Quote:
Originally Posted by RealSNR
Wouldn’t you also say there can be a difference between a QB with a low completion percentage and a QB who is an inaccurate thrower?
|
Sometimes, sure. Brett Favre comes to mind. Low completion percentage through college and even through a lot of his pro career, but when you watched him, he could be inhumanly accurate. His problem was more about taking exceptional risks, trying to fit the ball into ridiculously tiny spaces than an inherent inaccuracy. But sometimes he was horribly inaccurate as well.
On the flip side, Lamar Jackson wasn't very accurate in college, but last season he posted a 68% completion percentage. Or 66, I forget.
But was he really that much more accurate, or was there a change in the offense, and how the plays were designed? Anyone watching Lamar play last season could see that he wasn't great at anticipation or accuracy, as much as he was running plays that were designed around the kinds of throws he was good at. Any time he had to improv or throw with anticipation it was a almost a coin flip whether the ball would be catch-able.
But both QBs found ways to win, by hiding their weaknesses and maximizing their strengths. Or the OC found a way to do it, whatever.
Hell, Cam Newton found a way to be "more accurate" even though he just isn't that accurate a passer. At least good enough to get his team to a SB.
The point being, a QB doesn't have to be exceptionally accurate to succeed. It sure helps, but it's not a requirement. He does have to find a way to minimize his issues, especially in the big moments, but he doesn't necessarily have to suddenly become the most accurate passer in the league to win big games.