The more I watch this season, the more I'd love to see a new accuracy stat for passers. The difference in passers who win and passers who lose is in their accuracy, all other things being equal. Passing accuracy more than makes up for deficiency in the running game, and in receivers' speed. Being able to throw "strikes" or to put the ball "on the money" is what makes a good passer, and the "strike zone" is very small, especially with better defenses. That's why Russell Wilson's Seahawks beat Arizona, because Wilson was accurate, and Arizona's signal caller was not. And that's why Tom Brady is still among the top passers in the league even at 40, because he still throws strikes and puts the ball on the money. Passers can throw catchable balls, requiring their receivers to make exemplary catches, but virtually no receivers drop the ball when you put it right in their hands or hit them right in the chest. If you miss, there is where drops, batted balls, and INTs occur. Next time you watch a game, just keep a mental tally of how frequently the passer throws a good ball versus a bad one. Some games, some passers almost NEVER throw a good ball. It's a wonder they're even playing. It's also a sign that the crop of passers playing today all have a lot of room to improve.
At least for someone who isn't pulling for anyone in particular.
