Brandon Lee over at BGN wrote up a good post on some numbers Pro Football Focus put together on QBs and sack responsibility. Brandon did a good job of covering the info.
PFF had Michael Vick as one of the worst QBs in the league in terms of sack responsibility and Nick Foles as one of the best. They had Vick responsible for 5 sacks, Foles just 1.
The stats are a bit flawed in my mind because you don’t have context. Did Vick take sacks in situations where the team really needed a big play and dumping the ball off simply made no sense? Were the sacks on plays with max protect where there were only a couple of guys running routes?
The info does help with the notion that Foles will fit Chip Kelly’s offense better than Vick. Foles can run a spread offense passing attack that focuses on short, quick passes.
I agree that the stats seem a bit flawed. I also wonder if the type of behavior that Vick displayed or that PFF might have critiqued, (holding on to the ball longer) was net good or bad in the long run. Sure, it might lead to more sacks, but maybe if holding on to the ball longer leads to more long touchdown passes, it could be worth it. I say this because Andy Dalton, Jay Cutler, Russell Wilson, and Aaron Rodgers are all ranked ahead of (more sacks and higher sack %) Vick. Not exactly a bunch of scrubs.
DBG, you’re absolutely right. And in the article Tom is referencing, Brandon also posted each quarterback’s rating and ranking on those occasions when they hold on to the ball for more than 4 seconds, as, like you said, you can take more sacks if you in turn make more plays It’s only the confluence of a poor ranking on both of those lists that is an issue.
Vick rated very low on both lists.
Tommy’s point about context stands. These stats do seem somewhat flawed, and imo, are more of an indicator than a conviction.