Drew Willy

[17to85]

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. 

 

sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them. 

[17to85]

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

 

Really? Is it that ridiculous to think that passing yards are overrated when evaluating a quarterback? Or that Willy needs to make better decisions with the ball in his hands?

 

yes. 

 

Passing yards are one of the biggest numbers for a qb, the others on that level are going to be completion % and tds in my mind. You want a qb who can complete passes and throw tds. Yardage just goes along with the completing passes. 

[Yourface]

 

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. 

 

sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them. 

 

 

Not necessarily when it comes to passing yards, as I've already shown.

[DR. CFL]

More importantly might be a team that doesn't consistently lose the turnover ratio in games....a significant correlation in the outcome of games.

[Yourface]

 

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

 

Really? Is it that ridiculous to think that passing yards are overrated when evaluating a quarterback? Or that Willy needs to make better decisions with the ball in his hands?

 

yes. 

 

Passing yards are one of the biggest numbers for a qb, the others on that level are going to be completion % and tds in my mind. You want a qb who can complete passes and throw tds. Yardage just goes along with the completing passes. 

 

 

... And what you DON'T want is someone who throws a lot of interceptions. Passing yards tend to be the first thing that the average fan looks at when evaluating a quarterback, even though there are clearly better methods of evaluation.

[Mr Dee]

 

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. 

 

 

Stats are taken from games, not the other way around.

In other words, you cannot say that running the ball 60% passing will win a game for you, but you can say in a particular game it did.

Stats are pliable, you can conform them to any argument as seen fit.

 

And as to the statement that there is no correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and not winning….I don't agree.

Generally speaking, in the CFL, the team that has the better passing statistics has a better chance of winning the game.

[Yourface]

More importantly might be a team that doesn't consistently lose the turnover ratio in games....a significant correlation in the outcome of games.

 

And a good portion of the blame has to fall on the QB for throwing back-breaking interceptions.

[Yourface]

 

 

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. 

 

 

Stats are taken from games, not the other way around.

In other words, you cannot say that running the ball 60% passing will win a game for you, but you can say in a particular game it did.

Stats are pliable, you can conform them to any argument as seen fit.

 

And as to the statement that there is no correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and not winning….I don't agree.

Generally speaking, in the CFL, the team that has the better passing statistics has a better chance of winning the game.

 

 

Of course passing yards have some bearing on the outcome of a game... But again, the point we're making is that passing yards are overrated in the grand scheme of things, and that other factors such as the TD-INT ratio play a greater part in winning and losing, as well as in evaluating a quarterback.

[Ripper]

 

 

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

 

Really? Is it that ridiculous to think that passing yards are overrated when evaluating a quarterback? Or that Willy needs to make better decisions with the ball in his hands?

 

yes. 

 

Passing yards are one of the biggest numbers for a qb, the others on that level are going to be completion % and tds in my mind. You want a qb who can complete passes and throw tds. Yardage just goes along with the completing passes. 

 

 

... And what you DON'T want is someone who throws a lot of interceptions. Passing yards tend to be the first thing that the average fan looks at when evaluating a quarterback, even though there clearly better methods of evaluation.

 

People who throw the ball a lot, throw more pick's. The same 4 qb's that have the most attempts are listed in different order in the ones with the most int's. Throwing the ball has its risk's. If the bombers offensive strategy is to throw a lot, then the int numbers will stay higher than normal or higher than teams that don't throw as much.  Willy most picks, 3rd in attempts. glenn 2nd in picks 4th in attempts. ray most attempts 3rd in picks. burris 4th in picks 2nd in attempts.  same 4 guys in yardage. ray, willy, glenn, burris. 

[Mr Dee]

 

Stats are taken from games, not the other way around.

In other words, you cannot say that running the ball 60% passing will win a game for you, but you can say in a particular game it did.

Stats are pliable, you can conform them to any argument as seen fit.

 

And as to the statement that there is no correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and not winning….I don't agree.

Generally speaking, in the CFL, the team that has the better passing statistics has a better chance of winning the game.

 

 

Of course passing yards have some bearing on the outcome of a game... But again, the point we're making is that passing yards are overrated in the grand scheme of things, and that other factors such as the TD-INT ratio plays a greater part in winning and losing, as well as in evaluating a quarterback.

 

 

Passing yards are to a QB as rushing yards are to a running back.

That's as simple as it can be related.

We don't have to over-analyze every statistic. 

[Yourface]

 

 

Stats are taken from games, not the other way around.

In other words, you cannot say that running the ball 60% passing will win a game for you, but you can say in a particular game it did.

Stats are pliable, you can conform them to any argument as seen fit.

 

And as to the statement that there is no correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and not winning….I don't agree.

Generally speaking, in the CFL, the team that has the better passing statistics has a better chance of winning the game.

 

 

Of course passing yards have some bearing on the outcome of a game... But again, the point we're making is that passing yards are overrated in the grand scheme of things, and that other factors such as the TD-INT ratio plays a greater part in winning and losing, as well as in evaluating a quarterback.

 

 

Passing yards are to a QB as rushing yards are to a running back.

That's as simple as it can be related.

We don't have to over-analyze every statistic. 

 

 

Agreed... Yards per carry are a much more meaningful stat than total rushing yards.

[Yourface]

 

 

 

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

 

Really? Is it that ridiculous to think that passing yards are overrated when evaluating a quarterback? Or that Willy needs to make better decisions with the ball in his hands?

 

yes. 

 

Passing yards are one of the biggest numbers for a qb, the others on that level are going to be completion % and tds in my mind. You want a qb who can complete passes and throw tds. Yardage just goes along with the completing passes. 

 

 

... And what you DON'T want is someone who throws a lot of interceptions. Passing yards tend to be the first thing that the average fan looks at when evaluating a quarterback, even though there are clearly better methods of evaluation.

 

People who throw the ball a lot, throw more pick's. The same 4 qb's that have the most attempts are listed in different order in the ones with the most int's. Throwing the ball has its risk's. If the bombers offensive strategy is to throw a lot, then the int numbers will stay higher than normal or higher than teams that don't throw as much.  Willy most picks, 3rd in attempts. glenn 2nd in picks 4th in attempts. ray most attempts 3rd in picks. burris 4th in picks 2nd in attempts.  same 4 guys in yardage. ray, willy, glenn, burris. 

 

 

A QB who throws a lot should also score more than a few touchdowns. That's why the TD-INT ratio lends to a relatively fair evaluation. As I've already shown, there's much more correlation between the TD-INT ratio and the outcome of a game than between total passing yards and the outcome of a game.

 

Why can't everyone simply agree that Willy needs to improve his decision-making?

[Mr Dee]

 

Passing yards are to a QB as rushing yards are to a running back.

That's as simple as it can be related.

We don't have to over-analyze every statistic. 

 

 

Agreed... Yards per carry are a much more meaningful stat than total rushing yards.

 

 

I never said that.

Each stat has it's own merit.

Leave it at that.

[gbill2004]

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

Really? Is it that ridiculous to think that passing yards are overrated when evaluating a quarterback? Or that Willy needs to make better decisions with the ball in his hands?

yes.

Passing yards are one of the biggest numbers for a qb, the others on that level are going to be completion % and tds in my mind. You want a qb who can complete passes and throw tds. Yardage just goes along with the completing passes.

... And what you DON'T want is someone who throws a lot of interceptions. Passing yards tend to be the first thing that the average fan looks at when evaluating a quarterback, even though there are clearly better methods of evaluation.

People who throw the ball a lot, throw more pick's. The same 4 qb's that have the most attempts are listed in different order in the ones with the most int's. Throwing the ball has its risk's. If the bombers offensive strategy is to throw a lot, then the int numbers will stay higher than normal or higher than teams that don't throw as much. Willy most picks, 3rd in attempts. glenn 2nd in picks 4th in attempts. ray most attempts 3rd in picks. burris 4th in picks 2nd in attempts. same 4 guys in yardage. ray, willy, glenn, burris.

A QB who throws a lot should also score more than a few touchdowns. That's why the TD-INT ratio lends to a relatively fair evaluation. As I've already shown, there's much more correlation between the TD-INT ratio and the outcome of a game than between total passing yards and the outcome of a game.

Why can't everyone simply agree that Willy needs to improve his decision-making?

I agree and Drew Willy does too. He said his decision making was the number one item he needs to work on after last weeks sack-fest.

[17to85]

 

 

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. 

 

sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them. 

 

 

Not necessarily when it comes to passing yards, as I've already shown.

 

No you took a limited sample size and drew conclusions that fit your line of thinking. One season is hardly a representative sample especially when this season has been as odd as it has with wins and losses for everyone. It's nothing to do with the number of tds thrown vs. ints, it simply comes down to turnovers and teams that don't take care of the football lose. You'd be further ahead simply saying ints are a better measure of a qb.  You look at big picture sample sizes and you'll see that better stats = more wins, that's just inarguable because putting up passing yards means your offense is moving the ball and more than likely scoring points. You keep insisting passing yards are over rated, they're not. Not at all, but like any statistic it's just one thing to look at. I don't know why you feel the need to try and put some above the other... oh yeah, you're trying to crap on Drew Willy that's why. 

[Yourface]

 

 

 

 

Anytime someone hears a stat that discredits their obviously ridiculous opinion:

 

"Well that's the most overrated stat of all time!"

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. 

 

sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them. 

 

 

Not necessarily when it comes to passing yards, as I've already shown.

 

No you took a limited sample size and drew conclusions that fit your line of thinking. One season is hardly a representative sample especially when this season has been as odd as it has with wins and losses for everyone. It's nothing to do with the number of tds thrown vs. ints, it simply comes down to turnovers and teams that don't take care of the football lose. You'd be further ahead simply saying ints are a better measure of a qb.  You look at big picture sample sizes and you'll see that better stats = more wins, that's just inarguable because putting up passing yards means your offense is moving the ball and more than likely scoring points. You keep insisting passing yards are over rated, they're not. Not at all, but like any statistic it's just one thing to look at. I don't know why you feel the need to try and put some above the other... oh yeah, you're trying to crap on Drew Willy that's why. 

 

 

Well of course... And throwing interceptions means you're giving the ball away while coming away with no points of your own.

 

But anyway, one full season isn't a limited sample size lol. If you're so convinced that this year was an outlier in regards to the stats I posted, please present me with proof of your conviction. Come back to me after having calculated the same type of data for the three years prior to this one, and then I may eat my words. You're obviously grasping at straws here, because you can't even provide stats nor pertinent facts to support your argument.

 

Here's another passage of yours that I find amusing:

"It simply comes down to turnovers and teams that don't take care of the football lose." 

 

That's EXACTLY what I've been trying to say... Willy hasn't taken good care of the football this year, and it's part of the reason why he's lost so many games despite his high passing yards total. Of course there are other factors involved (for which he's not to blame), but that's one of the main issues.

[BigBlue]

Willey has got the "right stuff" but not necessarily the "right support system"

[SPuDS]

good post. Agree. would like to add that teams that fall behind in games because of defense issues (sorry but the bombers fall here) have a tendency to turn the ball over more. Being behind leads a team into taking chances as the clock winds down in the forth quarter. My 2 cents on Drew this year is most of the crushing turnover int's came late in the game when you guys were behind, when chances were being taken. In games where a running game was established and/ or you were ahead, I wouldn't say he necessarily threw more or less int's than any other qb. In fact if the team is behind and taking chances to try to come back and win, I don't think its entirely fair to blame the qb even though he is most responsible for the int himself. I'd be interested to see a stat on how many of Drew's int's were in the fourth quarter and what the score was when they occurred.

That is more to do with the overall turnover amount than td-int ratio of a quarterback. There is a well established trend in the CFL of teams that turn over the ball more lose more. You are trying to assign too much importance in winning and losing to quarterbacks I think. Willys numbers all told pretty accurately describe the Bombers season. Team that can't run so the qb has to pass more, but some mistakes made as a result which have held the team back from winning more games. Guy has played well though despite that. There are a lot of factors contributing to his play. That lack of a running game is one. How do the win/loss records look if you base it on total offensive yards? Some teams do rely a lot on the running game, thinking Calgary and Saskatchewan in particular.

Willy cost us both of the games here against you guys with terrible game crushing interceptions. My biggest concern with Willy is the fact that he regressed as the season went on.

And with a different QB we may not have even been in the game at all. Easy to point the finger when it comes down to one play but it's obviously not that simple.

Listen I'm still a Willy fan, but he's still learning how to win. I won't call him a young QB seeing as he's in his late 20's but he's not there yet. The hope is that he can take his play from the first six games this year and elevate it, but that's hardly a certainty. The fact that he got worse and worse as the season went on is what really bothers me. Once again, hopefully with a better supporting cast and with the entire off season to recuperate from the beating he took this year he'll come back and build on what he did earlier this season but we have to be prepared if he comes back next year and plays like he has recently.

So disregard the injuries, the drag of a full season on a guy in his first full season as a starter and the 70 sacks...coupled with no rhythm with his oline,receivers and RBs...

Regressed yes but it's not like he didn't have reasons to be regressing.. He didn't really have an ideal rookie season as a QB in regards to supporting cast, now did he?