Trubisky’s QBR: 6th Under Center, 30th From Shotgun

Toast88

Well-known member
Joined:
May 10, 2014
Posts:
12,863
Liked Posts:
11,915
Aside from the dreadful editorial analysis (saying Trubisky was “absolutely terrible” this year), check out this interesting info and a few graphs on ESPN.com concerning Mitch Trubisky’s rookie campaign, and how he was 6th in QBR in the league from under center, but 30th from shotgun.

I would assume that’s because he was often in shotgun in obvious passing downs, and we all know Trubisky struggles with blitzes. But that stat would seem to indicate that when he’s under center and the defense doesn’t know what’s coming, he’s actually very good. Thoughts?

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...-worst-quarterbacks-2017-nfl-season-total-qbr
 

bears26

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 29, 2012
Posts:
23,269
Liked Posts:
26,181
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. Houston Rockets
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Oklahoma Sooners
Has to do with obvious passing downs and WRs not getting open during obvious passing downs. Under center, there is a little more disguise.
 

iueyedoc

Variant Also Negotiates
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
20,900
Liked Posts:
25,187
Location:
Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Indiana Hoosiers
Deshone Kizer had a better season than Mitch Trubisky... Says no one or no credible ranking system.

Don't think was 6th best under center and don't think he was 30th from shotgun. Not the good nor the bad has any value in a PFF worthy shit metric like QBR.
 

Outlaw Josey Cutler

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 5, 2012
Posts:
4,300
Liked Posts:
2,338
Location:
NJ
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Penn State Nittany Lions
Aside from the dreadful editorial analysis (saying Trubisky was “absolutely terrible” this year), check out this interesting info and a few graphs on ESPN.com concerning Mitch Trubisky’s rookie campaign, and how he was 6th in QBR in the league from under center, but 30th from shotgun.

I would assume that’s because he was often in shotgun in obvious passing downs, and we all know Trubisky struggles with blitzes. But that stat would seem to indicate that when he’s under center and the defense doesn’t know what’s coming, he’s actually very good. Thoughts?

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...-worst-quarterbacks-2017-nfl-season-total-qbr

You know who was also statistically mediocre last year (with 14 TD and 14 INT) and put up better numbers under center as opposed to shotgun? Wentz .. I am not concluding anything; merely pointing out an interesting correlation.
 

iueyedoc

Variant Also Negotiates
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
20,900
Liked Posts:
25,187
Location:
Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Indiana Hoosiers
You know who was also statistically mediocre last year (with 14 TD and 14 INT) and put up better numbers under center as opposed to shotgun? Wentz .. I am not concluding anything; merely pointing out an interesting correlation.
But more importantly, what was his QBR?
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,233
Liked Posts:
35,298
Has to do with obvious passing downs and WRs not getting open during obvious passing downs. Under center, there is a little more disguise.

Weren't we told that he could throw guys open though? In reality, this is probably just an interesting anomaly that has a myriad of factors. Part of it may be obvious passing downs, part of it may be rhythm. Dropping back from center establishes a rhythm of when to pass because you drop back in 3, 5, and 7 step drops and you know that once you hit the end of the drop, the ball is suppose to come out.

While shotgun allows you to see the field quicker, you can more easily lose your footwork, timing, and rhythm because you don't have the act of dropping back naturally telling you when to get rid of the ball. Not a big issue in college because guys get so open but can cause young QBs to struggle given the tighter windows and how important timing is to NFL offenses relative to college.
 

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
22,260
Liked Posts:
17,710
Location:
Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Weren't we told that he could throw guys open though? In reality, this is probably just an interesting anomaly that has a myriad of factors. Part of it may be obvious passing downs, part of it may be rhythm. Dropping back from center establishes a rhythm of when to pass because you drop back in 3, 5, and 7 step drops and you know that once you hit the end of the drop, the ball is suppose to come out.

While shotgun allows you to see the field quicker, you can more easily lose your footwork, timing, and rhythm because you don't have the act of dropping back naturally telling you when to get rid of the ball. Not a big issue in college because guys get so open but can cause young QBs to struggle given the tighter windows and how important timing is to NFL offenses relative to college.

The way I saw it, Loggains for better or worse was running an offense that was intentionally trying to develop Trubisky above all else. Whether it made him look good or bad. Fox and Loggains both fell on the sword in that regard. They were never going to have a great season with Trubisky starting because he had to develop. We all knew this. He was raw under center and is why the Bears were under center well above the league average for the majority of the season since Trubisky was starting. Clearly shotgun was already something he was familiar with so putting him hella under center was the one thing that benefited his development the most.
 

Adipost

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
8,622
Liked Posts:
10,049
Location:
Chicago, IL
A major issue with the Bears offense this season as it pertains to a rookie QB is the fact that the Bears didn’t have a WR that could get any YAC off of quick screens and other quick passes. Well, they did in Tarik Cohen, but they hardly used him.

This meant that all the grunt work had to be done handing the ball off to the RB’s. So any time Trubisky dropped back to pass, he had to be looking for the big chunk plays.

Last year, almost 50% of Carson Wentz’s completions were behind the line of scrimmage. It’s why a guy like Jarvis Landry or Christian Kirk are so extremely valuable.
 

ZenBear34

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 28, 2012
Posts:
4,379
Liked Posts:
3,685
Also, when the Bears were in shotgun they were passing, and everyone knew it. They had such glaringly obvious tendencies in terms of formation vs. run or pass, it's a wonder they produced at all.
 

Adipost

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
8,622
Liked Posts:
10,049
Location:
Chicago, IL
A major issue with the Bears offense this season as it pertains to a rookie QB is the fact that the Bears didn’t have a WR that could get any YAC off of quick screens and other quick passes. Well, they did in Tarik Cohen, but they hardly used him.

This meant that all the grunt work had to be done handing the ball off to the RB’s. So any time Trubisky dropped back to pass, he had to be looking for the big chunk plays.

Last year, almost 50% of Carson Wentz’s completions were behind the line of scrimmage. It’s why a guy like Jarvis Landry or Christian Kirk are so extremely valuable.

If you watch the Kansas City offense, they frequently keep a receiver from releasing at the line of scrimmage no matter if they go to him or not to keep that WR screen threat on the defense at all times.

Here is an example...

https://gfycat.com/UnfinishedJoyfulAngelfish

There are even times KC keeps 2 WR’s from releasing on each side of the field...

https://gfycat.com/FlakyGlaringIndianpangolin

And there are even plays where KC keeps 2 WR’s in on opposite sides and still go downfield, opening up the entire field for the QB...

https://gfycat.com/FabulousSleepyIslandcanary

One of the jobs of the OC is to actually help make things easier for the QB.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,909
Liked Posts:
21,660
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Aside from the dreadful editorial analysis (saying Trubisky was “absolutely terrible” this year), check out this interesting info and a few graphs on ESPN.com concerning Mitch Trubisky’s rookie campaign, and how he was 6th in QBR in the league from under center, but 30th from shotgun.

I would assume that’s because he was often in shotgun in obvious passing downs, and we all know Trubisky struggles with blitzes. But that stat would seem to indicate that when he’s under center and the defense doesn’t know what’s coming, he’s actually very good. Thoughts?

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...-worst-quarterbacks-2017-nfl-season-total-qbr

Part of why we ran better from the gun as well. 3rd and Looong. I'm with xer0h0ur on this one though I don't think they were necessarily sacrificing a win. Just a byproduct of trying not to lose. Going schoolyard with this shitty unit would probably have been more effective but not part of their repertoire.
 

bamainatlanta

You wake him up, you keep him up
Staff member
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Aug 10, 2013
Posts:
34,822
Liked Posts:
29,019
Location:
Cumming
From 2015....

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...6-yard-two-pick-game-has-espns-best-qbr-ever/

here’s a risk of beating a dead horse when you talk about QBR, ESPN’s proprietary statistic that was rolled out with great fanfare four years ago as the “one stat that measures the totality of a quarterback’s performance.” I said plenty about QBR last week, and perhaps no more needs to be said.

But today I decided to dig a little deeper into what is, according to QBR, the greatest game any quarterback has ever played: Charlie Batch’s 186-yard, two-interception performance against the Buccaneers in 2010.

Really. Under “All-Time Best Games” on ESPN.com’s QBR page, the top game on the list is an utterly forgettable game that Batch played in place of the suspended Ben Roethlisberger in 2010. I couldn’t comprehend how 186 yards and two interceptions could add up to the greatest game ever played, with a 99.9 QBR on a scale of 0-100, but then again I didn’t remember exactly what Batch did in that game, and I know ESPN claims that QBR benefits from tape analysis that includes dropped passes and performance under pressure and other things that the traditional stats overlook. So I decided to re-watch Batch’s game and see how it looked.

Thanks to NFL.com’s Game Pass, it’s easy to go back and watch old games. So I did. And what I saw was not the greatest game any quarterback had in NFL history. Not even close. I’m sure Charlie Batch doesn’t think it was the greatest game in NFL history. I’m sure Charlie Batch’s mom doesn’t think it was the greatest game in NFL history. No sane person could possibly think it was the greatest game in NFL history. Only ESPN’s super-secret QBR formula could possibly arrive at the conclusion that it was the greatest game in NFL history.

Batch’s first pass of the game was absolutely terrible. He hit Aqib Talib in stride, right between the numbers — which is not a good thing because Talib played for the Buccaneers. The Buccaneers’ offense couldn’t do anything with the great field position Batch gave up with his interception, but the Bucs did kick a field goal to take a 3-0 lead. Shortly after that, CBS showed a split screen of Talib and Batch and called them “the hero and the goat.”

So how did Batch go from goat to G.O.A.T., at least according to QBR? I have no earthly idea, because ESPN doesn’t make its QBR formula public. But there was certainly nothing in the rest of Batch’s play that day that suggested a “Greatest Of All Time” performance.

The Steelers’ second possession ended in a three-and-out when Batch dumped off a pass to running back Mewelde Moore, and Moore dropped it. QBR apparently doesn’t penalize Batch for the drop, but even if Moore had caught the ball, he was very unlikely to pick up the first down. Why doesn’t QBR penalize Batch for throwing a third-down pass well short of the line to gain? I don’t know, you don’t know, no one knows except the people who calculate QBR, and they’re not saying.

Batch finally had a big play on the Steelers’ third possession, a 45-yard touchdown pass to Mike Wallace. That pass undoubtedly did a lot to bolster Batch’s QBR, but it really shouldn’t have: Wallace was well covered, Batch probably shouldn’t have thrown to him, and it only turned into a touchdown because Wallace made a great play on the ball while Buccaneers rookie safety Cody Grimm (a backup who was only playing because starting safety Tanard Jackson was suspended) lost sight of the ball and didn’t know where it was until Wallace caught it in the end zone.

As Steve Tasker, who was serving as the color commentator on the game for CBS, put it: “That ball’s up for grabs, and Grimm can’t make a play on it because he didn’t turn around and look for it. They had it covered, they just couldn’t make the play.”

That was the first “big play” Batch made in the game: A ball he threw into coverage that only turned into a touchdown because the defensive back lost sight of it.

Soon after that, Batch threw his second touchdown pass, another deep ball to Wallace in the end zone. That pass was even worse: Batch underthrew it, Talib reached up and grabbed it, and then somehow the ball bounced off Talib’s hands and into Wallace’s hands for another touchdown.

“The Bucs had it covered,” Tasker said on the broadcast. “Talib has his hands on it and tips it right to Wallace. That goes from being a pick-off in the end zone to a touchdown, just like that. . . . Talib’s got to be looking at himself going, ‘You got to be kidding me.’ He was right on that play and all of a sudden it’s a touchdown.”

When ESPN rolled out QBR, it boasted that the use of film study improved QBR because it could weed out things like dropped passes, which count against a quarterback’s stats but aren’t the quarterback’s fault. But what good is film study if it gives credit to Batch for two long touchdown passes, without noticing that both passes were thrown into coverage and could just as easily have been intercepted?

It’s not that Batch was terrible in his “all-time greatest” QBR game: On Batch’s third and final touchdown pass of the day, he did a nice job of buying himself some time and then finding an open Hines Ward in the end zone for a touchdown. It was a good play by Batch, but no better a play than we see quarterbacks make every Sunday — certainly not a play that screams “Greatest game in NFL history!”

That was Batch’s final touchdown pass of the game. He did throw another interception, again right into the hands of a defender: Buccaneers linebacker Quincy Black intercepted it with ease.

“He just throws it right to him. Quincy Black wasn’t moving anywhere,” Tasker said on the broadcast.

Why didn’t that interception count against Batch’s QBR? Maybe because QBR is “clutch-weighted,” which means it places greater importance on plays that come late in close games, and Batch’s second interception came after the Steelers had already taken a big enough lead that the game was in hand. But the Steelers’ big lead in that game was mostly attributable to their defense, which totally shut down Buccaneers quarterback Josh Freeman, who was benched after throwing a pick-six. Does Batch really deserve more credit on his QBR just because his defense shut down the other team’s quarterback?

To review, in that Steelers-Buccaneers game, Batch threw 17 passes. Two of them were interceptions thrown directly into the hands of the opposing defense. Two of them were long touchdown passes that easily could have been intercepted if the defensive backs had done their jobs. One was a legitimately good touchdown pass. On the other passes, Batch went 9-for-12 for 90 yards.

Does that sound to you like the greatest game any quarterback has ever played in NFL history? If it does, there might be a place for you in ESPN’s analytics department.
 

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
22,260
Liked Posts:
17,710
Location:
Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Part of why we ran better from the gun as well. 3rd and Looong. I'm with xer0h0ur on this one though I don't think they were necessarily sacrificing a win. Just a byproduct of trying not to lose. Going schoolyard with this shitty unit would probably have been more effective but not part of their repertoire.

The only thing that made me really go what the fuck and become irate was that Loggains' high usage of under center with Trubisky signaled he was trying to develop that aspect of his game YET the dumb son of a bitch kept Cohen off the field routinely because he admittedly didn't like that defenses were playing coverage differently with him on the field. So you want to develop Mitch's under center play but you don't want him to see those defensive looks? What in the actual fuck? Classic LOLggains.
 

PickSix

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 9, 2015
Posts:
2,686
Liked Posts:
1,334
Maybe Mitch just felt a little bit better when he got to actually touch that centers ass rather than just look at it. Just a theory.
 

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
22,260
Liked Posts:
17,710
Location:
Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Maybe Mitch just felt a little bit better when he got to actually touch that centers ass rather than just look at it. Just a theory.

Aaron Rodgers agrees.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,909
Liked Posts:
21,660
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
The only thing that made me really go what the fuck and become irate was that Loggains' high usage of under center with Trubisky signaled he was trying to develop that aspect of his game YET the dumb son of a bitch kept Cohen off the field routinely because he admittedly didn't like that defenses were playing coverage differently with him on the field. So you want to develop Mitch's under center play but you don't want him to see those defensive looks? What in the actual fuck? Classic LOLggains.

Not only that. If you know that stuff is coming, you actually have an advantage. It's called scheming. Before this year, I thought Loggains may have something to offer because he was actually calling pro plays, LOL and I do appreciate that he's actually helped Trubs future but this year's game planning and call sequencing was shit. Bye.
 

Top