By: Ryan Moreland (@ryanmoreland)
There was plenty of movement on the board this week, including a new leader who wasn’t in the top ten last week! Here are your JTR QB Rankings.
How JTR Works
JTR ranks players by their comparison to the league average using as unbiased stats as possible. By unbiased stats, we mean stats that don’t show a preference for one style of play over another. For example, we expect a quarterback in an air raid system to throw the ball more often than a quarterback in a multiple set. So comparing the two based on completions wouldn’t be fair. Once we determine stats that we believe to be unbiased, we create a league average. Outperforming the league average earns a player positive points. Stats that fall below the league average will earn a player negative points. Points for each stat are calculated and combined with a base rating given to each player. The combination results in a player’s JTR metric score. 0 is the worst possible score and 100 is the best possible score.
For QBs, the stats we chose to use are completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown percentage, interception percentage, passing yards per game, and unique rushing index. The rushing index attempts to exclude sacks from a quarterback’s rush totals to get a more accurate sense of them as a runner. Also, QBs cannot take negative points from the rushing index (outside of fumbles). This is because a running ability for a quarterback is a plus, but not a requirement.
JTR is not a predictive metric. It cannot tell the future. It can only measure what a player has done up to that point.
Note: This is a complicated system that is difficult to explain in an easily digestible way. If you have more questions about how it works, please reach out. We would be more than happy to answer your questions.
Another note: Base ratings were raised by 10 to all players this week.
JTR QB Rankings
| Rank (Last Week) | Player | Team | JTR Score (Change) |
| 1 (15) | Charlie Sammons | Notre Dame | 96.333 (+40.549) |
| 2 (2) | Helix Myers | Pittsburgh | 95.341 (-1.813) |
| 3 (4) | Loki Gunderson | Clemson | 94.899 (+4.165) |
| 4 (3) | Baker Thomas | Auburn | 93.454 (-2.037) |
| 5 (8) | Ayden Martinez | North Carolina | 93.378 (+22.307) |
| 6 (1) | Ludwig Friedman | Georgia | 90.682 (-6.542) |
| 7 (17) | Cece Range | Alabama | 83.487 (+30.341) |
| 8 (6) | Ryan Ravenhill | Florida State | 83.322 (-3.247) |
| 9 (18) | Topher Foreman | Michigan | 81.482 (+29.118) |
| 10 (14) | Beau Dale | Florida | 76.380 (+19.628) |
| 11 (7) | Avery Ware | Texas | 76.306 (-3.974) |
| 12 (5) | Tony Ellis | West Virginia | 75.185 (-11.604) |
| 13 (9) | McKade Alber | Toledo | 74.670 (+10.853) |
| 14 (20) | Mateo Walker | Miami | 70.868 (+25.165) |
| 15 (10) | Moses King | Kentucky | 69.498 (-6.142) |
| 16 (25) | Sam Dobbins | Boise State | 68.436 (+45.662) |
| 17 (21) | Logan Radloff | Ohio State | 64.824 (+27.525) |
| 18 (13) | Kyson Carey | Bowling Green | 64.749 (+7.480) |
| 19 (16) | Del Toro | Ohio | 63.480 (+9.317) |
| 20 (22) | Brantley Guaci | Oregon | 61.872 (+27.534) |
| 21 (12) | Greg Cooksey | Eastern Michigan | 60.470 (+3.201) |
| 22 (23) | Ryan Moreland | Oklahoma State | 58.876 (+26.834) |
| 23 (11) | Derrick Power | Oklahoma | 50.643 (-10.213) |
| 24 (19) | Shaker Mayflower | Kent State | 48.772 (+2.849) |
| 25 (26) | Dylan Shumate | Illinois | 42.188 (+20.844) |
| 26 (24) | Terry Olliff | Northern Illinois | 41.352 (+20.008) |
Findings
As seen in the second note, this week base ratings were increased for every player. This was because scores came closer together with another week of action. For that reason, we saw a few players with massive jumps in their scores this week. The highest jump in score belonged to Boise State’s Sam Dobbins, who gained more than 45 points on his JTR Score. The largest jump in rank went to Notre Dame’s Charlie Sammons, who jumped from 15 to 1. Sammons also had the second-largest increase in his JTR score.
Last week it was noted that many of the top-rated QBs were likely benefiting from the lighter matchups of a MAC non-conference schedule. That trend continued this week. Just as last week, four of the top five have yet to play a Power Two team. We will see if these QBs can hold on to their high ratings once conference play begins next week.
There were 11 players whose scores rose by at least 20 points this week. This isn’t uncommon for the beginning of the season. Good players can have an off game in Week One and then they get back to form in Week Two. As the season wears on these increases will likely fall exponentially. This is because the more games you play means the less each game means to the total score.
