DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) The 26-27-60 rule: Predicting QB success

I've been searching for an old article which correlates a QB's success in college to his success in the NFL. However, I unearthed something that I'd forgotten about which takes that factor and includes a couple others. The premise is that predicting a QB's success can be helped immensely with the rule mentioned in the title which states if a QB hits a 26 on the Wunderlic test, has 27 starts in college, and hits on 60% of his passes he stands a much greater chance of success than guys who miss that mark.

How does that relate to this draft? Buyer beware on Tannehill...

26-27-60 rule The Rule of 26-27-60 helps predict NFL quarterback success or failure

Story Highlights
Rule: Get at least 26 on Wonderlic, start 27 games and complete 60% of passes
Peyton Manning, Philip Rivers passed rule; JaMarcus Russell, David Carr did not
Wonderlic scores fall short for rookies Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow, Jimmy Clausen

Top pick Sam Bradford scored a 36 on the Wonderlic, started 31 games at Oklahoma and completed 67 percent of his passes.
Getty Images

Perhaps we should not be stunned by JaMarcus Russell's utter flop as an NFL quarterback -- low-lighted this week by his arrest for possession of a controlled substance in Alabama.

But could a simple formula have warned us of Russell's lack of NFL readiness? And Ryan Leaf's and David Carr's and other failed, high-pick quarterbacks?

Call it the Rule of 26-27-60.

Here is the gist of it: If an NFL prospect scores at least a 26 on the Wonderlic test, starts at least 27 games in his college career and completes at least 60 percent of his passes, there's a good chance he will succeed at the NFL level.

There are, of course, exceptions. If NFL general managers always could measure heart, determination and other intangibles, then Tom Brady would not have been drafted in the sixth round.

But short of breaking down tape, conducting personal interviews and analyzing every number and every snap of every game, remember the Rule of 26-27-60 the next time a hotshot prospect comes down the pike.

Since 1998, these are some of the NFL quarterbacks who aced all three parts of the Rule of 26-27-60: Peyton Manning, Phillip Rivers, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Kevin Kolb, Matt Ryan, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Matt Stafford.
Name Wonderlic Starts Completion Percentage
Peyton Manning 28 45 63
Philip Rivers 30 49 64
Drew Brees 28 36 61
Tony Romo 37 35 62
Matt Schaub 31 36 67
Eli Manning 39 38 61
Kyle Orton 26 37 60
Kevin Kolb 28 47 62
Matt Ryan 32 28 60
Ryan Fitzpatrick 48 28 60

Meanwhile, among the once highly-touted prospects who failed at least one part of the formula: Ryan Leaf, Joey Harrington, Michael Vick, Akili Smith, Tim Couch, Daunte Culpepper, David Carr, Vince Young and JaMarcus Russell.
Player Wonderlic Starts Completion Percentage
Ryan Leaf 27 24 53
Joey Harrington 32 26 55
Michael Vick 20 21 56
Akili Smith 26 11 58
Tim Couch 22 27 67
Daunte Culpepper 18 43 64
David Carr 24 26 62
Vince Young 16 32 61
JaMarcus Russell 24 29 61

There are a few notable exceptions to the rule but only by slight margins. Two-time Super Bowl champ Ben Roethlisberger scored a 25 on the Wonderlic, just one point short of the standard of 26. Jay Cutler -- a mixed-bag thus far in the NFL -- scored exactly a 26 on his Wonderlic and had the starts, but completed 57 percent of his passes at Vanderbilt. Joe Flacco, who's been to the playoffs in each of his first two seasons, fell short in the starts category.
Player Wonderlic Starts Completion Percentage
Jay Cutler 26 43 57
Ben Roethlisberger 25 38 65
Joe Flacco 27 22 64

How about the quarterback class of 2010? Top pick Sam Bradford aces the rule easily, but the other three high-profile rookie QBs -- the Browns' Colt McCoy, the Broncos' Tim Tebow and the Panthers' Jimmy Clausen -- all fall short on the Wonderlic, although not by much.
Player Wonderlic Starts Completion Percentage
Sam Bradford 36 31 67
Colt McCoy 25 53 70
Tim Tebow 22 42 67
Jimmy Clausen 23 35 63

It stands to reason why the Rule of 26-27-60 makes the most sense as a quick guide to NFL quarterbacking success, too.

The 26 represents the minimum Wonderlic score required to score a passing grade. Consider some of the lower-scoring quarterbacks drafted since 1998 when it comes to the Wonderlic: Vick (who scored a 20), Akili Smith (26), Couch (22), Carr (24), Young (16, first reported as a six) and Russell (24). All of them have been considered at best under-achievers, at worst busts.

The most notable exceptions to the rule are Brett Favre, who scored a reported 22 on the Wonderlic, and Donovan McNabb, who scored a reported 14.

The 27 represents the minimum number of starts a quarterbacking draft prospect should have had in college to make the grade. Ask any NFL scout if he would rather have 12 games to grade or 27. Playing a lot of games means more opportunity to hone your craft in the heat of battle and gain confidence in your ability to perform under pressure. That translates well to the next level. Oregon's Akili Smith was drafted in 1999 after making just 11 collegiate starts. He ultimately made just 17 starts in Cincinnati.

And how many quarterbacks, like Leaf and Russell, have been drafted based on "upside." That is another way of saying a player couldn't complete 60-percent in college. Do you really think he can do it at the next level?

The exceptions are few. Finding NFL quarterbacks certainly is a science, but it's not rocket science. When in doubt, turn to the Rule of 26-27-60.

Quote:

---

Top pick Sam Bradford scored a 36 on the Wonderlic, started 31 games at Oklahoma and completed 67 percent of his passes.

---

Is this supposed to be in support of this metric?

I've read this before and this is contrived as all get out.

Literally an exercise where they boiled down and shoe-horned a desired result.

Lies, damn lies and then there's statistics.

Pardon me while I pull up my black socks and go mow the lawn.

And tell those kids to stay off my lawn!!!

It's not an absolute. There can always be exceptions. For example, Cam newton only started something like 14 games in college, scored a 21 on the Wonderlic, but did complete 66% of his passes.

He was still able to come into the NFL and blow up rookie QB records. He is the exception.

I think that "rules" like this are important, because they set a baseline. There are always exceptions to every rule, but there are some rules that are pretty solid. A 6' Center is never going to make it in the NBA no matter how good he was in college. A 5' flat guy is not going to be an NFL QB, and if he is, he will be one among 100 or so in the NFL. The exceptions prove the rule.

OK, So How does this rule apply to Weedin? You probably already mentioned McCoy, if not how did he do?

About 3/4 of way down.Jeez read the damned thing,then ask questions.

Ehh,, doesn't say much.. if you go by rule,, I think McCoy is good enough to be a starter.. I mean, he missed by 1 on the wonderlick but blew away the other two..

Sounds like we got our QB of the future....

This is reminding me of the scene in Moneyball where all the old school scouts were saying things like "He's not a good player, because he has an ugly girlfriend", meaning "he has no confidence, thus he won't be able to pitch".


It's a rather pathetic attempt at trying to divine the undivinable by filtering out random sets of data and completely ignores some of the biggest factors in whether or not a QB will have any success (such as scheme, and the people around him).

Does it disregard things like O-line, offense run/pass, hands, and playcalling? Some of those would impact success,and certainly neuter the prediction. Interesting to find it as a quickie rule of thumb, but this bucket won't hold water well as far as predicting success reliably. How would it explain a Brayin' Edwards performance? Fascinating yardstick, but just too a pointIMO. Still interesting because I never heard of it before.

Well I've seen Toad use a lot of arguments for one person or position but this one sounds my like my divorce atty saying the more I pay them, the less I'll suffer in the settlement.


Too many variables in a person to use this as anything but one measurable among hundreds of others that should be considered. Yes, a QB should be smart enough to do his job, have as much experience as possible and be able to hit more than 60% of his passes but are we really going to use this "rule" as a major decision maker in picking a QB ?

It's like saying we have about a 50% chance of striking out on a first round QB so lets don't take the risk. I say draft TWO and increase your odds

I do agree with the pretence that we have to use SOME type of measurables to gage the possible success rate of a QB, but to rate someone lower because he didn't know the sq root of 789 or the name of the 24th president and he had a bunch of college receivers that couldn't catch a cold, is a little bit of a reach to make an argument one way or the other.

Quote:

---

How does that relate to this draft? Buyer beware on Tannehill...

---

So are you going to keep us all in suspense? We know that he falls short of the mark on starts, but that's only 1/3 of the equation.

What where the scores for the 2012 class?

A quick search didn't result in any wonderlic scores...he had career 62.5% passing (484 for 774).

thanks

Must be a weighted scale.. Marino scored a 16 and averaged a 57.6 % completion ratio. He did play 44 games so at least the scouts got to see him consistantly miss his receivers
He actually got more accurate as a pro and ended up at 59.4 % but I'm not sure if he got any smarter ?

It's a nice theory Toad. NEXT....

Marino was a different era, with different passing rules.

If you try you can find exceptions, but this thing is pretty decent at predicting success of QBs at or near the top of a draft. Again, there will always e exceptions, especially if you go back to the dark ages of my youth.

U mean when they played football with boiled dinosaur eggs lol

That was GM.. I'm a few years younger than that. lol

I dont necessarily agree with the rule per say but I want my QB to be smart and accurate above all else. Experience is important but even without Tannehill in the equation, experience in an NFL pro offense is highly valuable but 5 years in a spread is well 5 years in a spread and has little value, in fact I think it dummies down players football IQ.

The fact that RG3 was able to step up to the boards and impress is remarkable. Cam was also able to do that. Others not mentioning any names have not done well in this area.

Not all spreads are equal,some actually require theQB to make multiple reads,others are one and run.
Depends on the team,and more importantly the QB.

Formation has little to do with the complexity of a QB's reads.

I wouldn't think so.
you still have to read man,zone,blitz,determine the mike,just be done quicker from the shotgun.

statistic folks have debunked the wonderlic portion of this "rule"

there was found to be some correlation in the number of starts and completion % but of course nothing is absolute.

i would like to see some sabremetric guys do some real studies on the NFL draft. it is the one portion of football that I think can really be helped by statisticians.

everything is numbers based. you can take your scouting grade, your school, your 40time, your height, weight, hand size, etc. and come up with a weighted equation that tries to best come up with a non-bust factor rate.

i did a paper in college econometrics on something similar. it showed a few things like non-BCS school WRs drafted in the 1st round (thereby having a 1st round scouting grade) nearly were always successful (can't remember the parameters I used but it was based on number of starts and total career receptions).

good fun is to be had and if I had the time, I would love to start up this field.

So you want me to believe that if a QB is smart, accurate and experienced that he has a greater chance of success?

Quote:

---

I've been searching for an old article which correlates a QB's success in college to his success in the NFL. However, I unearthed something that I'd forgotten about which takes that factor and includes a couple others. The premise is that predicting a QB's success can be helped immensely with the rule mentioned in the title which states if a QB hits a 26 on the Wunderlic test, has 27 starts in college, and hits on 60% of his passes he stands a much greater chance of success than guys who miss that mark.

How does that relate to this draft? Buyer beware on Tannehill...

26-27-60 rule The Rule of 26-27-60 helps predict NFL quarterback success or failure

---

toad...it is all I can do to keep from laughing at this 26-27-60 rule.
...you are not serious, are you?

Favre did not make the cut...lol.

There is another rule...it is the 20-23-51 rule

Mac's measurements

Yea , and they thought you would be napping !

Could it be if a player has 20 touchdowns, 23 interceptions, and completes 51% of his passes, then he is a former Browns Qb, possibly Quinn, or Frye?

Just a guess.

It will probably be what some famous QB, who went on to a Hall Of Fame career, did in his college career once upon a time.