Players 2017 final
Quarterbacks — 2017 · ranked by Pass yards
| # | Player | Tm | G | Grade | Yds/gm | Att/gm | Yds | TD | INT | Cmp% | Y/A | Rush yds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
NE | 16 | 77 | 286.1 | 36.3 | 32 | 8 | 66.3% | 7.9 | 28 | |
| 2 |
|
LAC | 16 | 66 | 282.2 | 35.9 | 28 | 10 | 62.6% | 7.9 | -2 | |
| 3 |
|
DET | 16 | 60 | 277.9 | 35.3 | 29 | 10 | 65.7% | 7.9 | 98 | |
| 4 |
|
NO | 16 | 62 | 270.9 | 33.5 | 23 | 8 | 72.0% | 8.1 | 12 | |
| 5 |
|
PIT | 15 | 63 | 283.9 | 37.5 | 28 | 14 | 64.2% | 7.6 | 47 | |
| 6 |
|
ATL | 16 | 53 | 255.9 | 33.1 | 20 | 12 | 64.7% | 7.7 | 143 | |
| 7 |
|
WAS | 16 | 57 | 255.8 | 33.8 | 27 | 13 | 64.3% | 7.6 | 179 | |
| 8 |
|
KC | 15 | 73 | 269.5 | 33.7 | 26 | 5 | 67.5% | 8.0 | 355 | |
| 9 |
|
SEA | 16 | 70 | 248.9 | 34.6 | 34 | 11 | 61.3% | 7.2 | 586 | |
| 10 |
|
LAR | 15 | 65 | 253.6 | 31.8 | 28 | 7 | 62.1% | 8.0 | 51 | |
| 11 |
|
JAX | 16 | 52 | 230.4 | 32.7 | 21 | 13 | 60.2% | 7.0 | 322 | |
| 12 |
|
MIN | 15 | 55 | 236.5 | 32.1 | 22 | 7 | 67.6% | 7.4 | 160 | |
| 13 |
|
TB | 13 | 56 | 269.5 | 34.0 | 19 | 11 | 63.8% | 7.9 | 135 | |
| 14 |
|
LV | 15 | 50 | 233.1 | 34.3 | 22 | 13 | 62.7% | 6.8 | 66 | |
| 15 |
|
NYG | 15 | 42 | 231.2 | 38.1 | 19 | 13 | 61.6% | 6.1 | 26 | |
| 16 |
|
DAL | 16 | 49 | 207.8 | 30.6 | 22 | 13 | 62.9% | 6.8 | 357 | |
| 17 |
|
CIN | 16 | 45 | 207.5 | 31.0 | 25 | 12 | 59.9% | 6.7 | 99 | |
| 18 |
|
CAR | 16 | 54 | 206.4 | 30.8 | 22 | 16 | 59.1% | 6.7 | 754 | |
| 19 |
|
PHI | 13 | 84 | 253.5 | 33.8 | 33 | 7 | 60.2% | 7.5 | 299 | |
| 20 |
|
TEN | 15 | 46 | 215.5 | 30.2 | 13 | 15 | 62.0% | 7.1 | 312 | |
| 21 |
|
BAL | 16 | 35 | 196.3 | 34.3 | 18 | 13 | 64.1% | 5.7 | 54 | |
| 22 |
|
IND | 16 | 43 | 193.6 | 29.3 | 13 | 7 | 58.8% | 6.6 | 260 | |
| 23 |
|
NYJ | 13 | 51 | 225.1 | 30.5 | 18 | 9 | 67.3% | 7.4 | 124 | |
| 24 |
|
CLE | 15 | 32 | 192.9 | 31.7 | 11 | 22 | 53.6% | 6.1 | 419 | |
| 25 |
|
BUF | 15 | 50 | 186.6 | 28.0 | 14 | 4 | 62.6% | 6.7 | 427 | |
| 26 |
|
MIA | 14 | 39 | 190.4 | 30.6 | 19 | 14 | 62.0% | 6.2 | 32 | |
| 27 |
|
DEN | 11 | 38 | 207.7 | 31.7 | 12 | 14 | 59.0% | 6.5 | 127 | |
| 28 |
|
CHI | 12 | 37 | 182.8 | 27.5 | 7 | 7 | 59.4% | 6.6 | 248 | |
| 29 |
|
ARI | 7 | 48 | 282.6 | 38.1 | 9 | 7 | 61.4% | 7.4 | 12 | |
| 30 |
|
GB | 11 | 34 | 166.9 | 28.7 | 9 | 12 | 60.8% | 5.8 | 270 | |
| 31 |
|
HOU | 7 | 68 | 242.7 | 29.1 | 19 | 8 | 61.8% | 8.3 | 269 | |
| 32 |
|
GB | 7 | 61 | 239.3 | 34.0 | 16 | 6 | 64.7% | 7.0 | 126 | |
| 33 |
|
SF | 6 | 58 | 260.0 | 29.7 | 7 | 5 | 67.4% | 8.8 | 11 | |
| 34 |
|
SF | 6 | 44 | 238.3 | 37.3 | 4 | 6 | 54.9% | 6.4 | 136 | |
| 35 |
|
HOU | 8 | 27 | 176.5 | 27.9 | 5 | 6 | 56.1% | 6.3 | 2 | |
| 36 |
|
SF | 10 | 23 | 128.7 | 21.1 | 4 | 4 | 58.3% | 6.1 | 4 | |
| 37 |
|
TB | 6 | 47 | 183.8 | 27.2 | 7 | 3 | 58.9% | 6.8 | 78 | |
| 38 |
|
DEN | 6 | 40 | 181.3 | 28.7 | 5 | 5 | 55.8% | 6.3 | 64 | |
| 39 |
|
ARI | 5 | — | 217.2 | 34.2 | 6 | 6 | 55.6% | 6.4 | 82 | |
| 40 |
|
ARI | 5 | — | 178.8 | 31.8 | 6 | 5 | 49.7% | 5.6 | 7 | |
| 41 |
|
MIA | 4 | — | 215.2 | 31.8 | 4 | 5 | 61.4% | 6.8 | 9 | |
| 42 |
|
CHI | 4 | — | 208.2 | 35.0 | 4 | 5 | 66.4% | 6.0 | 4 | |
| 43 |
|
NYJ | 4 | — | 136.0 | 28.0 | 1 | 3 | 49.1% | 4.9 | 55 | |
| 44 |
|
PHI | 7 | 30 | 76.7 | 14.4 | 5 | 2 | 56.4% | 5.3 | 3 | |
| 45 |
|
HOU | 4 | — | 130.8 | 24.2 | 4 | 3 | 48.5% | 5.4 | 51 | |
| 46 |
|
CLE | 4 | — | 129.2 | 18.8 | 4 | 5 | 61.3% | 6.9 | 71 | |
| 47 |
|
BUF | 4 | — | 57.8 | 12.0 | 2 | 5 | 47.9% | 4.8 | 23 | |
| 48 |
|
LAR | 5 | — | 37.0 | 7.4 | 0 | 0 | 59.5% | 5.0 | -2 | |
| 49 |
|
BUF | 9 | 16 | 3.9 | 0.8 | 0 | 1 | 28.6% | 5.0 | 54 |
What this is. Finished box-score production from 2017, ranked by Pass yards. Per-game columns divide by games played, not games on the schedule, so a player who missed time is measured on the games he was in — and his season totals still show the games he missed. Minimum 4 games to be ranked, otherwise one big afternoon tops every list.
What it isn’t. None of this is a projection, a pick, or a prop recommendation — it is what already happened. Last season’s rate is a starting point for what a player does in a game, not a forecast of the next one: offense, role, and health all move underneath it. Target share and WOPR describe a player’s share of his own team’s passing game, so they compare roles, not players across teams.
About the grade. 0–100, where 50 is average for the position and 85+ is elite. It is box production, scaled by the defense it came against, pulled toward the positional average when a player has few games, then ranked within position — so a 90 quarterback and a 90 kicker are each elite for their own spot and are not comparable to each other in any other way. It needs 6 games, so players below that show — rather than a number built on a hot month.
What the grade can’t see. There is no charting behind it, so it rewards production over technique: the receiver who ran the route that freed someone else, and the back who picked up the blitz, get nothing for it. It is role-dependent by construction — a back on a run-heavy team gets more chances than an equally good back who touches it half as often. Kickers are not opponent-adjusted, because field goals are contested by distance and weather, not by the defense across the ball. And it grades a season already played; it is not a projection of the next one.
Regular season and postseason are kept separate on purpose. Playoff samples are small and the opponents are better; blending them into a season rate quietly flatters the players who got there. The grade is regular-season only, so it is not offered on the postseason split.