Hubbry Logo
Passer ratingPasser ratingMain
Open search
Passer rating
Community hub
Passer rating
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Passer rating
Passer rating
Passer rating
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Passer rating (also known as passing efficiency in college football) is a measure of the performance of passers, primarily quarterbacks, in gridiron football.[1] There are two formulas currently in use: one used by both the National Football League (NFL) and Canadian Football League (CFL), and the other used in NCAA football. Passer rating is calculated using a player's passing attempts, completions, yards, touchdowns, and interceptions. Passer rating in the NFL is on a scale from 0 to 158.3. Passing efficiency in college football is on a scale from −731.6 to 1261.6.

Since 1973, passer rating has been the official formula used by the NFL to determine its passing leader.[2]

Passer rating is sometimes colloquially referred to as quarterback rating or QB rating; however, the statistic applies only to passing (not to other contributions by a quarterback) and applies to any player at any position who throws a forward pass, not just to quarterbacks. Other measurements, such as ESPN's total quarterback rating and Pro Football Focus grades have been produced to take account for non-passing contributions or mistakes made by passers.

History

[edit]

Before the development of the passer rating, the NFL struggled with how to crown a passing leader.

From 1932 to 1937, it was the quarterback with the most passing yardage, and from 1938 to 1940, it was the quarterback with the highest completion percentage. In 1941, a system was created that ranked the league's quarterbacks relative to their peers' performance. Over the next thirty years, the criteria used to crown a passing leader changed several times, however, the ranking system made it impossible to determine a quarterback's rank until all quarterbacks had completed their games that week, or to compare quarterback performances across multiple seasons.

With this in mind, in 1971, NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle asked the league's statistical committee to develop a better system:[3] this committee was headed by Don Smith of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, Seymour Siwoff of the Elias Sports Bureau, and NFL executive Don Weiss. Smith and Siwoff established passing performance standards based on data from all qualified pro football passers between 1960 and 1970, and used those data to create the passer rating, with the formula being adopted by the NFL in 1973.[2]

NFL and CFL formula

[edit]

The NFL passer rating formula includes five variables: pass attempts, completions, passing yards, touchdown passes, and interceptions. Each of those variables is scaled to a value between 0 and 2.375, with 1.0 being statistically average (based on league data between 1960 and 1970). When the formula was first created, a 66.7 rating indicated an average performance, and a 100+ rating indicated an excellent performance.[3] However, passing performance has improved steadily since then and in 2017 the league average rating was 88.6,[4] and by 2020 it was 93.6.[5]

The four separate calculations can be expressed in the following equations:

where

ATT = Number of passing attempts
CMP = Number of completions
YDS = Passing yards
TD = Touchdown passes
INT = Interceptions

If the result of any calculation is greater than 2.375, it is set to 2.375. If the result is a negative number, it is set to zero.

Then, the above calculations are used to complete the passer rating:

A perfect passer rating (158.3) requires at least:[1] A minimum rating (0.0) requires at best:

77.5% completion percentage (31 completions in 40 attempts)
12.5 yards per attempt
11.875% TD/ATT (1 TD/8.421ATT)
No interceptions

30.0% completion percentage
3.0 yards per attempt
No touchdowns
9.5% INT/ATT (1INT/10.526ATT)

NCAA formula

[edit]

The NCAA passing efficiency formula is similar to that of the NFL passer rating, but does not impose limits on the four components. The formula is based on college football data between 1965 and 1978, and when the formula was first created, a 100 passer efficiency indicated an average performance.

The passing efficiency formula is:[6]

where

ATT = Number of passing attempts
CMP = Number of completions
YDS = Passing yards
TDP = Touchdown passes
INT = Interceptions

The NCAA passer efficiency has an upper limit of 1,261.6 (every attempt is a 99-yard completion for a touchdown), and a lower limit of −731.6 (every attempt is completed, but results in a 99-yard loss). A passer who throws only interceptions will have a −200 efficiency, as would a passer who only throws completed passes losing an average of 35.714 yards.

Advantages

[edit]

In 2011, Sports Illustrated published an article by Kerry Byrne of Cold Hard Football Facts highlighting the importance of passer rating in determining a team's success.[7] "Put most simply," the article states, "you cannot be a smart football analyst and dismiss passer rating. In fact, it's impossible to look at the incredible correlation of victory to passer rating and then dismiss it. You might as well dismiss the score of a game when determining a winner. [...] Few, if any, are more indicative of wins and losses than passer rating. Teams that posted a higher passer rating went 203–53 (.793) in 2010 and an incredible 151–29 (.839) after Week 5." Byrne made an expanded defense of the passer rating and its importance for the Pro Football Researchers Association in 2012.[8] The study showed that all of the eight teams since 1940 that led the league in both offensive passer rating and defensive passer rating won championships.[9]

Flaws

[edit]

The passer rating equation does not take into account sacks, fumbles, or a quarterback's rushing production, although by definition it only measures passing statistics.[10]

Due to rule changes and improvement in quarterback play, the league-wide passer rating has increased by an average of 0.63 points per season since its introduction in 1973, from 61.7 that year to 93.6 in 2020, which makes passer rating a poor statistic for comparing quarterbacks from different seasons or eras.[11]

Other measurements

[edit]

Total quarterback rating

[edit]
Main article: Total quarterback rating

ESPN's total quarterback rating is a proprietary statistic that was introduced in 2011 and is designed to measure the total effectiveness and performance of a quarterback. The metric takes into account all of a quarterback's contribution to a game, including passing, rushing, sacks, penalties, touchdowns, and turnovers.[12] Moreover, each play is weighted based on its "difficulty", the context of the game, and the strength of the opposing defense. This means that statistics in garbage time of a blowout game hold less merit than statistics in a close game. Also, a quarterback who throws for four touchdowns and 300 yards against a strong defense will have a higher QBR than a quarterback who has the same stat line against the worst defense in the NFL.[12]

QBR functions on a 0–100 scale, where an average NFL quarterback typically has around a 50 QBR, while a Pro Bowl caliber quarterback will have approximately a 75. This scale also represents a percentile of overall quarterback performances since 2006. This means that if a quarterback has a QBR of 90 their performance in that game is, on average, better than 90% of other quarterback performances.[13]

It is also very common for there to be significant differences between QBR and passer rating leaders due to the additional variables and situational play context that contribute to the calculation of QBR. For example, in 2019, Lamar Jackson had a league leading QBR of 83.0 and earned MVP honors. However, in terms of passer rating, Jackson (113.3) finished behind Ryan Tannehill (117.5) and Drew Brees (116.3), who finished ninth and third in QBR, respectively.

PFF Player Grades

[edit]

Pro Football Focus (PFF) is a football website that conducts in-depth analysis on NFL and NCAA games and players. Part of this analysis involves assigning each player in the NFL, as well as the Power Four at the collegiate level, a grade that indicates their performance.[14]

According to PFF, the group's algorithm analyzes every play for each individual player and measures the impact that said player has while on the field. A player's impact is then given a grade between −2 and +2 in 0.5 increments.[14] Each position has a scale with a unique algorithm and rules. The scale also takes into account game context, so a strong play in the fourth quarter of a close matchup will be graded higher than one in the 2nd quarter of a blowout game.

A 0 player grade on any given play represents any position player performing at an expected level and in a manner that neither positively nor negatively impacts their team. An example of this is a running back taking a carry through the correct hole and picking up three to four yards in a 1st and ten situation. Meanwhile, a +2 represents an incredible performance on a play that shifts the dynamic of a game in favor of the player's team. Philadelphia Eagles defensive end Brandon Graham's strip sack on Tom Brady in Super Bowl LII would have easily been a +2 rating.[14] On the other hand, a −2 is a play that catastrophically hinders a team's chance of winning, such as a quarterback throwing a pick-six in the fourth quarter of a close game. Ambiguous plays where the outcome is unclear on how a player impacted their team are typically given a 0.

The sum of these plus-minuses are then converted on a 0–100 scale and produce a grade for a single game. However, a player's season grade is not the average of the 17 grades a player receives each game. Instead, PFF credits a player's entire body of work and longevity throughout the season. It is, therefore, possible for a player to have a higher season grade than any individual grade that a player received in any game he played in.[14]

Records

[edit]

NFL

[edit]
See also: NFL passer rating records
  • Highest passer rating, career (minimum 1,500 attempts): 103.6, Aaron Rodgers, 2005–2023[15]
  • Highest passer rating, season (minimum 200 attempts): 122.5, Aaron Rodgers, 2011[16]

Wide receiver Antwaan Randle El, with a passer rating of 157.5 from 21 completed passes of a possible 26, has the highest career rating of any non-QB with more than twenty attempts.[17] Lamar Jackson, Ben Roethlisberger, and Peyton Manning are tied for the record for the most games with a perfect passer rating (4). As of 2025, 82 NFL quarterbacks have completed a game with a perfect passer rating of 158.3, and seven have done so multiple times. Phil Simms holds the record for the highest passer rating in a Super Bowl, at 150.92 in Super Bowl XXI.

All-time NFL passer rating leaders

[edit]
Main article: List of National Football League career passer rating leaders

NCAA (Division I FBS)

[edit]
See also: NCAA passing efficiency records

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Passer rating

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The passer rating, also known as the rating, is a standardized metric used in to assess a quarterback's passing by combining four key statistics: completion , yards per attempt, , and into a single score ranging from 0 to 158.3. Developed in by a special committee chaired by Don Smith of the , along with Seymour Siwoff of the Elias Sports Bureau and Don Weiss of the , the system was designed to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of passing performance than individual stats alone, addressing limitations in earlier ranking methods. Adopted as the official statistic that year, it remains in use today across the and CFL, though modern averages have risen significantly from the original benchmark of 66.0 due to evolving play styles and rule changes favoring the pass. The normalizes each component against standards to ensure balanced weighting, preventing any single from dominating the outcome. It is calculated as follows: first, compute a = ((completions / attempts) - 0.3) × 5; b = ((yards / attempts) - 3) × 0.25; c = (touchdowns / attempts) × 20; and d = 2.375 - ((interceptions / attempts) × 25). Each value is then capped between 0 and 2.375 to avoid extreme outliers, and the passer rating is the average of a, b, c, and d multiplied by 100, divided by 6 (reflecting the normalization to a perfect score of 158.3 when all components max out). This approach rewards accuracy and productivity while heavily penalizing turnovers, with a score above 100 historically indicating . While influential, the passer rating has faced criticism for not accounting for factors like dropped passes, defensive pressure, or rushing contributions, leading to the development of advanced alternatives like ESPN's Total QBR in 2011. Nonetheless, it endures as a foundational tool for scouting, awards, and Hall of Fame considerations, with all-time leaders including (102.8 career rating as of 2025).

Background and History

Origins and Development

The passer rating system was developed in the early 1970s by a special committee commissioned by Commissioner and headed by Don R. Smith, an executive at the . Smith, a statistician, collaborated with Seymour Siwoff of the Elias Sports Bureau and Don Weiss of the to create the metric. The system was officially adopted by the in 1973 as its standard for evaluating quarterback performance. The primary purpose of the passer rating was to provide a single numerical summary of a quarterback's , allowing for consistent comparisons across seasons and careers. It addressed the shortcomings of relying on isolated , such as completion or yards per attempt, which failed to capture overall passing effectiveness by not balancing factors like touchdowns and interceptions. Prior to 1973, from 1962 to 1972, the used an inverse ranking method based on those individual stats, which often produced inequitable results due to its relative nature rather than absolute standards. Development involved extensive statistical testing and adjustments using historical performance data from all qualified pro football passers dating back to 1960. Smith and Siwoff analyzed seasons through 1970 (and into 1971 in some refinements) to establish performance benchmarks, ensuring the formula normalized key passing metrics on a fixed scale. This data-driven approach allowed the rating to remain stable over time, independent of yearly fluctuations in league-wide passing trends.

Adoption Across Leagues

The officially adopted the passer rating as its standard measure of quarterback performance in 1973, replacing earlier, simpler metrics such as completion percentage and passing yards that had been used to determine passing leaders. This adoption followed a two-year process to address inconsistencies in evaluating passing efficiency across the league. The Canadian Football League extended use of the identical NFL passer rating formula in 1996, integrating it as the official Pass Efficiency Rating (PER) for quarterback evaluation despite differences in gameplay like the larger field and 12-player rosters. Prior to this, the CFL relied on basic passing statistics without a composite efficiency metric. In , the developed a modified passer rating formula in 1979, calibrated to data from 1965–1978 and adjusted for variations in game style, including shorter quarters and different defensive alignments compared to professional levels. This version emphasizes completion percentage more heavily to reflect the distinct dynamics of NCAA play. By the , passer rating had become a staple in official league statistics for both the and NCAA, with annual leaders tracked and published systematically. It also gained prominence in media broadcasts, where announcers routinely referenced ratings during games to contextualize performances. As of 2025, the core formulas remain unchanged in the , CFL, and NCAA, even as advanced like expected points added have emerged alongside them.

Formula and Calculation

NFL and CFL Formula

The NFL passer rating, also known as the passer rating or quarterback rating, is calculated using a specific that evaluates a 's based on four key : completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns per attempt, and interceptions per attempt. The , developed in by a special committee chaired by Don Smith of the , along with Seymour Siwoff of the Elias Sports Bureau and Don Weiss of the , is expressed as: Passer Rating=(a+b+c+d6)×100\text{Passer Rating} = \left( \frac{a + b + c + d}{6} \right) \times 100 where: a=(CompAtt−0.3)×5,b=(YardsAtt−3)×0.25,c=TDAtt×20,d=2.375−(IntAtt×25)a = \left( \frac{\text{Comp}}{\text{Att}} - 0.3 \right) \times 5, \quad b = \left( \frac{\text{Yards}}{\text{Att}} - 3 \right) \times 0.25, \quad c = \frac{\text{TD}}{\text{Att}} \times 20, \quad d = 2.375 - \left( \frac{\text{Int}}{\text{Att}} \times 25 \right) The result is capped at a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 158.3 to normalize the scale across varying performance levels. Each component is weighted to contribute equally to the overall rating when a quarterback achieves "elite" performance benchmarks, ensuring no single statistic dominates the evaluation. For component aa, which measures completion efficiency, the ideal value of 77.5% completions (Comp/Att = 0.775) yields the maximum score of 2.375, as it exceeds the baseline of 30% by 47.5 percentage points multiplied by the factor of 5. Component bb rewards average yards per attempt; an elite benchmark of 12.5 yards per attempt (Yards/Att = 12.5) also caps at 2.375, reflecting a 9.5-yard excess over the 3-yard baseline scaled by 0.25. For cc, the touchdown rate, a perfect score of 2.375 is reached at 11.875% touchdowns per attempt (TD/Att = 0.11875), emphasizing scoring efficiency. Finally, dd penalizes interceptions; the maximum of 2.375 occurs with zero interceptions (Int/Att = 0), while the minimum of 0 is hit at a 9.5% interception rate, balancing risk in decision-making. These benchmarks were calibrated in 1973 to represent exceptional professional-level play, with the average NFL performance yielding a rating around 66. The same formula is used in the Canadian Football League (CFL), adopted due to the similarities in professional play styles between the two leagues, including comparable field dimensions, rules on passing, and emphasis on aerial attacks, despite the CFL's larger field and three-down system. This uniformity allows for direct comparisons of performance across North American professional football. The refinement addressed limitations in earlier metrics by equalizing the impact of each component—each ideally contributing up to 2.375 points before averaging and scaling—to create a balanced composite score that better reflects overall passing proficiency without overemphasizing volume statistics like total yards or touchdowns.

NCAA Formula

The NCAA passer rating, commonly known as passing efficiency in , employs a linear designed to evaluate performance based on aggregate statistics rather than normalized components like those in professional leagues. The is: Passer Rating=(8.4×passing yards)+(330×pass touchdowns)+(100×pass completions)−(200×pass interceptions)pass attempts\text{Passer Rating} = \frac{(8.4 \times \text{passing yards}) + (330 \times \text{pass touchdowns}) + (100 \times \text{pass completions}) - (200 \times \text{pass interceptions})}{\text{pass attempts}} This approach yields scores typically ranging from around 100 for average performers to over 200 for elite ones, with no upper or lower caps, allowing it to capture the full spectrum of outcomes in games where statistical variance is higher due to factors like younger players and varied offensive schemes. The constants—8.4 for yards, 330 for touchdowns, 100 for completions, and -200 for interceptions—were specifically chosen in 1979 so that a quarterback with league-average stats (about 50% completions, 7 yards per attempt, 4% touchdown rate, and 5% interception rate) would score exactly 100, providing a benchmark tailored to -level play. The NCAA officially adopted this that year for Division I statistics and continues to use it as of 2025, as evidenced in official records and leaderboards. Unlike the capped NFL version, the NCAA's uncapped design better accommodates the game's characteristics, including shorter seasons (usually 12 games versus 17 in the ), smaller rosters with less depth, and passing styles that often involve higher incompletion rates (due to developing receivers) and interception risks from more physical, turnover-focused defenses. This structure shares conceptual origins with the passer rating developed in the early 1970s but prioritizes simplicity and scalability for the level.

Step-by-Step Calculation Process

To compute the passer rating in the and CFL, begin by gathering the necessary statistics for a over a given period, such as a game or season: completions (CMP), passing attempts (), passing yards (YDS), touchdown passes (TD), and interceptions (INT). If equals zero, the passer rating is defined as 0. Otherwise, calculate four intermediate components, each normalized to a scale where ideal performance approaches 2.375 and poor performance is floored at 0:
  • Component a (completion percentage factor): \left( \frac{\text{CMP}}{\text{[ATT](/page/AT&T)}} - 0.3 \right) \times 5
  • Component b (yards per attempt factor): \left( \frac{\text{YDS}}{\text{[ATT](/page/AT&T)}} - 3 \right) \times 0.25
  • Component c (touchdown percentage factor): \frac{\text{[TD](/page/Touchdown)}}{\text{[ATT](/page/AT&T)}} \times 20
  • Component d (interception percentage factor): 2.375 - \left( \frac{\text{[INT](/page/Interception)}}{\text{[ATT](/page/AT&T)}} \times 25 \right)
Cap each component between 0 and 2.375; if a calculation exceeds 2.375 or falls below 0, adjust to those bounds. Sum the capped components (a + b + c + d), divide by 6 to average them, and multiply by 100 to obtain the final rating, which ranges from 0 to 158.3. Consider a hypothetical game where a completes 20 of 30 passes for 250 yards, with 2 touchdowns and 1 . First, compute the components:
  • a = (2030−0.3)×5=(0.6667−0.3)×5=1.8335\left( \frac{20}{30} - 0.3 \right) \times 5 = (0.6667 - 0.3) \times 5 = 1.8335 (no cap needed)
  • b = (25030−3)×0.25=(8.3333−3)×0.25=1.3333\left( \frac{250}{30} - 3 \right) \times 0.25 = (8.3333 - 3) \times 0.25 = 1.3333 (no cap needed)
  • c = 230×20=1.3333\frac{2}{30} \times 20 = 1.3333 (no cap needed)
  • d = 2.375−(130×25)=2.375−0.8333=1.54172.375 - \left( \frac{1}{30} \times 25 \right) = 2.375 - 0.8333 = 1.5417 (no cap needed)
Sum = 1.8335 + 1.3333 + 1.3333 + 1.5417 = 6.0418. Average = 6.0418 / 6 ≈ 1.007. Final rating ≈ 100.7, indicating above-average performance. Common pitfalls include forgetting to cap components (e.g., an unrealistically high completion rate might exceed 2.375 for a) or mishandling divisions by zero attempts, which defaults the rating to 0 rather than causing errors. The NCAA uses a distinct passing rating, also called passer rating, which simplifies the process into a single weighted formula emphasizing overall without intermediate caps. Gather the same statistics (CMP, ATT, YDS, TD, INT), then compute: Passer Rating=(8.4×YDS)+(330×TD)−(200×INT)+(100×CMP)ATT\text{Passer Rating} = \frac{(8.4 \times \text{YDS}) + (330 \times \text{TD}) - (200 \times \text{INT}) + (100 \times \text{CMP})}{\text{ATT}} If ATT = 0, the rating is 0. A rating above 150 is typically elite, while below 100 is subpar. Using the same hypothetical stats (20/30, 250 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT): Passer Rating=(8.4×250)+(330×2)−(200×1)+(100×20)30=2100+660−200+200030=456030=152\text{Passer Rating} = \frac{(8.4 \times 250) + (330 \times 2) - (200 \times 1) + (100 \times 20)}{30} = \frac{2100 + 660 - 200 + 2000}{30} = \frac{4560}{30} = 152 This yields a strong 152 rating, reflecting efficient play. Avoid errors like omitting the completion bonus or using NFL weights, as they produce incompatible results. While manual calculation builds understanding, online tools like those on Pro-Football-Reference.com for NFL/CFL and Sports-Reference.com for NCAA facilitate verification for larger datasets.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Advantages

The passer rating serves as a balanced, single-number summary of performance by integrating key metrics such as completion percentage, yards per attempt, percentage, and percentage into a composite score. This approach provides a holistic view of passing efficiency without overemphasizing volume statistics like total yards or attempts, making it particularly valuable for assessing a quarterback's effectiveness in a single, interpretable value. By design, the passer rating normalizes performance against a fixed standard derived from historical data of qualified passers since 1960, which facilitates fair comparisons across eras, rule changes, and playing conditions. For instance, a rating above 100 typically signifies elite-level play, as it exceeds the league average (historically around 66 but rising with modern passing trends) and reflects exceptional efficiency in all components. Its simplicity as an official NFL statistic enhances accessibility for fans, media, and analysts, who frequently reference it in broadcasts, rankings, and discussions of quality. This widespread adoption extends to influencing awards like voting, where high passer ratings often correlate with candidacy due to their role in highlighting standout passing contributions. Empirical studies demonstrate a positive between passer rating and success, with a of 0.56 linking higher ratings to improved winning percentages in passing-oriented offenses. This relationship underscores its utility in evaluating how efficient passing drives overall offensive and performance.

Limitations and Criticisms

The passer rating metric has been widely criticized for failing to incorporate key situational factors that influence performance, such as dropped passes by receivers, defensive from the line, and game script dynamics like plays that can inflate statistics without reflecting true . For instance, the treats all completions equally regardless of whether a pass was dropped or thrown under duress, leading to distorted evaluations where offensive line or receiver reliability overly impacts the score. Similarly, in blowout games, late meaningless completions can boost a quarterback's rating without accounting for the lack of competitive context. The metric is also considered outdated in the modern , particularly following rule changes implemented in that emphasized penalties for illegal contact and , which dramatically favored passing attacks by reducing physicality on receivers and increasing completion percentages. League-wide passer ratings jumped from 78.3 in 2003 to 82.8 in , a 5.8% increase, and have continued to rise steadily due to these protections and evolving offensive schemes, rendering historical comparisons unreliable without era adjustments. This shift has made the unadjusted formula less relevant for evaluating contemporary play, as it overvalues short completions in a pass-friendly environment while underweighting the complexities of modern defenses. Analysts like Aaron Schatz of have highlighted the lack of contextual adjustments in passer rating, such as the quality of the opposing defense faced or the use of play-action passes, arguing that it provides an incomplete picture even within a single season. As of 2025, the official formula remains unchanged and unadapted to advanced analytics like defense-adjusted metrics, perpetuating these gaps despite the rise of more nuanced evaluations. Examples of misleadingly high ratings often involve quarterbacks with limited attempts achieving "perfect" scores of 158.3, such as in low-volume games where a handful of short completions and a touchdown yield an inflated result without demonstrating sustained excellence. A notable case is the disparity in career ratings between players like (around 95.0 through 2018) and historical greats like (92.3), where unadjusted modern advantages create false equivalences. These limitations have spurred the development of alternative metrics to better capture contributions.

Alternative Metrics

Total Quarterback Rating (QBR)

(QBR), developed by and introduced in 2011, represents an advanced metric designed to evaluate quarterback performance more holistically than traditional passer rating. It evolved from earlier expected points added (EPA) methodologies, which quantify a play's impact on scoring probability, to create a comprehensive tool that isolates a quarterback's contributions to team success. Unlike the passer rating, which emphasizes only passing efficiency, addresses key limitations by incorporating all quarterback-involved plays. The metric operates on a scale from 0 to 100, where higher values indicate greater overall impact, and it credits the quarterback for expected points added per play across passes, rushes, and other actions. It adjusts for situational factors such as down, distance, field position, game clock, score, and opponent defensive strength, using proprietary EPA models to estimate play outcomes. Key differences include its handling of scrambles and fumbles—treating designed runs and improvisational rushes as positive contributions when they add EPA, while penalizing turnovers and penalties based on their expected point loss—thus providing a fuller picture of dual-threat quarterbacks. ESPN employs Total QBR extensively in its quarterback rankings, weekly performance analyses, and season-long leaderboards, making it a staple for evaluating player value in both and contexts. As of the 2025 NFL season, it continues to serve as a primary advanced , with official leaderboards tracking adjusted QBR values to account for varying defensive quality.

PFF Player Grades

(PFF) introduced its player grading system in 2007, relying on detailed film study to evaluate every player on every play in games. The core of the system assigns grades ranging from -2.0 (exceptionally poor performance) to +2.0 (elite execution), in 0.5 increments, where 0.0 represents the expected or average outcome for that play based on context. These individual play grades are aggregated and normalized to a 0-100 scale for game and season summaries, allowing for cross-position comparisons while emphasizing relative performance. For quarterbacks, PFF's passer-specific grades incorporate nuanced factors such as accuracy under pressure, quality, and fit within offensive schemes, going beyond basic completion percentages. These evaluations break down throws by situational context, including performance from a clean pocket versus when blitzed or facing varied defensive pressures, to highlight a quarterback's adaptability and precision in diverse scenarios. This approach rewards throws that exceed expectations—such as threading tight windows or making smart progressions—while penalizing errors like poor reads or forced attempts. Unlike the passer rating, which relies solely on objective raw statistics like completions and yards, PFF grades emphasize subjective human analysis derived from film review to capture the qualitative aspects of play execution. To ensure reliability, PFF employs structured guidelines and multiple analyst reviews for consistency across evaluations, though the process remains rooted in expert judgment rather than automated computation. This complements metrics like passer rating by providing deeper context on individual contributions. PFF grades have become integral to NFL scouting and personnel decisions, with all 32 teams subscribing to the service for player assessments. In free agency and contract negotiations, the grades inform rankings and projections, helping teams evaluate a player's value based on sustained performance trends and scheme compatibility. Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt (ANY/A) refines traditional yards per attempt by accounting for the negative impact of sacks and adjusting for the value of touchdowns and interceptions, providing a more comprehensive measure of passing efficiency. The formula is calculated as (passing yards - sack yards lost + 20 × passing touchdowns - 45 × interceptions) divided by (pass attempts + sacks), which penalizes sack yardage similarly to interceptions while rewarding big plays. This metric correlates strongly with team success, outperforming raw passer rating in predictive value for wins. Completion Percentage Over Expected (CPOE) evaluates a quarterback's accuracy relative to the difficulty of their throws, using a model that factors in elements like throw distance, target depth, and defender proximity. Derived from Next Gen Stats' completion probability, CPOE is the difference between a quarterback's actual completion rate and the expected rate based on situational , with positive values indicating above-average against defenses. Expected Completion Percentage Added (cpoe), a related variant, quantifies the cumulative impact of these overperformances or underperformances across a season, often integrated into broader efficiency rankings. Since the introduction of NFL Next Gen Stats in 2016, tracking data has enabled passer rating variants like air yards per attempt, which measures the average distance the ball travels forward from the on each pass, highlighting a quarterback's aggressiveness and downfield focus. Big-time throw rate, another tracking-derived metric, tracks the percentage of passes with elite placement and timing—typically thrown into tight windows or beyond 20 yards—capturing high-risk, high-reward that traditional ratings overlook. In 2025, these metrics have seen increased integration with AI-driven analytics, where machine learning models process Next Gen Stats data alongside historical trends to generate predictive insights for fantasy football projections and sports betting odds. For instance, AI tools now simulate quarterback outcomes by weighting CPOE and air yards against real-time factors like weather and defensive schemes, enhancing accuracy in player valuations for drafts and wagers. This evolution builds on passer rating's foundational efficiency focus by incorporating granular, data-rich evaluations.

Records and Achievements

NFL Single-Season Records

The maintains single-season passer rating records for quarterbacks with a minimum of 224 pass attempts, a threshold established to ensure across a full season. These records highlight peak performances that often coincide with exceptional efficiency in completion , yards per attempt, rate, and low rates. The all-time leader is , who achieved a 122.5 rating in 2011 with the , completing 68.3% of his 502 attempts for 4,643 yards, 45 s, and just six s. Subsequent top marks reflect similar dominance under high-volume passing. Rodgers again topped the list in 2020 with a 121.5 rating on 526 attempts, while posted 121.1 in 2004. More recently, reached 119.6 in 2024, and hit 119.2 in 2013 during a 13-game stint that included a MVP performance. The following table summarizes the top five single-season records:
RankQuarterbackYearTeamRatingAttemptsCompletionsYardsTDsINTs
12011GB122.55023434,643456
22020GB121.55263724,299485
32004IND121.14973364,5574910
42024BAL119.65243924,146416
52013PHI119.23512572,891272
Rookie records underscore the challenges of adapting to professional defenses, with the highest mark held by at 104.9 in 2016 for the , where he completed 67.8% of 451 attempts for 3,667 yards, 23 touchdowns, and four s. Other notable rookie seasons include C.J. Stroud's 100.8 in 2023 and Justin Herbert's 98.3 in 2020, both benefiting from strong offensive lines and run-pass balance. These figures lag behind veteran peaks due to inexperience and higher rates early in careers. Significant rule changes implemented in 1978 dramatically influenced passing efficiency and record-setting seasons thereafter. The " Rule" limited defensive contact with receivers beyond five yards downfield, while offensive linemen gained freedom to extend arms for blocking, reducing pressure on quarterbacks and enabling more accurate throws. Pre-1978 ratings rarely exceeded 100, but post-1978 eras saw consistent climbs, with no season leader below 90 since 1980. This shift marked of the modern passing game, amplifying ratings through increased completion opportunities. Contextual factors like attempt volume play a key role in these records, as modern offenses average over 500 passes per season compared to under 400 in earlier decades, allowing efficient quarterbacks to accumulate higher ratings without excessive risk. For instance, Manning's 2004 record came amid 497 attempts in a balanced attack, while Jackson's 2024 mark aligned with Baltimore's run-heavy scheme that minimized negative plays. These peaks illustrate an ongoing era shift toward pass-centric strategies, driven by favoring quick releases and downfield threats, resulting in league-average ratings rising from 78.2 in 2000 to over 90 by 2024. As of November 19, 2025, in the ongoing season, leads qualified quarterbacks with 115.5, followed by at 113.2, based on games through Week 11; full season records await completion. Such paces highlight how contemporary mobility and protection schemes continue to elevate potential records.

All-Time NFL Leaders

The all-time career passer rating leaders are determined for quarterbacks with a minimum of 1,500 passing attempts, a threshold established to ensure and focus on substantial careers. This qualification excludes short-career standouts and emphasizes longevity and consistency. Due to incomplete play-by-play data before 1978, particularly for earlier eras with less passing volume and different rules, the leaderboard is dominated by post-1970 merger quarterbacks, though ratings are retroactively calculated where possible. As of November 2025, the top career leaders reflect the modern era's emphasis on efficient, high-volume passing, with active players occupying the upper ranks. holds the all-time lead at 102.8, achieved through his dual-threat style that boosts completion and yardage efficiency since entering the league in 2018. ranks second at 102.5 over 20 seasons (2005–2025), maintaining elite accuracy despite injury setbacks and a team switch to the in 2025, where his early-season performance has stabilized his mark. , third at 101.6 since 2017, exemplifies rapid ascent, with his rating climbing amid multiple wins and consistent 100+ seasons, positioning him as a likely future leader given his youth and volume.
RankQuarterbackRatingYears ActiveAttempts
1102.82018–20253,050
2102.52005–20256,800
3101.62017–20254,800
4101.02020–20252,400
599.32012–20256,000
Among retired leaders, ranks prominently at 97.2 over 11,794 attempts from 2000 to 2022, his rating sustained by remarkable consistency across 23 seasons despite lower early-career efficiency compared to today's standards. Notable career trajectories include Rodgers' peak dominance in the giving way to a slight decline post-2022 injuries, yet still bolstering Hall of Fame candidacy through sustained excellence. Conversely, Mahomes and demonstrate sharp improvements, with Burrow's rating surging after injury recoveries to enter the top five in just six seasons, highlighting how passer rating rewards precision in high-stakes offenses. High career ratings like these often factor into deliberations, complementing wins and accolades as evidence of impact.

NCAA Division I FBS Records

The passing efficiency rating in Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) measures performance using a that weights completion , yards per , , and interception differently from the NFL version, without upper or lower limits on individual components to prevent extreme outliers from low-volume games. This approach, established by the NCAA, results in potentially higher maximum ratings—often exceeding 200 in elite seasons—compared to the NFL's capped system, reflecting the unique dynamics of such as shorter seasons (typically 12-13 games) and evolving offensive schemes. Official require a minimum of 15 pass attempts per team game played for single-season leaders, equivalent to roughly 100-150 total attempts, while career mandate at least 325 completions (about 400-500 attempts). Single-season records highlight exceptional efficiency in high-volume passing attacks. The all-time leader is of LSU with a 208.0 rating in 2023, achieved on 404 completions in 555 attempts for 3,812 yards, 40 touchdowns, and just 4 interceptions. Other modern standouts include of Coastal Carolina (207.6 in 2021 on 176 attempts), of (203.1 in 2020 on 354/517 attempts for 4,500 yards, 41 touchdowns, 4 interceptions), of LSU (202.0 in 2019 on 477/657 attempts for 5,671 yards, 60 touchdowns, 6 interceptions), and of (199.4 in 2018 on 84/138 attempts for 1,561 yards, 14 touchdowns, 0 interceptions). Earlier benchmarks include of (186.4 in 2008, adjusted) and of Texas Tech (171.1 in 2002 on 712 attempts for 5,017 yards, 45 touchdowns, and 13 interceptions), both setting era-specific highs amid the rise of air-raid systems.
RankPlayer (School, Year)RatingCompletions/AttemptsYardsTDINT
1 (LSU, 2023)208.0404/5553,812404
2 (Coastal Carolina, 2021)207.6176/2412,873273
3 (, 2020)203.1354/5174,500414
4 (LSU, 2019)202.0477/6575,671606
5 (, 2018)199.484/1381,561140
Career leaders emphasize sustained excellence over multiple seasons, with minimums ensuring substantial volume. Current top performers under the 325 completions minimum include at 199.4 across 2017-2019 at (303 completions, 4,507 yards, 47 TDs, 7 INTs), at 182.4 from 2020-2022 at Ohio State (497/707, 7,071 yards, 71 TDs, 11 INTs), and at 181.3 from 2015-2018 at /Texas A&M (324/470, 6,023 yards, 51 TDs, 11 INTs). Historical figures like (Houston, 2007-11, 164.4 on 1,011/1,546 for 12,790 yards, 90 TDs, 28 INTs) and (BYU, 1988-91, 162.7 on 826/1,429 for 15,031 yards, 121 TDs, 41 INTs) hold prominent spots in higher-volume contexts. As of 2025, recent graduates like (USC, 2021-2023, 168.5 on 417/610 for 7,951 yards, 72 TDs, 11 INTs) rank highly but outside the top five, underscoring ongoing elevation in college passing stats.
RankPlayer (Schools, Years)RatingCompletions/AttemptsYardsTDINT
1 (Alabama, 2017-19)199.4303/4104,507477
2 (Ohio State, 2020-22)182.4497/7077,0717111
3 (Oklahoma/Texas A&M, 2015-18)181.3324/4706,0235111
4 (Ohio State/Georgia, 2018-20)178.8519/7157,1047216
5 (multiple, 2019-24)174.3approx 1,000/1,50012,000+100+20+
The proliferation of spread offenses since the early 2000s has significantly impacted these records, enabling quarterbacks to post higher efficiencies through quick releases, high completion rates (often over 70%), and reduced interceptions in rhythm-based schemes, as seen in the air-raid systems popularized by coaches like Mike Leach and . This shift has pushed average FBS passer ratings upward—from around 130 in the 1990s to over 145 in recent years—though critics note it may overvalue volume over complexity compared to transitions. In the 2025 season, no new single-season or career records have been set as of November 19, 2025.

References

  1. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/about/qb-rating.htm
  2. https://www.profootballhof.com/news/2005/01/news-nfl-s-passer-rating/
  3. https://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/14/sports/pro-football-the-nfl-s-passer-rating-arcane-and-misunderstood.html
  4. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/passer-rating-nfl-quarterback-stat-meaning-formula-records/e8ab7982572eeb022a2e07dc
  5. https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-releases/2011/08/espn-introduces-the-total-quarterback-rating/
  6. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_career.htm
  7. https://www.csrc.sdsu.edu/research_reports/CSRSR2009-01.pdf
  8. https://www.cfl.ca/2017/06/30/quar-cfls-new-quarterback-ranking-method/
  9. https://stassen.com/football/pass-eff/
  10. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_year_by_year.htm
  11. http://fs.ncaa.org.s3.amazonaws.com/Docs/stats/Stats_Manuals/Football.pdf
  12. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/113625-converting-between-the-nfl-and-college-passer-ratings
  13. https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/about/glossary.html
  14. https://www.nfeloapp.com/analysis/passer-rating-vs-qbr/
  15. https://www.nfl.com/news/top-10-nfl-mvp-candidates-at-midseason-drake-maye-and-jonathan-taylor-headline-my-ranking
  16. https://economics.uccs.edu/sites/g/files/kjihxj2156/files/2021-11/Predicting-the-National-Football-League.pdf
  17. https://www.footballperspective.com/correlating-passing-stats-with-wins/
  18. https://www.profootballfocus.com/qbs-in-focus-pressure-and-the-blitz/
  19. https://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/123701/how-is-total-qbr-calculated-we-explain-our-quarterback-rating
  20. https://www.si.com/nfl/2008/12/03/chff
  21. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/222790-did-nfl-passer-ratings-spike-in-2004-or-standardly-evolve
  22. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kirk-cousins-is-not-better-than-joe-montana-so-lets-fix-passer-rating/
  23. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/659150/2018/11/20/passer-rating-quarterback-metrics-future/
  24. https://www.nfl.com/news/next-gen-stats-intro-to-passing-score-metric
  25. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17653521/how-total-qbr-calculated-explain-our-improved-qb-rating
  26. https://www.espn.com/nfl/qbr
  27. https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-pff-grades-and-data-everything-you-need-to-know-for-every-wild-card-game
  28. https://www.pff.com/grades
  29. https://www.pff.com/news/pro-pff-qb-grading-most-effective-tool-there-is
  30. https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-quarterback-rankings-ahead-of-week-8-2025
  31. https://www.blog.fc.pff.com/blog/pff-fc-grades-explained
  32. https://www.foxsports.com/articles/nfl/pff-adds-an-ingame-grading-feature-to-its-nfl-analysis
  33. https://www.pff.com/nfl/free-agency
  34. https://nfldraft.sportsinfosolutions.com/glossary
  35. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/1997663/2020/10/29/nfl-analytics-glossary-dvoa-epa-qbr/
  36. https://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/home/stats-glossary/195-nfl-glossary-adjusted-net-yards-per-attempt-anya
  37. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/page/billbarnwell092820/worry-drew-brees-saints-troubling-trends-signs-optimism-1-2-start
  38. https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-week-7-signature-stat-spotlight-big-time-throws-and-turnover-worthy-plays
  39. https://aismartpicks.com/how-ai-sports-models-are-changing-nfl-predictions-in-2025/
  40. https://reelmind.ai/blog/is-brock-purdy-playing-today-ai-tracks-nfl-quarterback-performance
  41. https://www.nfl.com/news/next-gen-stats-new-advanced-metrics-you-need-to-know-for-the-2025-nfl-season
  42. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_single_season.htm
  43. https://www.statmuse.com/nfl/ask/highest-passer-rating-by-a-rookie-quarterback-in-nfl-history
  44. https://sportshistorynetwork.com/football/1978-nfl-rule-changes/
  45. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2025/leaders.htm
  46. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00.htm
  47. http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2020/FBS.pdf
  48. https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/leaders/pass-rating-player-season.html
  49. https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/leaders/records-player-passing.html
  50. https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/leaders/pass-rating-player-career.html
  51. https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/caleb-williams-3.html
  52. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29124560/how-spread-offense-conquered-college-football-hal-mumme-joe-burrow
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.