[aeneas1]

Exactly. If he HAS to come from behind, then our chances of winning are low. Because of the stats in the subject, not his individual ability. I will take the alternative please.

the gsot rams (1999-2001) were 0-8 when they trailed headed into the 4th quarter, what a bunch of losers, if they only had a great 4qcb quarterback they could have been something special, alas.

honestly, this 4qcb stuff is plain silly imo, brady got credit for a 4qcb win yesterday against the steelers, only because roethlisberger's receiver dropped ben's td pass, otherwise ben would have gotten the credit, and of course the patriots defense blanked the steelers in the 4th, allowing brady and the pats to mount a comeback in the first place.

and i guess garropolo is an example of a stud come-from-behind qb given he's posted 4qcb games in 50% of his starts this year - against the hapless bears he couldn't lead the niners into the endzone, the niners won on 5 field goals, but he's a late-game threat because he led them to a 4th quarter field goal to top trubisky and the bears 31st ranked scoring offense, an offense that the niners shut out in the second half.

maybe if the rams defense had shut out the skins, seahawks and eagles in the 4th as well, goff would have had a chance at a 4qcb game or two.

[dieterbrock]

IIRC Aaron Rodgers has a terrible win % when trailing starting the 4th quarter.
Which makes the stat pretty invalid imo

[ramsman34]

Ya. I’m kinda done with trying to argue. I just want a QB who can make enough plays to win, regardless of quarter, a D that can doninate and score, and a STs unit that can flip field position and occasionally score....

Oh wait, I want EXACTLY what we have.

[aeneas1]

IIRC Aaron Rodgers has a terrible win % when trailing starting the 4th quarter.
Which makes the stat pretty invalid imo

winning teams don't make a living pulling games out in the 4th quarter, they make a living beating teams early and then closing the show in the 4th... here's a look at each team's win % when trailing entering the 4th quarter, from 2000-2017, a very bleak picture, also included is how often each team entered the 4th trailing (gm%) - is it any surprise that the patriots have entered the 4th trailing just 29.5% of the time since the 2000 season while the browns are at 61.8%?

[ramsman34]

Great stats! Also, teams that get the lead going into the 4th typically force their opponent to be one dimensional and to take chances, increasing risk and making your defense’s job easier. In the contrary, when your team is trailing in the 4th THEY become that one dimensional, risk taking team.

Get the lead, protect the lead, win more games. Just like the stats support. And Brady is the luckiest 4th qtr comeback QB, not the best by any stretch. I wonder if the best ranked comeback kid has a SB ring?

[/zn/]

IIRC Aaron Rodgers has a terrible win % when trailing starting the 4th quarter.
Which makes the stat pretty invalid imo

Or, makes Rodgers an iffy qb in 4th quarter crunch time. It's a well-known weakness of his, but then they all have flaws of one kind or another.

Meanwhile Brady has been in 4 superbowls where they won on 4th quarter drives by either coming from behind or breaking a tie.

In last year's superbowl the Falcons had a chance to take it but choked. Of course that wasn't just Ryan, it was the playcalling too. The Falcons had 3 drives late in the 4th quarter where they could have sealed it, and didn't. Yet they had a prolific offense that got 540 points in the regular season. If you combine the last 4 games of the regular season with their 2 playoff games (and so not including the superbowl), in those 6 games the avg. point differential was 38.8-17.7. But, they couldn't seal the superbowl win when they had the chances.

The opposite of a team that can win in crunch time is not one with a prolific front-running offense. For one thing those 2 things are just plain not mutually exclusive. You CAN have a team that is capable of doing both things (like the 99 Rams...or they would never have beaten Tampa or won the superbowl).

Anyway the opposite of a team that is good in crunch time is one that chokes in crunch time.

All teams end up in close games sooner or later, no matter how prolific they are in other games. They either win most of those, or choke in most of those.

..

[PARAM]

Or, makes Rodgers an iffy qb in 4th quarter crunch time. It's a well-known weakness of his, but then they all have flaws of one kind or another.

Meanwhile Brady has been in 4 superbowls where they won on 4th quarter drives by either coming from behind or breaking a tie.

In last year's superbowl the Falcons had a chance to take it but choked. Of course that wasn't just Ryan, it was the playcalling too.

So we can have QB's who's flaw is they rarely bring their team back in the 4th quarter.
Or QB's who frequently bring their teams back in the 4th quarter.
Or QB's who get bad playcalling on those 4th quarter drives that fail?

I suppose we could also get QB's who regularly bring their teams back and get phenominal playcalling on their 4th quarter drives?

And what about the other 10 players?

It's the ultimate TEAM game and yet when a team comes back in the 4th quarter regularly (or vice versa), it's all on the QB?

Give me a good quarterback (resume irrelevant) and a good team and I'll feel good about one drive to win the game.

What I'd like to know about all these quarterbacks with a large amount of GWFQDs is how many times have they not done it in that situation.

[PARAM]

Just for shits and giggles I looked up QB rankings with 4th quarter comebacks. First we should know, a score that puts his team ahead for good 3 minutes into the 4th quarter counts as a "comeback". Or am I wrong?

Manning is at the top with 45, so I looked at the Colts wins/losses by 7 points or less from 1999-2010. Now certainly this doesn't mean each win was a comeback or some of the comebacks he's credited with ended up a 7 point game or less. They were 62-26 in games decided by 7 points or less. Over that same period they were 2-6 in the postseason in games decided by 7 points or less. So obviously like everything else there are other factors. Like how often does it happen vs. good defenses? How often did a receiver make an ungodly play? How many times did they get huge penalty yardage? And probably even more factors.

I found it funny they had a .705 winning percentage in the regular season and a .250 winning percentage in the postseason. Having said that, we've seen him do it a number of times and those we remember. How many times have we seen him fail and do we remember those as well? Those experts who compile those numbers as a job should come up with a success percentage in those situations instead of just a number. Because we all know during Manning's tenure with Indy he was put in that situation more times than most because of their D.

[dieterbrock]

Just for shits and giggles I looked up QB rankings with 4th quarter comebacks. First we should know, a score that puts his team ahead for good 3 minutes into the 4th quarter counts as a "comeback". Or am I wrong?

Manning is at the top with 45, so I looked at the Colts wins/losses by 7 points or less from 1999-2010. Now certainly this doesn't mean each win was a comeback but they were 62-26 in games decided by 7 points or less. Over that same period they were 2-6 in the postseason in games decided by 7 points or less. So obviously like everything else there are other factors. Like how often does it happen vs. good defenses? How often did a receiver make an ungodly play? How many times did they get huge penalty yardage? And probably even more factors.

I found it funny they had a .705 winning percentage in the regular season and a .250 winning percentage in the postseason.

The Rodgers stat was based on trailing starting the 4th Q whether trailing by 1 point or 100.
The man who has converted more Hail Mary passes than anyone else is somehow "flawed"? Gimme a break.

[PARAM]

The Rodgers stat was based on trailing starting the 4th Q whether trailing by 1 point or 100.
The man who has converted more Hail Mary passes than anyone else is somehow "flawed"? Gimme a break.

They need to change the parameters from all comebacks in the 4th quarter to 8 minutes or less left in the 4th quarter, as well as the number of failures and an overall percentage. There are teams with great offenses and lousy defenses (especially since the cap was instituted) who give the lead back as soon as the offense gets it. In other words, I'd bet a dollar to a rolling donut the guys with the most comebacks, had the most chances, which would mean they had their fair number of failures also. Nothing is definitive when it comes to stats, only that the stats were created to give an "indication".