan White

Comments (13) Add A Comment
that comparison between joey harrington and john elway made me, a duck fan and bronco hater, quite happy... until i realized that everyone else had changed too...
thehemogoblin- Gone
The University Of, OR
Total Comments (29510)
when you compared QBs from today to the 70s, 80's, 90's etc. how come you used the superstars from then and the idiots from today. There were also bad QBs then. For today you should have put Brady, Manning, Romo, and Favre.
Da Masta: retired
I Live In, NJ
Total Comments (2132)
I know, Da Masta. Read Bill Simmons article. You'll see what I mean. People denigrate today's quarterbacks using that same logic. It's absurd. That's kind of my point. People who think quarterbacks used to be better like to look at half the story to support their point of view.
The Ram
Pittsburgh , PA
Total Comments (8731)
oh, also, i avidly read page 2, but not anything that simmons writes; he's a homer, he's out of touch, and he never uses quality arguments...
thehemogoblin- Gone
The University Of, OR
Total Comments (29510)
Another excellent blog.
LoveItHateIt
Portland, OR
Total Comments (1916)
Another great blog, Ram. Very good job. Good information. Nice comparison between Harrington and the MVP, Elway. Almost hard to believe.
G.O.A.T.
Scranton, PA
Total Comments (12496)
Really good stuff Ram. By coincidence, I have been doing research into what I would call an explosion of really good QB's of late. Individual seasons like Manning's in '04 and Brady this year kind of dwarf everyone elses performance by comparison. But this year there are already three QB's with THIRTY TD passes, and the potential for a couple more too. I really do not think that has ever been done.
T-fo is Medium…
Go (Insert Your Team Here)!, MD
Total Comments (4352)
Great blog! Excellent research!
True Patriot
Johnstown , CO
Total Comments (181)
No Stabler?Sigh....
Rada4life
Total Comments (475)
Great blog, ram. Thoroughly researched and articulate, as always.
BenThere_DoneThat
Valdosta , GA
Total Comments (157)
Don't mean to burst your bubble, chief, but in the (ahem) "fairly comprehensive study on quarterback play since the Super Bowl era" you just did, please explain how you missed the fact that Elway played 12 games in 1987. You left off his rushing statistics as well (300+ yards in 12 games), proving you did not analyze this as well as you think you did.
Elway, in 12 games, averaged about 300 yards of offense per game (same as Brady this year), and averaged close to two touchdowns per game on his own.
Is 54 percent completion very good? Not really, but again, if you had watched those games, and knew anything about them, you'd know that Elway, like Favre, was very much a gun-slinger, and despite not having all the stats you solely use to come to an opinion on a QB, he still was very dominant, and truly, the most impactful player in the game that season.
To compare him to Joey Harrington's 16 game total in 2004 is flat-out ignorant.
This goes along with your theory that playbooks back in the day resembled those on Tecmo Bowl. To honestly suggest the 1970s QB had six plays to choose from is just as ridiculous as those who are saying offenses and defenses have not improved proportionally over the years. Your reasoning is highly suspect, and you put zero stock into the past.
Apples and oranges, though...you can't compare the players from 30 years ago to the ones today in any sport.
I also happen to disagree with Bill Simmons' "This Guy Is Related To Boston And/Or My Dad In Some Way, Therefore He's Great" philosophy. But I don't think your decision to base all of this purely on stats that do not accurately reflect vast improvements in technology, health/medicine, equipment and just simple evolution is correct, either.
Steelercooz
St. Paul, MN
Total Comments (3667)
Steelercooz,
First off, thanks for taking an interest in the blog. I appreciate thoughtful comments.
I left off rushing statistics intentionally, neither to advance my argument nor to hinder it. In my previous blog on qb play I compared Mike Vick to Troy Aikman, purely on passing stats. I did not add in that Mike Vick also ran the ball for hundreds of more yards. I was only investigating passing ability. This is a similar study on the passing ability of qb's through the years. Perhaps I should have specified, however.
As for the comparison with Harrington, the attempts bear out the differences. Harrington had the advantage of 79 more pass attempts, which was presented. He did about the same damage as Elway did with 79 more attempts. I disagree with your stating that the comparison is ignorant. The TD-Int ratio is identical. The completion percentage is close. I was not claiming that Harrington was better than Elway. Rather that was an attempt to show how the expectations on quarterbacks have changed over time. Harrington's season was a travesty and completely unacceptable, whereas Elway's was MVP-worthy. Compare 1987 Elway with 2006 McNabb. McNabb had better number in less games, but he was nowhere close to MVP. (For the record. I watched all of those 1987 games, replacement players and all. I grew up in Colorado during the 80's)
Also, Elway was not the most impactful player of 1987. He was fourth in pass yards per game, 8th in TD's, 12th in passing efficiency. The most dominant player was either Joe Montana (266/398, 66.8%, 3054 yds, 31 TD, 13 Int), Reggie White (21 sacks) or Jerry Rice (1078 yds, 22 TD's)
I also disagree that we can't compare players with those of 30 years ago. Why not? Certainly we have to keep the proper context, realizing that styles of play change over time. However, to state that it is impossible to compare is willful ignorance. I think you just don't want them compared. You prefer to keep your sacred cows, sacred, and any iconoclasts need to be refuted.
The Ram
Pittsburgh , PA
Total Comments (8731)
Well, you're wrong, I neither have, nor want, any sacred cows. I'm a Steelers fan, so believe me, I don't ever want to think about the 80s from a "Those Were The Glory Days" standpoint.
What's ironic about your take on this is how you feel today's players are better while screaming about sacred cows and the like. Those players you so easily dismiss are as much a part of why today's game is better as any other factor.
The knowledge of the players back in the 70s cannot be compared to today. That's not ignorance. That's reality. They only had the guidance of around 30 years of professional football. The players today have 60+ years of experience from which to draw. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp. Less experience = less intelligence top to bottom (provided exceptions here and there)
"Harrington had the advantage of 79 more pass attempts, which was presented. He did about the same damage as Elway did with 79 more attempts. I disagree with your stating that the comparison is ignorant. The TD-Int ratio is identical."
I don't understand this at all, how can you possibly compare two quarterbacks when one played 16 games and the other only played 12?
The ratio is NOT identical. You cannot get past the fact that Elway mirrored Harrington's stats in 25 percent less games. THAT'S ONE QUARTER OF AN ENTIRE SEASON. How is this comparison valid at all? Where would Elway have been if he played 16 games? How close was Harrington to Elway after his 12th game? You didn't look at that perspective at all. You saw 19 and 12, and therefore, made it equal.
You can argue your side all day, the point is you failed to point this out to your reader, and that's a huge omission. It ends there.
Don't miss the forest for the trees...
Steelercooz
St. Paul, MN
Total Comments (3667)
Comment
Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.