Quantifying Quarterbacks is an NFL Draft focused quarterback charting project geared toward providing as much information about as much of a quarterback’s recent career as possible. Over 20 data points are recorded for any given pass attempt, ranging from down-and-distance, personnel grouping, play-action, depth of target, accuracy, and much more. Quantifying Quarterbacks charts the entirety of a quarterback’s final college season, as well as a smaller sample (four games) from their previous season. All of this charting is done manually by me during and after the college football season. For a more in-depth look at what exactly Quantifying Quarterbacks is, here is a link to last year’s final product: 2019 Quantifying Quarterbacks.
The 2020 Quantifying Quarterbacks project is nearly complete. Now mid-March, just two QBs remain to be scouted / charted to finish out the project: Washington State’s Anthony Gordon and Hawaii’s Cole McDonald. Based on what I’ve seen from both already, I do not suspect either will be breaking the model or holding many significant titles over their peers (good or bad). Therefore, this feels like a good time to check up on the class as a whole and directly compare where each of the current eight quarterbacks stand next to each other in accuracy, environment-related play, and situational play. [[ad:athena]]
Let’s start with general accuracy.
| Name | 0 | 1-5 | 6-10 | 11-15 | 16-20 | 20+ | Total Adjusted Accuracy |
| Joe Burrow | 90.28% | 84.75% | 77.57% | 66.23% | 78.95% | 55.45% | 78.43% |
| Jacob Eason | 94.55% | 85.37% | 73.17% | 56.67% | 66.67% | 39.39% | 73.28% |
| Jake Fromm | 94.37% | 75.89% | 77.22% | 65.63% | 67.57% | 38.10% | 69.98% |
| Justin Herbert | 90.65% | 85.59% | 69.01% | 64.79% | 57.78% | 55.13% | 73.08% |
| Jalen Hurts | 87.65% | 82.35% | 72.84% | 77.33% | 75.00% | 48.10% | 74.52% |
| Jordan Love | 88.46% | 85.71% | 67.07% | 60.00% | 50.00% | 44.21% | 69.66% |
| Nate Stanley | 87.04% | 73.00% | 67.92% | 61.67% | 63.64% | 36.84% | 66.03% |
| Tua Tagovailoa | 93.33% | 82.26% | 70.00% | 58.70% | 72.00% | 52.17% | 73.41% |
| Average | 90.79% | 81.87% | 71.85% | 63.88% | 66.45% | 46.16% | 72.30% |
Accuracy Leader By Target Range
0: Jacob Eason - 94.55%
1-5: Jordan Love - 85.71%
6-10: Joe Burrow - 77.57%
11-15: Jalen Hurts - 77.33%
16-20: Joe Burrow - 78.95%
20+: Joe Burrow - 55.45%
Total Adjusted Accuracy: Joe Burrow - 78.43%
Eason taking the crown for accuracy behind the line of scrimmage is a shock to me. In watching his film, I did not necessarily believe he was clumsy behind the line of scrimmage like Love or Stanley, but I can’t say he was my first choice to be the winner for that part of the field. If anything, the 6-10 area may have made sense for Eason considering how many slants, curls, and outs the Washington offense ran.
Love winning out in the 1-5 area, however, is not surprising at all. Love is at his best when he can pick a target pre-snap and fire immediately with his smooth, quick throwing motion. His decisiveness with pre-snap reads and fast trigger make it easy for him to execute on those quick passes. Unfortunately, Love did not perform well enough in other areas to get a ton of value out of being a quick-game savant, but perhaps those other parts of his game can be developed to make him a more complete quarterback down the line.
One area that presents mixed feelings is the 11-15 area with Hurts beating out the field. At least to me, Hurts’ dominance in this area is in large part because of how well Oklahoma HC Lincoln Riley frees up crossing routes, seam routes, comeback routes on the sideline, and the like. Riley is a genius in creating space in the intermediate area, as evidenced by his work with Baker Mayfield, Kyler Murray, and now Hurts. Pair Riley’s genius along with the Big 12 generally having awful defenses and it is not hard to see where the openings come up. Granted, Hurts was still plenty accurate enough in his own right to take advantage of those openings, but I suspect Hurts had more open looks to that area than everyone aside from maybe Burrow.
As for Burrow’s accuracy ... well, there isn’t anything more to say at this point. He is the most accurate quarterback in my database going back to 2016.
| Name | Outside The Pocket % | Outside the Pocket Accuracy % | Under Pressure % | Under Pressure Accuracy % | Play-Action % | Play-Action Accuracy % |
| Joe Burrow | 11.99% | 62.50% | 17.67% | 63.93% | 26.18% | 79.22% |
| Jacob Eason | 9.28% | 53.23% | 16.77% | 36.07% | 33.53% | 79.82% |
| Jake Fromm | 6.59% | 47.67% | 15.82% | 45.28% | 24.84% | 64.96% |
| Justin Herbert | 12.99% | 66.51% | 17.94% | 61.26% | 36.70% | 78.82% |
| Jalen Hurts | 23.29% | 57.47% | 27.18% | 55.05% | 41.65% | 73.16% |
| Jordan Love | 16.26% | 52.04% | 18.71% | 45.51% | 27.62% | 62.09% |
| Nate Stanley | 13.76% | 57.96% | 17.42% | 40.81% | 23.03% | 57.32% |
| Tua Tagovailoa | 11.55% | 66.00% | 17.16% | 50.19% | 46.20% | 71.50% |
| Average | 13.21% | 57.92% | 18.58% | 49.76% | 32.47% | 70.86% |
Rate / Accuracy Leaders By Environment Split
Outside the Pocket %: Jalen Hurts - 23.29%
Outside the Pocket Accuracy %: Justin Herbert - 66.51%
Under Pressure %: Jalen Hurts - 27.18%
Under Pressure Accuracy %: Joe Burrow - 63.93%
Play-Action %: Tua Tagovailoa - 46.20%
Play-Action Accuracy %: Jacob Eason - 79.82%
Hurts gets himself into sticky situations far too often. His outside-the-pocket and under-pressure rates being so high have far more to do with his play style than it does with Oklahoma’s offensive scheme or quality of offensive line. The two are tied together, too, because of Hurts’ reaction when things go awry. Often times, if Hurts does not get the look he wants early in the down, he will freeze up trying to get through the rest of his progressions. In turn, Hurts tends to only be left with one option: bail. To be fair, Hurts does very well to escape and is a comfortable passer outside the pocket, but it’s strenuous to put himself in those situations so often, especially considering many of them turn into pressures one way or another. Though this theory is half-baked, it is plausible that Hurts’ accuracy against pressure is good in part because many of those pressures are self-inflicted when he has already decided to break the play, so it is not as much of a shock to his system and process.
As far as other quarterbacks’ play under pressure, Burrow is the clear stand out. Burrow proved himself incredibly poised and flexible in tough situations. He never panicked and it often felt like he knew exactly what his next move needed to be in the event of pressure, whether that was to just pull the trigger at the target he was looking at or knowing where to slide to keep himself clean. Burrow’s process and results under pressure each speak for themselves.
Herbert, however, was not very far off from Burrow with respect to play under pressure. On film, I do not necessarily believe this to be true. That said, I suspect the numbers are higher on Herbert in part because he doesn’t force bad throws under pressure the way players like Eason, Fromm, and Love do. This is also in part because Herbert is often operating fairly on-time, so when pressure does arrive, he tends to already be at his desired target and he has no reservations about taking a hit in order to get the ball out. Herbert is not nearly as creative within the pocket or on the move as other quarterbacks, but the willingness and raw talent to play under talent is there. That should be enough for him to do well in the league in that regard.
Lastly, Tagovailoa’s terribly high play-action percentage is a tad concerning to me. This was mentioned in his Quantifying Quarterbacks piece a couple months back, but that high a rate of play-action signals to me that much of Alabama’s offense was gimmick (quick) play-action and RPOs (run-pass options). Of course, NFL teams do both of those things, but not nearly at a clip of 45%. Most NFL teams do not even clear the 30% mark on play-action and much more of their play-action concepts are hard fakes from under-center, none of which Tagovailoa did at Alabama. This is no death knell for Tagovailoa, but it does suggest he will have a tougher learning curve than is assumed.
| Name | 3rd/4th Down Accuracy | 3rd/4th Down Conversion Rate | 4th Quarter / OT Accuracy | Red Zone Accuracy |
| Joe Burrow | 66.33% | 44.53% | 70.64% | 68.09% |
| Jacob Eason | 70.85% | 44.68% | 65.69% | 74.71% |
| Jake Fromm | 63.11% | 43.92% | 65.96% | 64.84% |
| Justin Herbert | 70.00% | 44.00% | 72.23% | 67.86% |
| Jalen Hurts | 69.08% | 50.83 | 73.54% | 64.00% |
| Jordan Love | 69.86% | 42.86% | 67.27% | 65.08% |
| Nate Stanley | 62.39% | 45.87% | 50.43% | 59.80% |
| Tua Tagovailoa | 76.46% | 58.46% | 81.25% | 61.28% |
| Average | 68.51% | 47.00% | 68.38% | 65.71% |
Rate / Accuracy Leaders By Situational Split
3rd/4th Down Accuracy: Tua Tagovailoa - 76.46%
3rd/4th Down Conversion: Tua Tagovailoa - 58.46%
4th Quarter/OT Accuracy: Tua Tagovailoa - 81.25%
Red Zone Accuracy: Jacob Eason - 74.71%
Finally, a section where Tagovailoa dominates. For a player touted as the second coming for a year and still considered a top-two quarterback in this class, I was hoping Tagovailoa would fare better compared to his 2020 peers. Red zone aside, though, Tagovailoa is a stud in situational play. Tagovailoa crushed the 3rd/4th down sections, beating out the next-best mark by more than 5% in each split. That isn’t Tagovailoa edging out section wins by luck, that is clear dominance.
The one where I may have reservations is with the absurdity of his 4th quarter/OT numbers. Tagovailoa is still a plenty good quarterback when it comes down to crunch time, but I suspect his numbers late in the game are inflated by not being in many dire spots by the end of the game. Many of Tagovailoa’s 4th quarter pass attempts are efforts to close out games, not come from behind or struggle with a tight lead. Of course, that is not to say Tagovailoa never played in tough games, but rather that he played in a handful that were decided early. Tagovailo’s overall passing sample is smaller than most other quarterbacks due to his injury, so I suspect that plays some part in it as well.
Eason is the clear surprise on this list. If Eason was going to come out on top in any of these areas, however, the red zone does make the most sense. Eason has a strong trigger and blazing arm strength, so it is not terribly surprising he can fit the tight windows in the red zone. I am a bit surprised he was making the right reads often enough to even have a chance at that high of an accuracy score, but perhaps playing on a “condensed” field is more comfortable for Eason.
