2020 Quarterback Competition

[Undone]

The spring was a lot of wasted practice during the spring game.  Guys that carried weight in the  spring game were ghosts during the season.

Name some of them.

 

[skers83]

Haven’t went through the whole thread so if it was posted earlier I apologize. All season people have said something has been off with Martinez and they are right from what little I’ve been able to gather. It sounds like he played the whole season with a bum shoulder which required surgery early this week to repair. This would explain quite a bit in both the running and passing game issues. I’m all for a open QB competition this spring but don’t be surprised if a healthy Martinez wins the job. 

I hadn't heard that he had surgery this week. Like you said that would explain alot.

 

[Minnesota_husker]

Name some of them.

Casper

 

[Courtesy Flush]

Yeah, it's hard to tell how McCaffrey is at passing. He's had some real bad passes, so he will need to work on that in the off season. He's definitely a great option QB. 

I am still interested to know whether Martinez is injured. He hasn't looked right running or passing the ball for a while now. The good news is that the QB position has some depth now. I just hope whoever gets beat in the spring/fall for the number one spot sticks around. I can't remember the last season Nebraska has made it through the season without the starting QB getting injured. 

QBR isn’t based on passing stats alone. That’s what makes this a good measure of comparison. It incorporates all of a quarterback's contributions to winning, including how he impacts the game on passes, rushes, turnovers, and penalties. Since QBR is built from the play level, it accounts for a team's level of success or failure on every play to provide the proper context, then allocates credit to the quarterback and his teammates to produce a clearer measure of quarterback efficiency.
 

The Central Limit Theorem requires the sample to be random and it’s not.

What statistic would your confidence interval be on? Where would you get your standard deviation? I don’t think it would be on QBR; QBR is calculated from multiple plays.

As I mentioned above, QBR takes into account the entire performance of the QBs game/series of games. During the games, the plays are rarely the same or in the same order. Defensive sets are rarely the same from play to play. Therefore the process is inherently random. Also, we are looking at a snap shot in time of a players performance through these randomly selected circumstances. All meet the criteria for using CLT.
 

You can obtain a confidence interval based on that QBR as a ranking in the same way you would with the percentage of highest recorded responses on a survey. With that established, a t-test can be conducted as well, and you can also identify standard error from play to play. As you probably know, standard error of a statistic is the estimated standard deviation of a sampled distribution. That’s as close as you get with incomplete samples. 
 

Three principles at play - CLT, Standard Error and Law of large numbers. 

 

[Husker in WI]

QBR isn’t based on passing stats alone. That’s what makes this a good measure of comparison. It incorporates all of a quarterback's contributions to winning, including how he impacts the game on passes, rushes, turnovers, and penalties. Since QBR is built from the play level, it accounts for a team's level of success or failure on every play to provide the proper context, then allocates credit to the quarterback and his teammates to produce a clearer measure of quarterback efficiency.
 

As I mentioned above, QBR takes into account the entire performance of the QBs game/series of games. During the games, the plays are rarely the same or in the same order. Defensive sets are rarely the same from play to play. Therefore the process is inherently random. Also, we are looking at a snap shot in time of a players performance through these randomly selected circumstances. All meet the criteria for using CLT.
 

You can obtain a confidence interval based on that QBR as a ranking in the same way you would with the percentage of highest recorded responses on a survey. With that established, a t-test can be conducted as well, and you can also identify standard error from play to play. As you probably know, standard error of a statistic is the estimated standard deviation of a sampled distribution. That’s as close as you get with incomplete samples. 
 

Three principles at play - CLT, Standard Error and Law of large numbers. 

QBR is better than the old rating, but it's still somewhat subjective at the end of the day. There's not necessarily a clean way to do the bolded on a given play. Again it's definitely better than rating which is only passing and doesn't account for drops, pressure, etc, but QBR can only account for those in a limited way as well. QBR can lessen the penalty against a QB if an incompletion is because of instant pressure in his face, but there's no way of accurately assessing what would have happened if the QB had time.

Also, it's great that QBR assesses both passing and running, which does give us a better idea of MccCaffrey's performance. But the run/pass ratio with him this year is unsustainable, and using the QBR just for passing plays is back to not enough data to say much about him as a passer. I guarantee you his QBR goes down if he plays a lot of snaps next year with the same ~3 to 1 run/pass split we had with him this year.

 

[Dan92]

QBR isn’t based on passing stats alone. That’s what makes this a good measure of comparison. It incorporates all of a quarterback's contributions to winning, including how he impacts the game on passes, rushes, turnovers, and penalties. Since QBR is built from the play level, it accounts for a team's level of success or failure on every play to provide the proper context, then allocates credit to the quarterback and his teammates to produce a clearer measure of quarterback efficiency.
 

As I mentioned above, QBR takes into account the entire performance of the QBs game/series of games. During the games, the plays are rarely the same or in the same order. Defensive sets are rarely the same from play to play. Therefore the process is inherently random. Also, we are looking at a snap shot in time of a players performance through these randomly selected circumstances. All meet the criteria for using CLT.
 

You can obtain a confidence interval based on that QBR as a ranking in the same way you would with the percentage of highest recorded responses on a survey. With that established, a t-test can be conducted as well, and you can also identify standard error from play to play. As you probably know, standard error of a statistic is the estimated standard deviation of a sampled distribution. That’s as close as you get with incomplete samples. 
 

Three principles at play - CLT, Standard Error and Law of large numbers. 

I have been reading these posts for a while but do not comment because I normally do not want to get involved. But I do agree with the previous person that said that these statistics do not mean what you think they mean. I like Mccaffrey just as much as the next person, but CLT/SE/LLN aside, you cannot make the claims you are making from this sample. I am currently getting my PhD in statistics, do not feel like I have to prove that to you so you can believe it or not. I do not care what types of statistical summaries and tests you would like to conduct on this data. I hate arbitrary cutoffs for things like sample size, so whether or not you think this data meets the CLT criterion whatever. But, you can't just go using this data to make claims like what you did before..."Based on inferential statistical analysis, Luke won By a landslide this year (5% error allowed). " No, I don't believe it, and no one should for that matter. 

No matter what you believe, this was not a random and representative sample. Sure, its "random" in that they have different plays in different orders blah blah blah, but that is not what is meant by random sample. Was the sample of games that Mccaffrey played representative of all the times he could have been put into play... no, probably not. And this is all observational data anyways, so you cannot make large sweeping overarching claims about the comparison between the two quarterbacks, as much as we would like. 

So while sure, his numbers might be better based on some type of specific statistical test. However, you cannot use these tests to make these types of conclusions about the data. 

 

[madrat]

Name some of them.

Bunch, Forbes, Hemphill, Nance, Bradley, Jones, Chaffin, McQuitty, Liewer, Karel, Alexander, Vainuku, Cox, and Rogers.

 

[The Dude]

Frost seems dead set on Martinez, whether he gives us the best chance to win or not.  I don't believe there will be an open competition.

 

[HuskermanMike]

Frost seems dead set on Martinez, whether he gives us the best chance to win or not.  I don't believe there will be an open competition.

They will probably have a competition, but you are right in that Adrian would win that. 

Frost won't pull Martinez in the game. He just won't. He always goes with his starter because against UCF in 97 he got pulled during the game and never forgave Osborne for it. If it is at all possible, he doesn't want to mess with the QB's psyche. 

 

[Undone]

He always goes with his starter because against UCF in 97 he got pulled during the game and never forgave Osborne for it.

Sounds a bit hard to believe honestly.

 

[twofittyonred]

Did you watch the Minnesota game? How many points did we put on the board with Vedral at the helm? That was his shot to show he was significantly better than Martinez and we put up seven points.

 

Iowa's entire defense crashed down towards him when he rolled out because the scouting report showed he's a run-first guy. That sprung Spielman wide open. So yes, it was practically a trick play in that regard. How people can't understand this is pretty confusing. Frost even explained this in the post game presser.

So what happened the second time he ran it...  it WASNT a trick play...??

 

[twofittyonred]

Haven’t went through the whole thread so if it was posted earlier I apologize. All season people have said something has been off with Martinez and they are right from what little I’ve been able to gather. It sounds like he played the whole season with a bum shoulder which required surgery early this week to repair. This would explain quite a bit in both the running and passing game issues. I’m all for a open QB competition this spring but don’t be surprised if a healthy Martinez wins the job. 

I heard this as well but have not seen anything official indicating that this is true..  If it was official why would it be kept hush hush..??

 

[Undone]

So what happened the second time he ran it...  it WASNT a trick play...??

Iowa learned their lesson the first time.

I heard this as well but have not seen anything official indicating that this is true..  If it was official why would it be kept hush hush..??

This sounds like something somebody would say that hasn't ever listened to a single Scott Frost presser. Frost doesn't comment on injuries unless they're season-ending. This is common knowledge and goes back to early last year when this pattern of his first emerged.

 

[madrat]

Did you watch the Minnesota game? How many points did we put on the board with Vedral at the helm? That was his shot to show he was significantly better than Martinez and we put up seven points.

So you are going to judge Vedral's first collegiate start at QB against one of the top B1G defenses against Martinez and his numbers against mainly powder puff competition?  Gee whiz, Wally, you're being a little hard on the Beaver.

Vedral had 110 QBR in that game.  Martinez has a 35 QBR versus OSU, 68 versus Iowa, and 142 QBR against Wisconsin.  So a cold set of conditions in his first start,a ducky position to be thrown into, didn't hinder him.  I'd say Vedral's performance was in a good light even if they only scored 7.

 

[Undone]

Vedral had 110 QBR in that game.

Fake news. Here's proof from https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4243539/noah-vedral:

So you are going to judge Vedral's first collegiate start at QB against one of the top B1G defenses against Martinez and his numbers against mainly powder puff competition?  Gee whiz, Wally, you're being a little hard on the Beaver.

No...I'm not going to do that. I wasn't one of the people saying that "Vedral is better than Martinez." That comment is directed at that crowd.