Volosaurus rex
Doctorate in Volology
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2009
- Messages
- 6,041
- Likes
- 4,259
BadJerry20, there have been a series of articles produced within the last couple of years that are producing the kind of data you seek regarding fourth-quarter comebacks. Data therein is quite interesting but not synthesized in a terribly straightforward fashion.
One article, authored by Scott Kacsmar before the current season (Captain Comeback: NFL Network Chokes on List of Top 10 Clutch Quarterbacks) focuses primarily on deconstructing conclusions advanced by the NFL Network's 2008 program, "Top 10 Clutch Quarterbacks." Some interesting takeaway info from this article includes the following data:
A. Montanas comebacks werent just big in volume. He had 31, but 23 of them came on the road or a neutral site. That ties Peyton Manning for the most in NFL history.
B. Theres a short list of quarterbacks with more wins in the clutch than losses (minimum 30 games): Matt Ryan (23-14), Tom Brady (38-25), Joe Montana (34-31), Peyton Manning (50-49) and Dan Marino (51-50).
C. His revision of NFL Network's list of clutch QBs, which he emphasizes is not the same as a list of the "greatest" NFL quarterbacks, is as follows:
1. Joe Montana
2. Johnny Unitas
3. Peyton Manning
4. Tom Brady
5. Dan Marino
6. John Elway
7. Roger Staubach
8. Eli Manning
9. Ben Roethlisberger
10. Drew Brees
Another article, written prior to the 2012 season and also authored by Kacsmar, primarily focuses on demonstrating statistically why Brett Favre was NOT a great clutch quarterback (Brett Favre: Why the Gunslinger Was Not a Clutch Quarterback | Bleacher Report). There is a lot of good comparative data here.
A third article, authored by Kacsmar in October 2012 ( Peyton Manning is the NFL), contextualizes Peyton's achievement as the then-new record holder for most 4th-quarter comebacks, indeed listing everyone of them up to that point in time, but does not analyze his record in comparison to those of Montana, Marino, etc. It is worth noting that eight of Peyton's comebacks involved fourth-quarter deficits of 10 or more points, and five of them involved deficits of 14 or more points. Furthermore, the San Diego victory (2012) was the "7th time in Mannings career he came back from a deficit of 17+ points (at any time in the game), which extends his NFL record."
A fourth article, authored by Nicholas Higgins in 2010, works from the premise that not all fourth-quarter comeback attempts are created equal (FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Adjusted Comeback Efficiency). He comes up with a metric, which he calls Adjusted Comeback Efficiency, the purpose of which is to "provide a comprehensive figure for measuring a quarterbacks performance in potential game-winning or game-tying situations. . . . Adjustments were made for four factors: starting field position, time remaining in game, deficit (how many points behind), and outcome (no score, field goal attempt, touchdown). For example:
Quarterback A: after an interception return, he starts at his opponent's 5-yard line down by one point with two minutes to go.
Quarterback B: after a kickoff, he starts at his own 20-yard line down by 8 points with 30 seconds to go.
Quarterback A has a much easier scenario than Quarterback B. Therefore, the ACE rating gives more credit to Quarterback B for a successful comeback than Quarterback A, and penalizes Quarterback B less than Quarterback A for failure. . . . [In short, t]he ACE rating calculates how efficient a quarterback is in potential comeback situations, taking into account the level of difficulty of the situation."
Unfortunately, his results include only quarterbacks with at least 30 qualifying drives from 1998 to 2009 (including playoffs), so Montana and Marino are largely excluded, presumably because of insufficiently detailed drive-by-drive data. Based on this formula, Eli Manning finished with the highest ACE (1.55), which underscored efficiency at fourth-quarter comeback opportunities (when they availed themselves) despite his otherwise often erratic play. In short, a Jekyll-Hyde performance pattern.
With respect to Brady, Higgins offers some intriguing, if controversial, conclusions: "Brady has a very high ACE rating -- 1.24 -- but that still doesn't seem to fit his reputation as the best clutch quarterback of the past decade, and he ranks eight places lower in ACE (14th) than he does in QB rating (6th). Bradys career ACE rating is dragged down by his uncharacteristically poor 2009 season, when he went 1-for-10 on comebacks and had the first below-average seasonal ACE rating of his career (not counting 2004, when he only had one comeback drive). If 2009 is removed, his ACE rating is 1.32, which would be eighth on the list. Brady has also been in easier comeback situations than other quarterbacks. His average degree of difficulty per drive was the easiest of any player in the top 20 of the ACE rankings. [This, in my opinion, would suggest consistently beneficial field position as a result of excellent defense and special teams play.] Finally, there's the Adam Vinatieri effect: Every time Vinatieri hit a clutch kick in the playoffs, Brady was measured based on what we would expect from an average field-goal kicker instead. This is how Brady can lead all quarterbacks in actual comeback percentage (45 percent) but rank just 14th in ACE."
Peyton comes in with the third highest ACE score (1.40) and, interestingly, Higgins chronicles progressive improvement in Peyton's game over the course of his career in this respect: "Some (*cough* Bill Simmons *cough*) have theorized that Peyton was a choker for most of his career but became clutch somewhere around the Super Bowl victory in 2006. The theory is right, but the timing is wrong -- the year Peyton Manning became clutch was 2002. Looking at the above table, it can be seen that Peyton indeed had some rough years early in his career (including a 1-for-19 start). Since 2002, Peyton has performed exceptionally well. In fact, Peyton from the last 8 seasons would be the top quarterback by far with a 1.74 ACE rating."
Again, there is a whale of a lot of the kind of data you are looking for here, if you want to thoroughly examine these articles.
One article, authored by Scott Kacsmar before the current season (Captain Comeback: NFL Network Chokes on List of Top 10 Clutch Quarterbacks) focuses primarily on deconstructing conclusions advanced by the NFL Network's 2008 program, "Top 10 Clutch Quarterbacks." Some interesting takeaway info from this article includes the following data:
A. Montanas comebacks werent just big in volume. He had 31, but 23 of them came on the road or a neutral site. That ties Peyton Manning for the most in NFL history.
B. Theres a short list of quarterbacks with more wins in the clutch than losses (minimum 30 games): Matt Ryan (23-14), Tom Brady (38-25), Joe Montana (34-31), Peyton Manning (50-49) and Dan Marino (51-50).
C. His revision of NFL Network's list of clutch QBs, which he emphasizes is not the same as a list of the "greatest" NFL quarterbacks, is as follows:
1. Joe Montana
2. Johnny Unitas
3. Peyton Manning
4. Tom Brady
5. Dan Marino
6. John Elway
7. Roger Staubach
8. Eli Manning
9. Ben Roethlisberger
10. Drew Brees
Another article, written prior to the 2012 season and also authored by Kacsmar, primarily focuses on demonstrating statistically why Brett Favre was NOT a great clutch quarterback (Brett Favre: Why the Gunslinger Was Not a Clutch Quarterback | Bleacher Report). There is a lot of good comparative data here.
A third article, authored by Kacsmar in October 2012 ( Peyton Manning is the NFL), contextualizes Peyton's achievement as the then-new record holder for most 4th-quarter comebacks, indeed listing everyone of them up to that point in time, but does not analyze his record in comparison to those of Montana, Marino, etc. It is worth noting that eight of Peyton's comebacks involved fourth-quarter deficits of 10 or more points, and five of them involved deficits of 14 or more points. Furthermore, the San Diego victory (2012) was the "7th time in Mannings career he came back from a deficit of 17+ points (at any time in the game), which extends his NFL record."
A fourth article, authored by Nicholas Higgins in 2010, works from the premise that not all fourth-quarter comeback attempts are created equal (FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Adjusted Comeback Efficiency). He comes up with a metric, which he calls Adjusted Comeback Efficiency, the purpose of which is to "provide a comprehensive figure for measuring a quarterbacks performance in potential game-winning or game-tying situations. . . . Adjustments were made for four factors: starting field position, time remaining in game, deficit (how many points behind), and outcome (no score, field goal attempt, touchdown). For example:
Quarterback A: after an interception return, he starts at his opponent's 5-yard line down by one point with two minutes to go.
Quarterback B: after a kickoff, he starts at his own 20-yard line down by 8 points with 30 seconds to go.
Quarterback A has a much easier scenario than Quarterback B. Therefore, the ACE rating gives more credit to Quarterback B for a successful comeback than Quarterback A, and penalizes Quarterback B less than Quarterback A for failure. . . . [In short, t]he ACE rating calculates how efficient a quarterback is in potential comeback situations, taking into account the level of difficulty of the situation."
Unfortunately, his results include only quarterbacks with at least 30 qualifying drives from 1998 to 2009 (including playoffs), so Montana and Marino are largely excluded, presumably because of insufficiently detailed drive-by-drive data. Based on this formula, Eli Manning finished with the highest ACE (1.55), which underscored efficiency at fourth-quarter comeback opportunities (when they availed themselves) despite his otherwise often erratic play. In short, a Jekyll-Hyde performance pattern.
With respect to Brady, Higgins offers some intriguing, if controversial, conclusions: "Brady has a very high ACE rating -- 1.24 -- but that still doesn't seem to fit his reputation as the best clutch quarterback of the past decade, and he ranks eight places lower in ACE (14th) than he does in QB rating (6th). Bradys career ACE rating is dragged down by his uncharacteristically poor 2009 season, when he went 1-for-10 on comebacks and had the first below-average seasonal ACE rating of his career (not counting 2004, when he only had one comeback drive). If 2009 is removed, his ACE rating is 1.32, which would be eighth on the list. Brady has also been in easier comeback situations than other quarterbacks. His average degree of difficulty per drive was the easiest of any player in the top 20 of the ACE rankings. [This, in my opinion, would suggest consistently beneficial field position as a result of excellent defense and special teams play.] Finally, there's the Adam Vinatieri effect: Every time Vinatieri hit a clutch kick in the playoffs, Brady was measured based on what we would expect from an average field-goal kicker instead. This is how Brady can lead all quarterbacks in actual comeback percentage (45 percent) but rank just 14th in ACE."
Peyton comes in with the third highest ACE score (1.40) and, interestingly, Higgins chronicles progressive improvement in Peyton's game over the course of his career in this respect: "Some (*cough* Bill Simmons *cough*) have theorized that Peyton was a choker for most of his career but became clutch somewhere around the Super Bowl victory in 2006. The theory is right, but the timing is wrong -- the year Peyton Manning became clutch was 2002. Looking at the above table, it can be seen that Peyton indeed had some rough years early in his career (including a 1-for-19 start). Since 2002, Peyton has performed exceptionally well. In fact, Peyton from the last 8 seasons would be the top quarterback by far with a 1.74 ACE rating."
Again, there is a whale of a lot of the kind of data you are looking for here, if you want to thoroughly examine these articles.
Last edited:
