Just Passing Bye?
June 29, 2007 6:24pm CDT
We've hit a bit of a lull in the NFL schedule, as that world rests in between minicamps and the start of training camp. Maybe it's the thought of a breather. Maybe it's boredom. Maybe it's a flash of insight. Regardless, I began to wonder if the timing of NFL bye weeks affects players' digits later in the regular season. In other words, does a running back who gets a Sunday off in week four tend to wear down in December more than a running back who gets to rest in week nine?
Admittedly, all the factors that could go into such an analysis (injuries, starter changes, strength of opponent, etc.) make that question extremely difficult to truly answer. But in the interest of time and curiosity, I began with a base overview of team quarterback performances in December over the last four years, split by bye weeks. What did I find? Let's begin with the overall, four-year December and January totals separated by when quarterbacks had their bye weeks:
2003-06 QB Dec/Jan
| G | QB Rat | Comp% | Yds | Yds/G | TD | INT | | Yds | TD | Sack |
| Wks 3-6 | 314 | 76.4 | 58.8 | 6,631 | 212.2 | 373 | 357 | | 2725 | 24 | 724 |
| Wks 7-10 | 294 | 79.9 | 59.1 | 6,402 | 215.8 | 390 | 315 | | 3246 | 31 | 661 |
The difference isn't huge, but you'll notice that the quarterbacks with the later bye weeks (7-10) posted a much better TD-to-INT ratio and performed better in all three of the rushing stats noted. There was also a notable split in fumbles, as the earlier bye week passers dropped the ball 211 times over those four seasons versus only 177 muffs for the other group. While this is only a wide-ranging overview, all of those factors suggest quarterbacks may be slightly fresher (mentally and physically) when their bye weeks come later in the season.
When I peeled the analysis back one layer, though, I felt like the later bye-week passers looked even better. Here are the key year-by-year stats:
2003-06, Bye weeks 3-6
| Year | G | QB Rat | Comp% | Yds | Yds/G | TD | INT | | Yds | TD | Sack |
| 2003 | 64 | 72.3 | 58.5 | 1,988 | 202.9 | 73 | 83 | | 547 | 6 | 147 |
| 2004 | 80 | 83.6 | 60.3 | 1,820 | 235.3 | 121 | 85 | | 715 | 3 | 181 |
| 2005 | 80 | 72.3 | 56.9 | 1,341 | 204.3 | 79 | 88 | | 549 | 7 | 189 |
| 2006 | 90 | 76.2 | 59.4 | 1,428 | 204.8 | 100 | 101 | | 914 | 8 | 207 |
2003-06, Bye weeks 7-10
| Year | G | QB Rat | Comp% | Yds | Yds/G | TD | INT | | Yds | TD | Sack |
| 2003 | 64 | 84.2 | 58.7 | 1,360 | 208.8 | 89 | 48 | | 867 | 10 | 142 |
| 2004 | 80 | 75.3 | 58.0 | 1,385 | 217.3 | 108 | 113 | | 732 | 5 | 201 |
| 2005 | 80 | 79.1 | 60.2 | 1,105 | 213.8 | 98 | 82 | | 845 | 12 | 177 |
| 2006 | 70 | 82.3 | 59.5 | 1,552 | 222.2 | 95 | 72 | | 802 | 4 | 141 |
Look at the Yards-per-Game and TD-to-INT numbers for the 3-6 group. You'll see that the 2003, 2005 and 2006 seasons are fairly similar in passing yards and all include more picks than scores. Why was 2004 different? Because in that season, the group of quarterbacks who had earlier bye weeks included Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Trent Green, Donovan McNabb, Daunte Culpepper, Matt Hasselbeck, Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, and Jake Delhomme.
Who were the best two 2004 passers with 7-10 bye weeks? Billy Volek and Kerry Collins. Thus, you'll notice that the 2004 numbers for the 7-10 group don't quite vibe with the 2003, 2005 and 2006 digits.
The reverse happened in 2005. The 3-6 group was noticeably weak that year, while the 7-10 crowd contained many of the NFL's best arms. In 2003 and 2006, though, the talent levels were relatively even. For example, here were the top names from last year:
Bye weeks 3-6: Manning, Palmer, Brady, Michael Vick, Philip Rivers, Jay Cutler, Eli Manning
Bye weeks 7-10: Marc Bulger, Drew Brees, Vince Young, J.P. Losman, Jon Kitna, Jeff Garcia, Chad Pennington, Jake Delhomme
Conclusion
As I noted earlier, my quick-and-dirty overview approach to analyzing the early vs. late bye-week differences overlooks a multitude of factors. But I believe it shows a noticeable (but not major) edge for those passers who have later Sundays off.
This research won't cause me to downgrade studs like Peyton or Palmer – or even anybody whom I consider a starter-level fantasy quarterback. Instead, I may use factor the placement of the bye week when selecting my backup quarterback. Maybe I'll opt for Eli (bye week 9) instead of Cutler (bye week 6).
Who knows? Maybe when I tackle this bye-week issue with running backs, a more interesting pattern will emerge.