Not every quarterback who is good at avoiding sacks in college becomes a good NFL quarterback, but most good NFL quarterbacks are good at avoiding sacks in college. In addition, college pressure to sack rate is best used as a tool to spot potential land mines in the NFL Draft, not to identify the next Patrick Mahomes.
The above statements are what I have consistently told myself after digging into pressure to sack rates for the last six months. I encourage readers to reference it if, at any point, they believe I’m making an argument that suggests otherwise.
Pressure to sack rate has gained a lot of steam in recent months. It became a hot topic in and around Washington D.C. after Sam Howell opened the year with 19 sacks through the first three weeks of the season and was on a 17-game pace for 108 sacks — which would have smashed the single-season record of 76 set by David Carr in 2002.
Howell’s pace slowed over the year. He finished with a league-high 65 sacks but was well off the number he was pacing toward. However, at the peak of his struggles, fans and analysts began digging into Howell’s propensity for taking sacks, going back to his college days at North Carolina.
People quickly learned that sack avoidance has been a major weakness in Howell’s game for quite some time. As far as carving out a role as a long-term NFL starter is concerned, it’s fair to think Howell’s sack-eating problems could prove to be his fatal flaw and will keep him from being a permanent fixture in the league. Apologies to the Seahawks and GM John Schneider, who recently gave up a top-100 pick to acquire the 2022 fifth-rounder.
We’ll get more into high pressure-to-sack rates in a moment, but Howell is an interesting case to consider when you realize his struggles last year and also know he had the fourth-highest college pressure-to-sack rate (26.7 percent) among 102 quarterbacks drafted since 2015.
NOTE: Stats and information courtesy of PFF.com, RotoViz.com, and SportsReference.com.
For people unfamiliar with pressure-to-sack rate, which I’ll refer to as P2S% for the remainder of the article, Pro Football Focus defines it as the “percentage of pressures turned into sacks.”
What is Pressure to Sack Rate?
A pressure, as defined by NFL Next Gen Stats, is:
One common misconception about P2S% is that quarterbacks who drop back more often will have a worse P2S% than those who don’t. However, last year’s leader in dropbacks, Patrick Mahomes (732), had an 11.2 percent P2S% — the second-lowest number among qualified quarterbacks (min. 250 dropbacks).
Below is a look at quarterbacks who have been top 10 in dropbacks over the last three seasons and how they fared in P2S%. The table is sorted by most to least dropbacks.
| Player | Year | DB | DB Rank | P2S% | P2S% Rank |
| Justin Herbert | 2022 | 764 | 2 | 14.0 | 4 |
| Tom Brady | 2022 | 761 | 1 | 14.9 | 9 |
| Tom Brady | 2021 | 751 | 1 | 14.7 | 7 |
| Justin Herbert | 2021 | 740 | 2 | 15.6 | 10 |
| Patrick Mahomes | 2021 | 735 | 3 | 12.0 | 2 |
| Josh Allen | 2021 | 724 | 4 | 10.6 | 1 |
| Patrick Mahomes | 2022 | 722 | 3 | 10.8 | 1 |
| Sam Howell | 2023 | 712 | 1 | 23.5 | 29 |
| Kirk Cousins | 2022 | 701 | 4 | 18.3 | 13 |
| Derek Carr | 2021 | 686 | 5 | 16.7 | 14 |
| Patrick Mahomes | 2023 | 677 | 2 | 11.2 | 2 |
| Joe Burrow | 2022 | 676 | 5 | 22.9 | 25 |
| Trevor Lawrence | 2021 | 668 | 6 | 14.5 | 6 |
| Dak Prescott | 2023 | 661 | 3 | 17.9 | 14 |
| Josh Allen | 2022 | 659 | 9 | 14.7 | 7 |
| Josh Allen | 2023 | 653 | 4 | 10.3 | 1 |
| Geno Smith | 2022 | 652 | 8 | 20.7 | 18 |
| Dak Prescott | 2021 | 651 | 7 | 15.2 | 8 |
| Ben Roethlisberger | 2021 | 646 | 8 | 26.0 | 31 |
| Trevor Lawrence | 2023 | 645 | 5 | 18.4 | 18 |
| Jared Goff | 2023 | 642 | 6 | 13.2 | 3 |
| Matthew Stafford | 2021 | 640 | 9 | 17.8 | 16 |
| Baker Mayfield | 2023 | 639 | 7 | 18.3 | 17 |
| Trevor Lawrence | 2022 | 637 | 7 | 14.6 | 5 |
| Jordan Love | 2023 | 633 | 8 | 15.2 | 7 |
| Jared Goff | 2022 | 626 | 6 | 12.3 | 2 |
| Jalen Hurts | 2023 | 622 | 9 | 14.5 | 5 |
| Bryce Young | 2023 | 622 | 9 | 24.5 | 32 |
| Matt Ryan | 2021 | 617 | 10 | 16.3 | 12 |
| Tua Tagovailoa | 2023 | 609 | 10 | 19.3 | 21 |
| Aaron Rodgers | 2022 | 588 | 10 | 20.4 | 17 |
Interestingly, 17 of the 31 players shown (54.8 percent) rank in the top 10 in P2S%, and 10 rank inside the top five. If it were true that players who pass at high volumes are more negatively impacted by a high P2S%, then we probably wouldn’t be seeing more than half of this group ranked in the upper third of sack avoidance on a year-to-year basis.
When considering P2S%, I think it’s best to view the stat in the context of a quarterback versus a defender.
For starters, quarterbacks aren’t pressured on every dropback. Of the 33 quarterbacks who dropped back at least 250 times last season, that group combined to be pressured on just 35.6 percent of their dropbacks.
Additionally, pressure is something the quarterback faces from a defender, putting the onus on him to avoid a sack once pressured by said defender. While an offensive lineman or blocker can allow a quarterback to be pressured, it’s on the quarterback to decide how he will keep that pressure from turning into a sack — whether it’s via a scramble, a pass, or throwing the ball out of play.
This is why quarterbacks like Mahomes don’t take many sacks despite ranking in the top five in dropbacks and pressures every season since 2021. Even though he consistently faces pressure that ranks near the top of the league, Mahomes’ elite sack avoidance, coupled with knowing where to go with the ball, is part of what allows him to play at the high level he does.
Using Pressure-to-Sack Rate to Avoid Draft Pitfalls
As I mentioned at the top of my article, I believe career college P2S% numbers are best utilized to find quarterbacks to avoid in the draft. While it can help identify plenty of good quarterbacks, the concerning low number of hits at the pro level that comes when we get above a certain P2S% threshold for their college career makes for a compelling case for a P2S% profile that should be avoided.
I’ve found that a career college P2S% of 20 percent or higher becomes immediately concerning when trying to identify prospects who could successfully make the leap to the NFL. Below is every quarterback drafted from 2015 through 2022 who had a P2S% of 20 percent or higher for their college careers. I have chosen to leave out the 2023 draft class due to their only having one season of record.
In the above table, we have 31 quarterbacks. While some undoubtedly need more opportunities before we can correctly label them a hit or miss at the pro level, I think we can safely agree that we know where the consensus stands on guys like Desmond Ridder, Malik Willis, Marcus Mariota, Zach Wilson, and even Justin Fields — who was recently dealt to the Steelers for a conditional 2025 sixth-round pick.
Yes, outliers exist in this group. Joe Burrow and Lamar Jackson have undoubtedly turned in great professional careers thus far, and Baker Mayfield continues to stay afloat.
However, I will point out that when using 20 percent as a P2S% threshold for both career and single-season numbers, Jackson is one of few quarterbacks in the group who showed multiple seasons of good sack-avoiding skills while at Louisville. I mentioned as much in a recent back-and-forth with Establish the Run’s Pat Thorman on the website formerly known as Twitter.
Another interesting thing about the "outliers" (Burrow/Lamar) is I don't consider Lamar a true outlier In three college seasons, he had very solid P2S% of 17.6 and 17.9 percent. In 2016, his P2S was 24.9%, which really overinflated his career P2S%.
— Zachary Krueger (@ZK_FFB) March 22, 2024
In my opinion, Burrow, whose best single-season P2S% of 19.1 percent came in his 2019 season — a barely passable mark — is the one true outlier of the group.
For their pro careers, Jackson has a P2S% of 18.9 percent, while Burrow sits at 22.9 percent. That Burrow continues to play at a fairly high level despite being amongst the worst quarterbacks in the league at avoiding sacks is both miraculous and concerning.
Behind an improved offensive line in 2023, Burrow posted a career-best P2S% of 19.5 percent — ranking 23rd among 33 quarterbacks.
While a list of 31 quarterbacks with poor P2S% does plenty to differentiate hits from misses, as far as the draft is concerned, it’s hard to ignore that several of these quarterbacks are players with low draft capital. Before they set foot in the NFL, the league had more or less already determined their long-term future based on where they were drafted. To get a better sense of the hits and misses that exist within quarterbacks viewed more favorably by the league on draft day, I looked at players with a P2S% over 20 percent who drew first or second-round draft capital.
There’s a multitude of ways we can choose to decide whether or not a player was a hit or miss, but for the sake of keeping it simple, I’m identifying a hit as a player who signed (or is expected to sign) a long-term second contract with the team that drafted them. In simpler terms, I’m looking for the kind of second contract we’d expect a team to give a franchise quarterback.
With this in mind, the only above players with first or second round draft capital who hit this mark are Jackson and Burrow (2-of-9, 22.2 percent). Interestingly, Fields, Mayfield, and Trey Lance were all traded before their rookie contracts expired. The Jets would love to trade Zach Wilson, but it appears the UFL isn’t allowed to make transactions with NFL teams, forcing the Jets to keep Wilson on the roster at this time.
Now let’s look at the quarterbacks with a career college P2S% below 20 percent.
There’s a lot to be seen here — 57 quarterbacks, to be exact. Using the same criteria as we did above to identify a hit at the position, we get 14 players (24.6 percent) who meet that standard. It’s a low rate but still higher than the second contract rate of players taken in just the first or second rounds with a P2S% of 20 percent or higher. However, if we apply the same draft capital standards (drafted in the first or second round) to this group, the second contract rate more than doubles.
Again, I am excluding players from the 2023 class because they have only played for one year.
This leaves us with 22 quarterbacks, of whom 12 have signed (are expected to sign) a second contract with the team that drafted them (54.5 percent). There are players who are easy to hate on in this group. The Giants signing Daniel Jones to a second contract last offseason appears to be a monumental mistake, and the Eagles moved on from Carson Wentz just two years after signing him to a four-year, $128 million contract extension in the 2019 offseason that would have kept him with the team through 2024.
However, even with those notable second contract flops, the rate of second contracts received by players with a college P2S% below 20 percent compared to those above is noticeably different. Even the difference in overall quality of play between the two groups is quite obvious.
Of the 19 quarterbacks taken in the first round with a college P2S% below 20 percent, 11 (57.9 percent) have signed a second contract with their original team.
Assuming that every quarterback drafted in the first round is viewed by their team as a long-term solution at the position, we can safely conclude that quarterbacks with a career college P2S% below 20 percent have offered that positional longevity at a much higher rate than those above 20 percent.
The 2024 Quarterback Class
There’s been a lot of work done by various people on how sticky a stat pressure-to-sack rate is from the college to pro levels. A stat being “sticky” is easily explained by Matt DiSorbo in an article over at TheFantasyFootballers.com, where he writes:
As my friend @fball_insights, on the site formerly known as Twitter, points out, P2S% is one of the more sticky stats we have regarding projecting quarterbacks from college to the NFL. The coefficient for the below chart is 0.3440733.
Pressure to sack ratio is a nice starting point when projecting QBs to the NFL. Pretty sticky in the aggregate: pic.twitter.com/um5s1lyQ5U
— Football Insights 📊 (@fball_insights) January 9, 2024
You should follow Football Insights if you aren’t doing so already.
Knowing the predictable nature of P2S%, let’s have a look at the incoming rookie class.
The list of quarterbacks is comprised of those who were invited to the 2024 NFL Scouting Combine. While we could dive into all of them, here we’ll focus specifically on the draft’s “Big Six” who are:
- Caleb Williams — USC
- Drake Maye — UNC
- Jayden Daniels — LSU
- J.J. McCarthy — Michigan
- Michael Penix Jr. — Washington
- Bo Nix — Oregon
Interestingly, Penix and Nix have the best P2S% of this year’s consensus top six quarterbacks despite being viewed as the QB5 and QB6 of the class by most draft analysts. Although, it’s also worth noting that of this group, only Penix, Nix, and Jayden Daniels have more than four years of college football experience on their resumé. Penix and Nix both have well-documented issues as far as accuracy is concerned. Nix did see a drastic improvement in his accuracy when he transferred from Auburn to Oregon, but a short ADOT (7.5) over that span and a high rate of screen passes can be credited for the improved numbers.
Penix’s 6.5 percent P2S% for his career isn’t just good — it’s the best mark of 116 quarterback prospects dating back to 2015. His strong Pro Day, coupled with his elite sack avoidance, could make him the sleeper of this class if he can iron out some of the wrinkles in his game.
Caleb Williams and Drake Maye’s career P2S% numbers are high but still fall below the 20 percent threshold we’d like to avoid. In his two seasons as a starter, Maye never had a P2S% higher than 19.5 percent, while Williams had seasons of 19.8 percent and 16.0 percent in 2021 and 2022 before seeing that number jump to 23.2 percent last year.
Given what we’ve seen from Lamar Jackson as an outlier, I’m telling myself we don’t need to be too concerned about Williams because of those two passable seasons on his resumé.
Draft riser J.J. McCarthy and his 14.3 percent P2S% is one of the tops of the class and ranks 27th amongst 116 quarterback prospects since 2015. His ability to avoid sacks is one of many reasons I’m on board with him being viewed as a top quarterback in this class and why I don’t think he’ll see the same draft-day slide that befell draft-hype darlings Malik Willis and Will Levis in 2022 and 2023 — who unsurprisingly have two of the worst career P2S% of any prospect over the last 10 years.
The P2S% that tends to leave people annoyed and/or “mad online” is Jayden Daniels’. His career 24.5 percent P2S% is not only the worst in the class but also ranks 110th among the 116 quarterbacks. Here’s a look at the quarterback prospects with the 10 highest P2S% over that span who received first or second round draft capital.
Daniels won the Heisman Trophy last season after he put together one of the most efficient seasons in college football history. His 3,812 passing yards, 40 touchdowns, and four interceptions, paired with another 1,134 rushing yards and 10 touchdowns on the ground, made him the best dual threat in the nation and the best dual-threat quarterback of this class.
With that said, if you believe a high P2S% in college can serve as a red flag when evaluating prospects, then we can’t overlook what Daniels’ numbers were during his five years in college.
Daniels’ best season came in 2023 when he finished the year with a 20.2 percent P2S%, narrowly edging out the 20.9 percent P2S% he posted in 2021. Here’s a complete look at Daniels’ year-by-year rates.
| Year | P2S% |
| 2019 | 24.0 |
| 2020 | 25.0 |
| 2021 | 20.9 |
| 2022 | 30.8 |
| 2023 | 20.2 |
One player who I believe Daniels comps most closely to, Justin Fields, never had a P2S% below 22.1 percent for his college career and has struggled to escape pressure, even with a much-improved offensive line, as we saw in 2023.
If you’re reading this as me personally slighting Daniels, don’t.
When the pre-draft process began, I was ready to rank Daniels as high as QB2 of the class. His Heisman season generated a lot of excitement, and everything about football is more fun when players with Daniels’ game-breaking speed and ability to create on the run succeed.
Sundays will be better if Daniels lives up to what is expected to be very high draft capital for the next 10 years.
Still, the company he exists within as far as P2S% goes is a legitimate concern — even with his rushing upside. While this could change over time, I think Daniels’ best-case scenario for success early in his career is to land with a staff that prioritizes his strengths as a runner above all else — á la Lamar Jackson and Greg Roman.
During Jackson’s four-year run with Roman, he saw 73.1 percent of his runs come on designed carries. Fields, on the other hand, saw few designed runs as a rookie but was viewed by many as having taken more of a “step in the right direction” over the last two seasons when his designed runs rate increased.
I want to love Daniels’ long-term outlook as much as the next fan, but I’ll also be weary of what I believe to be a concerning profile despite some exciting attributes.
