Campbell's numbers dont lie

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinster

He is a 3 time mvp...

plus the benefit of throwing a td far outweighs the loss of throwing an int. A td is a definate score, an int just makes it possible for the other team to score quicker

This isn't at all true. It's actually quite the opposite. A lot of really smart people think the absolute value of an INT is somewhere between two and three times the absolute value of a TD pass.

I'm not agreeing with the poster that suggests that Brett Favre should not be in the hall of fame because he has a strong interception tendency. That's not right either. Brett Favre can make up for an interception tendency by being a high-efficiency passer. Lots of completions, lots of touchdowns, few sacks and fumbles. This efficiency seperates Favre from the Donovan McNabb's, Kerry Collins', Daunte Culpeppers of the world, lower-efficiency players who absolutely need to be throwing three times as many TDs as INTs to be worth a roster spot.

Favre's unquestionably a first-ballot hall of famer, but I think he's come to be overrated in recent seasons because people see a player exceeding his relative expectations and then jump to the level of, "he hasn't lost anything". Favre hasn't been a truly MVP-type player since 2001 or 2002 though. The fact that he's had pro-bowl type seasons in recent years has kind of skewed the public opinion of him.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

This isn't at all true. It's actually quite the opposite. A lot of really smart people think the absolute value of an INT is somewhere between two and three times the absolute value of a TD pass.

...

Can you explain this proposition to us less then smart people. I get that it ends a drive but, unless it is run back for a TD, it seems to me that an absolute value of a TD pass = 6, the most an INT can equal is 6 but often times it is 3 or even 0. So in my basic understanding, the absolute value of a TD pass= 6, and the absolute value of an INT <6.
Another way I could say it, is if you took the avg points awarded for all the TD passes ever thrown in the history of football, it would be 6 points to the scoring team. However, if you took the points awarded off of all the interceptions ever thrown in the history of football, it could not even be close to 6 points to the scoring team, I could even see it being close to 2, because of all the times 0 points are scored off of an INT.

Not being a smart alec, just don't see how an INT is worth 2 or 3 times a TD pass.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Can you explain this proposition to us less then smart people. I get that it ends a drive but, unless it is run back for a TD, it seems to me that an absolute value of a TD pass = 6, the most an INT can equal is 6 but often times it is 3 or even 0. So in my basic understanding, the absolute value of a TD pass= 6, and the absolute value of an INT <6.
Another way I could say it, is if you took the avg points awarded for all the TD passes ever thrown in the history of football, it would be 6 points to the scoring team. However, if you took the points awarded off of all the interceptions ever thrown in the history of football, it could not even be close to 6 points to the scoring team, I could even see it being close to 2, because of all the times 0 points are scored off of an INT.

Not being a smart alec, just don't see how an INT is worth 2 or 3 times a TD pass.

Well said. I was about ot ask the same thing. Perhaps QBs who throw alot of INTs typically have significantly lower completion rates than other QBs, but thats a different point. Or maybe it has something to do with "momentum" shifting and changing the way the teams perform. However, I look at it the same way you do: A TD is a garaunteed 6 points. An Int isnt. I'd much rather have a QB that threw 3 INTs and 3 TDs per game than one who didn't throw either.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Can you explain this proposition to us less then smart people. I get that it ends a drive but, unless it is run back for a TD, it seems to me that an absolute value of a TD pass = 6, the most an INT can equal is 6 but often times it is 3 or even 0. So in my basic understanding, the absolute value of a TD pass= 6, and the absolute value of an INT <6.
Another way I could say it, is if you took the avg points awarded for all the TD passes ever thrown in the history of football, it would be 6 points to the scoring team. However, if you took the points awarded off of all the interceptions ever thrown in the history of football, it could not even be close to 6 points to the scoring team, I could even see it being close to 2, because of all the times 0 points are scored off of an INT.

Not being a smart alec, just don't see how an INT is worth 2 or 3 times a TD pass.

By really smart people, I was referring to people much smarter than myself.

Now, I've seen versions of this analysis in multiple places, but I'm going to link to research done by pro football reference, because, well, it's easy to find. I think the original groundwork for this was done by economists Palmer, Thorn, and Carroll (also way smarter than me) in the Hidden Game of Football way back in 1988 (so their research predates me...as in me the person, not just my research).

Pro-football-reference.com blog » Why a touchdown is worth ten yards

Pro-football-reference.com blog » Rearview Adjusted Yards per Attempt

Pro-football-reference.com blog » The Best QB of all time?

PFR has always done a 45 yd penalty for INTs and a 10 yd bonus for TDs. They've recently upped their stats to included a 20 yard bonus for TDs because there's a lot of debate about how valuable a TD pass is compared to a pass down to the one yard line, and it's probably really context heavy no matter what, so the estimate could be way off. But not so way off where an INT and a TD would be of equal value.

If they were of equal value, you'd want a quarterback who threw INTs and TDs at a 1:1 rate to pass on pretty much every down, despite the fact that a guy who throws 20 TDs and 20 INTs in the same year is probably not a great quarterback.

A lot of this is conjecture anyway, and your points are completely valid. That's why I'm linking and not disputing.