Skip to main content

"A turnover machine"

While watching ESPN's Monday Night Countdown last night, I couldn't help but notice the negative trend of comments regarding Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Michael Vick. According to these commentators, Vick's middle name might as well be Mr. Turnover. Cris Carter even called him a "turnover machine." Having researched these numbers previously, I thought I'd re-examine the analysts' claims. Here's what I found... For current starting quarterbacks who have played at least 30 games (including Jay Cutler and Drew Brees, who will be back in the next week or two from injury), here's how their turnover numbers stack up (all stats courtesy of NFL.com):

1) Aaron Rodgers (Green Bay): 57 INTs, 17 lost fumbles in 113 games = 0.65 to/gm

2) Russell Wilson (Seattle): 28 INTs, 8 lost fumbles in 51 games = 0.71 to/gm

3) Colin Kaepernick (San Francisco): 25 INTs, 12 lost fumbles in 51 games = 0.73 to/gm

4) Tom Brady (New England): 143 INTs, 41 lost fumbles in 212 games = 0.87 to/gm

5) Nick Foles (St. Louis): 18 INTs, 10 lost fumbles in 31 games = 0.90 to/gm

5) Alex Smith (Kansas City): 79 INTs, 23 lost fumbles in 113 games = 0.90 to/gm

7) Michael Vick (Pittsburgh): 87 INTs, 43 lost fumbles in 140 games = 0.93 to/gm

8) Matt Ryan (Atlanta): 93 INTs, 17 lost fumbles in 113 games = 0.97 to/gm

9) Joe Flacco (Baltimore): 94 INTs, 20 lost fumbles in 115 games = 0.99 to/gm

10) Peyton Manning (Denver): 237 INTs, 28 lost fumbles in 259 games = 1.02 to/gm

11) Cam Newton (Carolina): 56 INTs, 11 lost fumbles in 65 games = 1.03 to/gm

12) Sam Bradford (Philadelphia): 42 INTs, 12 lost fumbles in 52 games = 1.04 to/gm

13) Brandon Weeden (Dallas): 29 INTs, 3 lost fumbles in 30 games = 1.07 to/gm

14) Philip Rivers (San Diego): 126 INTs, 37 lost fumbles in 151 games = 1.08 to/gm

15) Drew Brees (New Orleans): 196 INTs, 33 lost fumbles in 204 games = 1.12 to/gm

15) Ryan Tannehill (Miami): 45 INTs, 12 lost fumbles in 51 games = 1.12 to/gm

17) Josh McCown (Cleveland): 60 INTs, 20 lost fumbles in 71 games = 1.13 to/gm

18) Andy Dalton (Cincinnati): 67 INTs, 12 lost fumbles in 67 games = 1.18 to/gm

19) Andrew Luck (Indianapolis): 50 INTs, 14 lost fumbles in 51 games = 1.25 to/gm

19) Carson Palmer (Arizona): 157 INTs, 27 lost fumbles in 147 games = 1.25 to/gm

21) Ryan Fitzpatrick (NY Jets): 106 INTs, 24 lost fumbles in 100 games = 1.30 to/gm

21) Eli Manning (NY Giants): 185 INTs, 39 lost fumbles in 172 games = 1.30 to/gm

23) Matthew Stafford (Detroit): 90 INTs, 15 lost fumbles in 80 games = 1.31 to/gm

24) Jay Cutler (Chicago): 132 INTs, 31 lost fumbles in 121 games = 1.35 to/gm

25) Kirk Cousins (Washington): 23 INTs, 4 lost fumbles in 17 games = 1.59 to/gm


Here are the turnover stats for the seven starting quarterbacks who have played in fewer than 30 games in their NFL careers to this point:

1) Tyrod Taylor (Buffalo): 5 INTs, 0 lost fumbles in 17 games = 0.29 to/gm

2) Ryan Mallett (Houston): 5 INTs, 0 lost fumbles in 10 games = 0.50 to/gm

3) Teddy Bridgewater (Minnesota): 14 INTs, 0 lost fumbles in 16 games = 0.88 to/gm

4) Derek Carr (Oakland): 13 INTs, 4 lost fumbles in 19 games = 0.89 to/gm

5) Blake Bortles (Jacksonville): 20 INTs, 1 lost fumble in 17 games = 1.24 to/gm

6) Marcus Mariota (Tennessee): 2 INTs, 2 lost fumbles in 3 games = 1.33 to/gm

6) Jameis Winston (Tampa Bay): 3 INTs, 1 lost fumble in 3 games = 1.33 to/gm

So, there you have it; of the 25 current starting quarterbacks who have played in at least 30 NFL games, Michael Vick has turned the ball over the 7th fewest, behind only: Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Colin Kaepernick, Tom Brady, Nick Foles, and Alex Smith. If Cris Carter and company want to label any NFL quarterback as a "turnover machine," they may want to direct their attention to one of the following names: Andrew Luck, Carson Palmer, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Eli Manning, Matthew Stafford, Jay Cutler, and more than any other, Kirk Cousins.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"