QB Rating... Yet Another Look

In our recent discussion of the calculation of QB Rating, we noted the differences between how QB Rating is calculated in the NCAA and the NFL. Though the calculations are different, one would hope if not expect that these calculations would be a fair comparison from one QB to another.

Not so.

I decided to engage in an interesting exercise. Below is the Top 10 NCAA QB’s in terms of QB Rating as calculated by the NCAA formula:

1) Kellen Moore, Boise State – 167.3
2) Tim Tebow, Florida – 164.2
3) Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame – 161.4
4) Max Hall, BYU – 160.1
5) Kyle Padron, SMU – 159.9
6) Andy Dalton, TCU – 159.6
7) Nathan Enderle, Idaho – 157.3
8) Case Keenum, Houston – 154.8
9) Dan LeFevour, Central Michigan – 154.0
10) Ryan Mallett, Arkansas – 152.5

Next, I took their statistics from 2009 and calculated what would be their equivalent NFL QB Rating. I expected the results to be similar. See for yourself:

1) Kellen Moore – 121.4
2) Jimmy Clausen – 113.3
3) Tim Tebow – 112.7
4) Andy Dalton – 110.0
5) Dan LeFevour – 109.1
6) Max Hall – 107.0
7) Case Keenum – 106.4
8) Kyle Padron – 106.2
9) Ryan Mallett – 103.7
10) Nathan Enderle – 103.7

Interesting results. LeFevour makes the biggest jump – from 9th to 5th. Clearly this means that he will be better at the pro level than in college.

Ok, that’s a joke… and a mathematics joke at that. I’m embarrassed.

Let’s check out the NFL Quarterbacks and how they would rank using the NCAA formula. First, here is how they rank on ESPN.com in terms of NFL-calculated QB Rating.

1) Drew Brees, Saints – 109.6
2) Philip Rivers, Chargers – 104.5
3) Brett Favre, Vikings – 103.5
4) AaRod, Packers – 102.4
5) The Greatest Statistical Quarterback of All-Time in Non-Pressure Situations, Colts – 101.0
6) Matt Schaub, Texans – 99.1
7) Ben Roethlisberger, Steelers – 98.9
8) Tom Brady, Patriots – 97.4
9) Tony Romo, Cowboys – 97.0
10) Donovan McNabb, Eagles – 94.5

Now here’s how these players would rank using the NCAA formula:

1) Drew Brees – 159.9
2) Philip Rivers – 154.6
3) The Greatest Statistical Quarterback of All-Time in Non-Pressure Situations, Colts – 149.7
4) Ben Roethlisberger – 149.5
5) Matt Schaub – 148.6
6) AaRod – 148.2
7) Brett Favre – 148.2
8) Tom Brady – 144.0
9) Tony Romo – 142.8
10) Donovan McNabb – 142.3

Again, most of these results seem close enough. But you still can’t help but notice some differences.


For example, Brett Favre drops to 7th from 3rd. That’s a pretty big drop. If there’s a Vikings fan and a Packers fan arguing over who has the better QB (certainly an understandable argument), the difference between “who is better” is just a matter of how you calculate the numbers. If you use the NFL formula, then Favre is better. But if you use the NCAA formula, AaRod is better.

How can we use two different and arbitrary formulas to rank the game’s most important position?

It seems to me that these numbers are just way too arbitrary to take at face value. In a general sense, you can sort of say that a guy like Drew Brees has had a better season than someone like Mark Sanchez (NFL QB Rating of 63.2). But when it comes to miniscule differences like Matt Schaub (99.1) vs. Ben Roethlisberger (98.9), how can you really tell the difference? You can’t. And that’s why you cannot judge a QB on QB Rating.