[/zn/]

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.

Who is "they"? Anyway near as I can tell those are the time parameters now. It would in fact be nice if someone kept a stat on percentages.

[/zn/]

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?

I remember that after the 2006 season someone had posted a detailed breakdown of win percentages in comeback situations. It's generally not high. In fact that that point, the the team and qb combo with the highest percentage of wins in comeback situations was the Rams with Bulger. He had 66%. 66% was better than anyone else. (That later changed when the Rams OL fell dramatically apart for 3 straight years.)

So the best I have seen when someone bothered to do the numbers is 66%.

..

[Elvis]

Just so i'm clear:

QB wins and losses is not a meaningful stat but QB 4th quarter comebacks is?

[snackdaddy]

I'll take the wins. A good quarterback gets the lead early and keeps it all the way till the final gun. We still don't know if Goff can come through when trailing with 2 minutes left. But it sure feels better when he doesn't have to.

[/zn/]

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.

The other 10 players are of course crucial, thought that went without saying.

The measure you;re looking for probably is not statistical, it's more something you see. But what you want in a qb is someone who is as poised and effective under time pressure late in a close game when passing will be crucial.

In the comeback drive situation, everything you expect from a qb becomes intensified. He has to execute under especially amped up conditions.

So it's obviously not all on the qb---I always take that as something that goes without saying, it's just a basic truth---but it is also true that everything you need from your qb intensifies in that situation. The classic case would be a 2 minute drill driving for a win. Time is a factor so the passing game is especially crucial. Everyone else has to execute, obviously, BUT I've also noticed that teams execute better under those conditions when they have confidence in the qb.

So comeback drives tend to magnify the qb's contribution. Unless you can imagine a situation where a team tries to comeback from 4 points down with 3:35 left on the clock by running every down. I'm sure that has happened now and then but it's not the normal scenario. Plus of course the defense knows you have to be able to pass the ball to win, so that makes it that much more challenging.

That doesn't mean the qb CARRIES THE TEAM HIMSELF.

It means something different from that.

It means that the qb has to be especially sharp in those circumstances. His job is just harder at that point. That doesn't mean the qb does it all alone, but it does mean that if a drive like that is going to work, the qb has to be at his best.

How many players, let alone qbs, are at their best at crunch time with the game on the line and with time ticking away?

A lot are. Some aren't. Some have that knack. Some don't. This is why teams always practice for 2-minute and late-game drive situations. Trying to make it run more smoothly.

....

[dieterbrock]

Just so i'm clear:

QB wins and losses is not a meaningful stat but QB 4th quarter comebacks is?

And 31+ yard passes

[PARAM]

Who is "they"? Anyway near as I can tell those are the time parameters now. It would in fact be nice if someone kept a stat on percentages.

Those are the parameters now? I thought it was bringing you team back from a 4th quarter deficit, regardless of when it happened in the 4th quarter, so long as you engineered a drive that gave your team the lead and they won. It could happen 3 minutes into the 4th, 6 minutes into the fourth, 10 minutes into the fourth or 13 minutes into the 4th. It's not just the final drive of the game. Or the final 2 minutes of the game. Or the second half of the 4th quarter is it?

I remember that after the 2006 season someone had posted a detailed breakdown of win percentages in comeback situations. It's generally not high. In fact that that point, the the team and qb combo with the highest percentage of wins in comeback situations was the Rams with Bulger. He had 66%. 66% was better than anyone else. (That later changed when the Rams OL fell dramatically apart for 3 straight years.)

So the best I have seen when someone bothered to do the numbers is 66%.

..

I'm not looking for "somebody" to do the numbers for failures and successes. I'm asking the guys (at ESPN, NFL.com, Football Outsiders, PFF, etc) who do those things to show the most comebacks and the highest percentage of comebacks when faced with that predicament. Down, 2nd half of the 4th, comeback win or no comeback. Of course it would only be fair it just one drive was needed.

The other 10 players are of course crucial, thought that went without saying.

The measure you;re looking for probably is not statistical, it's more something you see. But what you want in a qb is someone who is as poised and effective under time pressure late in a close game when passing will be crucial.

In the comeback drive situation, everything you expect from a qb becomes intensified. He has to execute under especially amped up conditions.

So it's obviously not all on the qb---I always take that as something that goes without saying, it's just a basic truth---but it is also true that everything you need from your qb intensifies in that situation. The classic case would be a 2 minute drill driving for a win. Time is a factor so the passing game is especially crucial. Everyone else has to execute, obviously, BUT I've also noticed that teams execute better under those conditions when they have confidence in the qb.

So comeback drives tend to magnify the qb's contribution. Unless you can imagine a situation where a team tries to comeback from 4 points down with 3:35 left on the clock by running every down. I'm sure that has happened now and then but it's not the normal scenario. Plus of course the defense knows you have to be able to pass the ball to win, so that makes it that much more challenging.

That doesn't mean the qb CARRIES THE TEAM HIMSELF.

It means something different from that.

It means that the qb has to be especially sharp in those circumstances. His job is just harder at that point. That doesn't mean the qb does it all alone, but it does mean that if a drive like that is going to work, the qb has to be at his best.

How many players, let alone qbs, are at their best at crunch time with the game on the line and with time ticking away?

A lot are. Some aren't. Some have that knack. Some don't. This is why teams always practice for 2-minute and late-game drive situations. Trying to make it run more smoothly.

....

You took 500 words to say, "it's difficult, particularly more so late in the 4th quarter and it's more than just the QB"?

[/zn/]

Those are the parameters now? I thought it was bringing you team back from a 4th quarter deficit, regardless of when it happened in the 4th quarter,

Well I use PFR for this. Here's what they do say about 4qCs:

Must be an offensive scoring drive in the 4th quarter, with the team trailing by one score, though not necessarily a drive to take the lead. Only games ending in a win or tie are included.

Sounds like in theory they start it from the top of the 4th. They discuss it at length here: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... tml?p=3401

But to me, the whole point of a late game comeback is that time is an important constraint. I doubt anyone would take being down a score at the start of the 4th as being under those kinds of time pressures. I would count it more as being down by a score in a winnable game halfway through the 4th.

When I check PFR for "4th quarter comeback" stats and I have never seen any examples of them doing it from the start of the 4th quarter. But then I haven't looked at every entry obviously and they do actually say on their definition/discussion page they start from the top of the 4th.

...

[PARAM]

Troy Aikman has 16 comebacks (#58) and yet he won 3 SBs in a 4 year period.
Bradshaw has 19 (#31t) and has 4 SB championships.
Mark Sanchez has 10 and Kurt Warner has 9. Who would you rather have at QB?

[/zn/]

Troy Aikman has 16 comebacks (#58) and yet he won 3 SBs in a 4 year period.
Bradshaw has 19 (#31t) and has 4 SB championships.
Mark Sanchez has 10 and Kurt Warner has 9. Who would you rather have at QB?

Who do I want? The guy who is a good qb every quarter AND a winner in comeback situations.

No one ever made it this stark choice where you have to choose the number of comebacks. That's not realistic. You CAN have a guy who is both.

The conversation got to this place where people were saying, well choose between someone who can help get you leads in advance of the 4th quarter, or a guy who comes back in the 4th. And, my only point is that's a false dichotomy.

First, it's false to assume that it's the qb alone who got you into a comeback situation. Good teams play good teams at times and that can lead to close games and as often as not, does.

So if anyone says, choose one or the other, I would so no, that's a false dichotomy, but if I had to choose, I would choose one who can do both...because the 2 things are not mutually exclusive.

Meanwhile this whole "here's their comeback numbers which qb do you take" is another false choice. No one ever said that was the sole or chief or biggest reason for choosing a qb.

It is something I value in a qb but it does not exclude other considerations.

So if we found out that Goff was just not as good under those conditions, would I say jettison him? No. I would just factor that in as part of a well-rounded and realistic assessment of him. Just as if someone said Goff isn't the runner McNair was or Wentz is, I would say sure, that's part of his portrait, but it's not the ONLY or the DECIDING thing.

I would like to see if Goff is a comeback qb. If he is he is, then yay. If he's not, then, well okay, but, that's just part of the picture and not the complete picture or The Single Most Important Deciding Thing...cause no one said it was, or WOULD say it was.

What happens for some is that if you offer more realistic, objective ways of talking about a player, often, someone inflates that into this big deal straw man thing. Well that's not real.

I have so much to say positive about Goff, I don't particularly feel the need to defend asking this one question about him. It's just part of a whole and complete conversation.

....