Passer Rating vs. Quarterback Rating

Attribute	Passer Rating	Quarterback Rating
Calculation	Formula involving completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown percentage, and interception percentage	Formula involving completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown percentage, and interception percentage
Range	0 to 158.3	0 to 158.3
Used in	NFL	CFL
Historical Development	Developed by the NFL in 1973	Developed by the CFL in 1987

Passer Rating and Quarterback Rating are two metrics used to evaluate the performance of quarterbacks in American football. While they may sound similar, there are key differences between the two that make them unique in their own right. In this article, we will explore the attributes of Passer Rating and Quarterback Rating and compare how they are calculated and what they measure.

Calculation Method

Passer Rating is a formula that takes into account a quarterback's completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown percentage, and interception percentage. The formula for Passer Rating is complex and involves several steps to calculate a final score. On the other hand, Quarterback Rating is a simpler formula that takes into account a quarterback's passing yards, touchdowns, interceptions, and completions. The formula for Quarterback Rating is more straightforward and easier to calculate compared to Passer Rating.

Weighting of Attributes

Passer Rating places a higher emphasis on efficiency and accuracy, as it takes into account completion percentage and interception percentage. This means that a quarterback with a high completion percentage and low interception percentage will have a higher Passer Rating. On the other hand, Quarterback Rating places more emphasis on volume statistics such as passing yards and touchdowns. This means that a quarterback who throws for a lot of yards and touchdowns will have a higher Quarterback Rating, regardless of their completion percentage or interception rate.

Scoring Range

Passer Rating has a scoring range of 0 to 158.3, with a higher score indicating a better performance by the quarterback. A perfect Passer Rating of 158.3 is rare and is achieved by very few quarterbacks in a season. On the other hand, Quarterback Rating has a scoring range of 0 to 158.3, with a higher score indicating a better performance. A perfect Quarterback Rating of 158.3 is also rare and is achieved by only a handful of quarterbacks in a season.

Historical Context

Passer Rating has been used as a metric to evaluate quarterback performance since the 1970s and is considered a standard measure of a quarterback's efficiency. It is widely recognized by fans, analysts, and players as a reliable indicator of a quarterback's skill. On the other hand, Quarterback Rating is a newer metric that has gained popularity in recent years as a simpler alternative to Passer Rating. It is used by some analysts and fans as a quick way to evaluate a quarterback's performance without delving into the complexities of Passer Rating.

Limitations

Passer Rating has been criticized for being too complex and difficult to understand for the average fan. The formula for Passer Rating involves multiple steps and calculations that can be confusing for those not familiar with the metric. On the other hand, Quarterback Rating has been criticized for oversimplifying quarterback performance by placing too much emphasis on volume statistics such as passing yards and touchdowns. This can lead to misleading conclusions about a quarterback's overall effectiveness on the field.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Passer Rating and Quarterback Rating are two metrics used to evaluate quarterback performance in American football. While Passer Rating focuses on efficiency and accuracy, Quarterback Rating places more emphasis on volume statistics. Both metrics have their own strengths and weaknesses, and it ultimately comes down to personal preference on which metric to use. Whether you prefer the complexity of Passer Rating or the simplicity of Quarterback Rating, both metrics provide valuable insights into a quarterback's performance on the field.