99 Overall AI Methodology
The Rubric
See what we see on every play. Every criterion, every band, every behavioral anchor — the full methodology behind each grade.
5
Categories
17
Criteria
5
Bands Each
0–100
Score Scale
Band Scale
Pre-Snap Intelligence
Coverage Read
Correctly identified coverage shell pre-snap — pattern-matched Cover 2, quarters, or man concepts by reading safety alignment, corner leverage, and linebacker depth. Mike ID was confirmed, and the QB's eyes and alignment telegraphed awareness before the ball was snapped. Any coverage rotation post-snap was anticipated, not a surprise.
Coverage was identified correctly but required a beat or a second look to confirm — slight hesitation in pre-snap cadence or a late audible that still worked. May have misread a rotation but corrected quickly at the line. Final call reflected accurate coverage understanding.
Coverage read was partially correct — QB identified the coverage family (zone vs. man) but missed a key indicator like a rolled-up corner or a two-high shell rotating to single safety post-snap. Play still functioned but the best exploitation window was not identified.
Coverage misread that affected the play — QB attacked a zone concept with a man beater route or vice versa. Eyes went to a covered receiver based on a faulty pre-snap assumption. The error was apparent on tape, though the play may have survived due to receiver athleticism or YAC.
No evidence of a coherent pre-snap coverage read. QB snapped the ball into a coverage that should have triggered a check or audible. Eyes were fixed, alignment was wrong for the coverage faced, or the snap was hurried before any read process could occur. The play was set up to fail at the line.
Protection Adjustment
QB identified the free rusher or blitz threat pre-snap, made the correct hot protection call or audible at the line, and communicated the Mike point and slide direction clearly. The offensive line had no confusion, and the protection scheme accounted for the extra rusher. The QB's operation was decisive and fast.
Protection adjustment was made but slightly late — a beat after the snap rather than at the line. Or the call was correct but incomplete, leaving one lineman uncertain. Protection held, but the process showed minor timing inefficiency or communication lag that a top-level defender could exploit.
QB made a generic protection call that didn't specifically account for the overload look or blitz threat. Protection survived because the offensive line improvised correctly, not because the QB's call solved the problem. No clear Mike point communicated, or a slide that didn't match the actual pressure.
Protection adjustment was incorrect or absent — a blitz that should have been picked up by a hot call instead caused a breakdown. QB snapped the ball into a known-pressure look without adjusting. The free rusher was the direct result of a failed adjustment, not a scheme win by the defense.
No protection adjustment attempted against an obvious overload or blitz look. The snap count or cadence accelerated the defense's timing instead of resetting it. Either the QB couldn't identify the threat or chose not to address it. The result was a protection failure that was entirely predictable pre-snap.
Play Modification / Audible
QB correctly identified that the called play was compromised by the defensive alignment and audible'd to a scheme that exploited the coverage or front shown. The new call was decisive, communicated quickly, and resulted in a positive play that would have been negative or limited had the original play been run.
Audible was appropriate given the defensive look — the original play was a poor matchup and the new call was better suited. Execution was clean, though the advantage gained was modest. Or QB stayed with the original call in a situation where an audible would have been optimal but wasn't strictly necessary.
QB audible'd but to a play that didn't maximally exploit the defense — a safe call rather than a calculated attack. Or the called play had an exploitable matchup that the QB didn't recognize, ran a functional play instead, and left value on the field. Competent but not schematically sharp.
QB audible'd into a worse situation — the new call was a poorer matchup than the original, or the audible process created confusion among skill players mid-motion. Or stayed with a play into an obvious look that should have triggered a check, and the original play failed as a direct result.
No audible in a situation that clearly warranted one — defense was showing an unblocked rusher, a bracket on the intended target, or an alignment that made the original play DOA. Or audible'd into a play that was entirely incompatible with the coverage, demonstrating a fundamental schematic misread.
Decision Making
Read Progression
Identified the correct matchup pre-snap, attacked it on the first hitch, or cycled through full progression in under 2.5s under pressure. No wasted movement.
Correct progression, minor hesitation or one unnecessary pump fake that didn't cost the play. Got to the right read within the protection window.
Got to the right read but too slow — pressure arrived before the throw window opened. Or correct read but telegraphed the throw with eyes.
Skipped reads, forced to a second choice that was covered, bailed to checkdown unnecessarily. Progression existed but was incomplete or panicked.
Complete breakdown — threw into coverage, held past the protection window, or ignored open receivers. No evidence of a read progression.
Target Selection
QB selected the receiver with the highest completion probability and most available space — not necessarily the first read, but the optimal choice given coverage alignment, leverage, and route timing. The decision was fast and demonstrated an understanding of where the defense would break down.
Target selection was correct and intentional — QB went to a receiver who was open or advantaged. A slightly better choice may have existed (bigger window, more YAC room) but the selection was defensible and typically resulted in a completion or near completion.
QB selected a catchable option but not the best available. Threw to a receiver with tight coverage when a more open option existed elsewhere in the structure. Or targeted a receiver in a congested zone when a cleaner throw window was available off the coverage rotation.
Target selection was clearly suboptimal — threw to a covered receiver while an open option was visible on tape. May have locked onto a pre-snap read and never left it despite the coverage taking it away. The decision put completion responsibility on the receiver rather than the throw.
Target selected was covered, bracketed, or otherwise unavailable — throw should not have been attempted. Multiple open receivers were bypassed in favor of a contested or dangerous throw. No evidence that coverage was factored into the decision, or target selection was abandoned entirely for a desperation heave.
Timing / Anticipation
Ball was released before the receiver finished their break, timed to arrive as the receiver hit their stem — a rhythm throw on a hitch, dig, or slant that required anticipating the window before it opened. The defender had no chance to break on the ball because it was already in flight. Throw timing synced perfectly with route timing.
Throw was on time with minor hesitation — released at the receiver's break rather than just before it, giving the defender a small window to rotate. The ball arrived cleanly, but a slightly earlier release would have created more separation at the catch point. Timing was competent and functional.
QB waited for the receiver to be clearly open before throwing — reactive timing rather than anticipatory. Defender had time to close after the break, and the receiver had to make the catch in tight coverage that an earlier throw would have avoided. The window existed but was smaller than it needed to be.
Throw was late relative to the route — released after the defender had already closed, or after the receiver had to slow down waiting. Coverage leveraged the timing error. Or QB pumped when he should have thrown, breaking his own rhythm and the receiver's tempo on the route.
Timing was so far off that the route concept broke down — receiver was past the window, covered because the throw was held too long, or released so early the receiver wasn't in phase. No synchronization between the QB's release and the receiver's route timing was apparent on tape.
Risk Management
QB demonstrated clear situational awareness — checked down when appropriate, threw the ball away under duress rather than forcing into coverage, and identified when a designed route wasn't there without holding the ball. Down, distance, score, and time were factored into every decision. No unnecessary risk was accepted.
Risk management was sound — QB protected the ball in critical situations and made smart throwaway decisions. One marginal decision on tape that slightly elevated risk (a throw into tight coverage on a 3rd-and-short when a scramble was available) but not a play that put the team in danger.
Situational awareness was present but occasionally overridden by aggressive instincts — attempted a throw that carried moderate interception risk when a safer option was available. Not a critical error, but the decision showed incomplete risk calibration for down, distance, and defensive alignment.
Accepted unnecessary risk — threw into a tight window in a situation that didn't call for it, or held the ball in a scramble situation and took a sack rather than throwing it away. Decision-making didn't account for field position, down, or score. Risk taken exceeded the potential reward.
Risk management failed completely — attempted a throw that was near-certain to result in an interception or that ignored game situation entirely. Or held the ball through pressure in a two-score game in the fourth quarter and took a strip-sack. Demonstrated no understanding of risk-reward calculation in that moment.
Mechanics & Delivery
Footwork / Base
Drop was clean and on rhythm — three-step, five-step, or seven-step completed without shuffles or wasted lateral movement. Hitch step was precise and loaded the back hip. Weight transfer through the throw was efficient — front foot hit the target line, hips and shoulders rotated in sequence, and the follow-through was balanced. Footwork was invisible because it was correct.
Footwork was generally sound — clean drop with correct hitch timing. Minor inefficiency under pressure: an extra gather step, slight truncation of the base, or a hitch that landed slightly outside the throw line. The ball still arrived on target because the rest of the mechanics compensated, but the inefficiency was visible.
Footwork showed moderate inefficiency — QB shuffled in the pocket unnecessarily, dropped late and had to shorten the throw, or planted with weight on the wrong foot. The mechanical error was compensated by arm strength or receiver adjustment. A disciplined pass rush would have capitalized on the timing.
Footwork broke down in a way that directly affected the throw — threw off the back foot, failed to hitch and reset before firing, or stepped into pressure instead of away from it. The ball placement or velocity showed the mechanical consequence. The error was a coachable, repeatable problem.
Footwork was functionally absent — threw from a completely compromised base, stumbling through the pocket, or off a single foot with no hip engagement. The throw was arm-only with no lower body contribution. The mechanical failure was severe enough to make an accurate throw nearly impossible regardless of arm talent.
Ball Placement
Ball was placed exactly where only the receiver could get it — away from the defender, in stride for YAC, or in the only available window. Catch-and-run was possible because of placement.
Accurate throw to the correct shoulder or side. Receiver caught it cleanly with minor adjustment. Placement was good but not perfect — slightly high, low, or inside.
Catchable ball but placement forced the receiver to adjust — reach back, go up, or slow down. Defender was able to close because of imprecise placement.
Placement was off — behind the receiver, too far outside, or into the defender's leverage. Receiver had to make an athletic play to catch it. Contested when it shouldn't have been.
Uncatchable or wildly inaccurate. Sailed over the receiver, bounced in the dirt, or was thrown directly to a defender. Placement showed no relationship to the target.
Release Quickness
Release was exceptionally fast — ball out of the hand in under 0.4s from hitch completion on rhythm throws. Compact arm path with no wasted loop or wind-up. Defender breaking on the ball had no chance to redirect because the ball was already in flight. Release quickness functioned as a protection extender.
Release was quick and compact — minimal arm loop, ball out on time. Slightly longer than elite on off-platform or under-pressure throws, but within a range that didn't materially affect outcome. No hitching or reset hesitation at the release point.
Release was adequate but showed a discernible wind-up or gathering hesitation that added time in the pocket. On quick game concepts this cost a step of separation. Arm path was functional but not compact — a longer delivery that required clean protection to succeed.
Slow release that was visibly exploitable — QB went through a full wind-up motion that allowed defenders to close on routes they should have been trailing. Pressure caused an additional hesitation before release. On tape, the release timing was the reason the throw was contested or incomplete.
Release was severely delayed — ball held after the window closed, arm path looped wide, or QB reset twice before throwing. Defense reacted to the wind-up and broke on the ball before release. The slow delivery turned a clean pocket throw into a dangerous or incomplete play.
Pocket Presence & Athleticism
Pocket Navigation
QB showed elite spatial awareness — sensed edge pressure without looking, stepped up into the pocket to avoid containment, and maintained a down-field focus through the movement. Pocket movement was purposeful and small — a single step up or across that kept the throwing platform intact. Never abandoned a clean throw window to escape.
Pocket movement was sound — QB recognized and avoided the primary pressure source and maintained down-field vision. A minor inefficiency was present: slightly late to feel the edge, a small drift that compressed the pocket, or a gather step that wasn't entirely necessary. Functional and competent under a live rush.
Pocket navigation was reactive rather than anticipatory — QB moved only after contact was imminent rather than sensing and avoiding pressure early. The movement worked but was not efficient. Eyes drifted to the rush for a beat, briefly losing down-field focus, and the platform was partially compromised before the throw.
Pocket navigation broke down — QB moved laterally out of a clean pocket unnecessarily, drifted into pressure instead of away from it, or abandoned the pocket before a throw window closed. The rush dictated the QB's movement rather than the QB managing the pocket on his terms.
No pocket navigation present — QB froze when pressure arrived, ran directly into the rush, or bailed to the edge on a delayed blitz that the protection had handled. The collapse of the pocket was partly or entirely self-created. Down-field vision was lost immediately when pressure appeared.
Escape Ability
When the pocket collapsed, QB escaped cleanly with a decisive first move — burst past the defender's angle, maintained eyes down the field while on the move, and either delivered an accurate throw or gained meaningful yardage by keeping the defense honest. The escape was instinctive and converted a broken play into a positive one.
Escape was effective — QB got outside the rush and extended the play. Eyes came back to receivers after the initial escape move. The result was a completion or scramble that salvaged the play, though the escape path wasn't as clean as elite — a slight bounce-back or an extra move that cost a step of separation.
QB escaped but couldn't fully convert the broken play — got outside the rush but eyes stayed down rather than resetting to receivers, resulting in a scramble when a throw was available. Or the escape route was predictable and the defense funneled the QB into a less favorable position.
Escape attempt was ineffective or mistimed — QB hesitated before breaking, chose a direction into pressure, or escaped late enough that the defender was able to contain. The broken play resulted in a minimal gain, a throwaway, or contact that affected the throw. Athleticism was present but decision-making was slow.
No effective escape when the pocket collapsed — QB absorbed a sack without attempting to extend the play, or attempted an escape to a clearly closed lane and took a loss. Decision to escape or stay was wrong, and the result was negative. No ability to convert broken plays was evident on this snap.
Scramble Effectiveness
Scramble produced maximum value for the situation — QB kept contain defenders honest by threatening to throw on the move, drew a defender out of coverage to open a throw window, or gained first-down yardage with a decisive cut and slide. The scramble was a calculated extension of the play, not a panic run.
Scramble was effective — produced positive yardage or a completion that exceeded what a routine play would have generated. QB showed enough athleticism to avoid the first-level defenders and gain meaningful ground. Didn't maximize the opportunity but turned a broken play into a productive one.
Scramble gained yards but didn't fully exploit the defensive breakdown — QB stayed in-bounds when going out would have preserved clock, or turned down an open receiver to run when the throw was the better call. Result was positive but below the ceiling available on the play.
Scramble was minimally effective — gained minimal yardage, took an unnecessary hit by refusing to slide or go out of bounds, or ran into a congested area after escaping the pocket. The scramble converted a broken play into a marginal gain rather than a positive one.
Scramble resulted in a loss, a sack, or a negative play — QB ran into the line of scrimmage without setting up for a cut, was contained easily by the defense, or fumbled under contact after choosing to run. The decision to scramble made the outcome worse than staying in the pocket would have.
Play Outcome
Completion / Accuracy
Ball was caught cleanly with no adjustment required — on-target to the receiver's hands or chest in stride. In contested situations, the throw was placed to give the receiver the only accessible catch point, eliminating the defender. The completion was a direct result of throw accuracy, not receiver athleticism.
Completion made cleanly with a minor receiver adjustment — slightly high or outside but still on-target enough to be caught without difficulty. Or an incompletion that was accurate but dropped by the receiver. The throw quality was above the average standard for the route concept.
Completion made but receiver had to work for it — an adjustment catch, a concentration drop of a slightly errant ball, or a catchable incompletion that was within reach but not on-target enough to guarantee the catch. Accuracy was sufficient to complete the play but not sufficient to advance the receiver efficiently.
Incompletion or a completion that required an exceptional receiver effort — ball was off-target in a way that forced a diving, reaching, or behind-the-body catch attempt. If completed, yards after catch were negated by the poor placement. If incomplete, the throw was the primary reason, not coverage.
Throw was wildly inaccurate — sailed out of bounds, hit the dirt, or was so far off-target that the receiver had no chance. Or the throw was intercepted as a direct result of severe inaccuracy. No reasonable receiver could have made a catch on the ball as thrown.
Yards Generated
Play generated substantial yardage — a first down in short or medium yardage, a chunk gain of 15+ yards, or a touchdown. The yards gained reflected both the scheme advantage created and the QB's execution. The result moved the chains or scored, and the yardage was the direct output of a well-executed play from snap to catch.
Play generated above-average yardage for the down and distance — first down converted in a manageable situation, or a gain that set up a short third down. Yardage was meaningful and reflected solid execution. Not an explosive play but a production-positive result that sustained the drive.
Yardage generated was consistent with a standard completion — short to intermediate gain that maintained possession but didn't move the chains or create a significant field position change. The play did its job but didn't maximize the available yardage from the route structure or coverage breakdown.
Yardage generated was below expectation for the play call and coverage — a short gain on a designed chunk play, a gain that didn't approach the sticks on a third-and-manageable, or a completion behind the line that created a long second down. The execution left yards on the field.
Play generated no yardage or a loss — an incompletion, a sack, a throwaway, or a completion behind the line that resulted in a loss after contact. The play outcome was negative or neutral at best, and no yardage progress was made. The result put the offense behind schedule.
Turnover-Worthy Play
No turnover-worthy characteristics on this play — decision was sound, ball placement was secure, and the throw did not put the defense in a position to make a play on the ball. In scramble situations, the QB protected the ball proactively and did not expose it to strip attempts. Zero turnover risk was generated.
Play was largely clean with minimal turnover risk — a slightly aggressive throw that could theoretically have been tipped, or a decision that worked out but carried a low level of inherent risk. The throw or decision was not reckless, but film review identifies a small window where a different outcome was possible.
Play carried moderate turnover risk that the outcome didn't reflect — a throw into a window that a faster defender would have closed, a decision to force a route that was covered by an average defender, or a ball that was tipped at the line and fell incomplete rather than into a defender's hands. Lucky rather than clean.
Play was a near-turnover — ball was tipped and nearly intercepted, receiver was hit immediately and nearly fumbled due to a contested throw, or a scramble fumble risk was created by poor ball security. The turnover-worthy decision was evident on tape even if the result didn't produce a turnover.
Play resulted in a turnover or was a direct turnover-worthy event — interception thrown into coverage, a fumble caused by a reckless scramble, or a batted ball that should have been anticipated. The decision or mechanics that created the turnover risk were entirely QB-generated and should have been avoided.
Big Play / Explosive
Play resulted in an explosive gain of 20+ yards or a touchdown — a deep completion, a broken tackle reception set up by precise placement, or a designed chunk play that the QB executed at the highest level. The big play was earned by throw quality and decision-making, not solely by receiver athleticism or a defensive breakdown.
Play generated significant yardage — a gain in the 12–19 yard range that created first-down leverage or moved the offense into scoring position. The throw was on-target on a route that required above-average execution. Not quite explosive but meaningfully impactful within the context of the drive.
Play produced moderate yardage with no explosive element — a standard gain that functioned correctly within the offense. Route was designed for intermediate yardage and the QB delivered. No big play potential was present in the play design or execution; this was routine production.
Play had explosive potential that the QB failed to unlock — a receiver got behind the coverage on a deep route and the throw was underpowered, late, or off-target. Or a designed shot play was checked down when the deep option was available. The opportunity for a big play was present but not executed.
Play resulted in a negative outcome that functioned as the opposite of an explosive — a sack, turnover, or significant loss of yardage on a play where the offense had a designed advantage. The QB's execution turned a positive opportunity into a drive-killing result.
Grades are calculated using a weighted composite of all criteria scores. Process scores reflect decision-making quality independent of outcome. Result scores reflect the outcome of the play. Combined criteria use a 50/50 split unless otherwise weighted by snap context.
99 Overall AI QB Rubric · Position: Quarterback