These days the word ‘elite’ is often overused. As I tend to agree, the true definition of ‘elite’ refers to a select few who are superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group, or in this case, the NFL. Therefore, we can only contend whether a passer is among the best at what he does, not whether or not they’re superior. If we recognize them as a top NFL quarterback, by definition, they’re elite.

Beyond the eye test, the NFL has always sought to pinpoint a signal-caller’s performance. A decade into its existence, the NFL used solely passing yardage totals to honor its top quarterbacks. Since that alone couldn’t decipher the elite from the rest of the league, the NFL turned to completion percentages. Again, too many variables were found to contradict this method of grading quarterback play.

Passer Rating (RTG)

It would take more than 50 years for the National Football League to adopt the formula it uses today–the quarterback passer rating. And the fact it’s held steady for nearly 50 years is impressive given the lack of statistical stability beforehand.

Below you’ll find a table from ESPN indicating numerous quarterback statistics. To the far right, you will see the player’s QB passer rating, as I have sorted the columns according to this number. Per the “tried-and-true” formula, Tennessee Titan quarterback Ryan Tannehill was the best passer of 2019.

In addition to Tannehill, the graphic lists signal-caller’s Matthew Stafford, Jimmy Garoppolo, and Derek Carr, all in the top-ten. Ironically, the three have been tied to trade rumors this offseason. Had Kirk Cousins’ three-year deal with the Minnesota Vikings not been fully guaranteed and contained a no-trade clause, he may very well be in the same boat.

However, the passer rating system, like all metrics, has its flaws. Yet, it has withstood its faults and continues to rule all other quarterback statistics to this day. What helps matters is that up until 2011, the passer-rating had little to no competition.

Total Quarterback Rating (QBR)

Nine years ago, ESPN created a proprietary metric known as the Total Quarterback Rating or QBR. Besides using statistics similar to that of the passer-rating, QBR includes all quarterback actions within a football game. The passer-rating only accounts for passing.

QBR took what the passer rating accomplished and added to it. There was now a quarterback performance grading scale that rewarded athletic players who gain yards with their feet and buy time from scrambling out of the pocket. Hence four of the top five players being elusive, athletic type signal-callers. But therein lies the flaw.

In QBR’s inaugural year, during a Week five matchup between the Denver Broncos and Green Bay Packers, quarterbacks Tim Tebow and Aaron Rodgers went toe-to-toe. Rodgers completed 66.7% of his 39 attempts for 396 yards and two touchdowns and was given a lower QBR designation than the Broncos quarterback. Tebow completed just four of his ten attempts for 79 yards and a single score. However, Tebow ran for a touchdown, adding 38 yards rushing. Clearly, the metric benefits the dual-threat passer–to a fault.

Offensive Share Metric (OSM)

Here at Pro Football Network, we’ve adopted our very own metric for evaluating NFL quarterback performance, the Offensive Share Metric (OSM). One of the most significant differences between OSM and the flawed QBR and archaic passer rating is for the first time, quarterbacks can be correlated with other players on their respective offenses. That’s right, running backs, receivers, and even tight ends. OSM assesses all of these positions on an individual basis.

While it has its own critics, OSM is a relatively new metric. Research is ongoing, and tweaking of the formula is anticipated. Similarly to the passer rating, OSM does not yet associate rushing yards for the quarterback at this time, but it aims to. Keep in mind both passer rating, and QBR have undergone revisions and adjustments several times throughout their existence.

OSM’s foundational recipe was established in 2016 using data and expertise behind a comprehensive physical education company geared for developing elite athletes. But its results weren’t fully appropriated until 2019 when Pro Football Network made it the company’s proprietary metric for evaluating individual offensive production in the NFL.

Stemming from behavioral science, OSM was constructed to measure results. It’s often difficult to tell how well an individual is performing during an NFL game. Conventional statistics are helpful, but they seldom tell the full story. Similarly to ESPN’s QBR, OSM grades measure how much of a player’s statistical production they were actually responsible for, making it immediately more accurate than the passer rating metric developed in the 1970s.

Film or analytics?

As an advocate of film analysis, I’d be remiss in including the importance of evaluating a player’s performance through tape. However, there’s a place for both film study and analytics in formulated a best-of-the-best list. Here at Pro Football Network, we assess offensive production using OSM as the basis for player performance, but we don’t turn a blind eye to the apparent.

As stated in several instances above, statistical formulas aren’t perfect, although modern systems have proven more reliable. All data should be a reference to the actual in-game behavior. And that’s what makes OSM the most reliable of all; it’s rooted in player behaviors.

So without further ado, here are the top NFL quarterbacks deemed elite by Pro Football Network’s Offensive Share Metric and reinforced by film analysis.