Big Ten QBs Week 1 by the numbers (total yards)

Submitted by myrtlebeachmai… on

Mich    DRob          19/22    186yds    1td;   197yds rush 1td

NU      Persa           19/21    222yds    3td;   82 yds rush

OSU   Pryor              17/25    247yds    3td;   17yds rush

PSU   Bolden         20/29     239yds   2td;   6yds rush

Pur     Marve            31/42    220yds   0td;   10yds rush

Iowa  Stanzi            18/23    229yds   1td;   no rush

MSU  Cousins       13/21     186yds  1td;   no rush

Ind      Chappell      16/23    182 yds   2td;   no rush    (I-AA opp)

Illinois, Minny  not worth mention

Captain

September 5th, 2010 at 12:31 AM ^

  • Mich    DRob          383
  • NU      Persa           304
  • OSU   Pryor             264
  • PSU   Bolden            245
  • Pur     Marve            230
  • Iowa  Stanzi            229
  • MSU  Cousins          186
  • Ind      Chappell       182

Space Coyote

September 5th, 2010 at 12:48 AM ^

Impressed: DRob, Pryor, Persa, Bolden

Didn't: Cousins, Illinois guy

Now for the QBs that impressed, consistency is going to be key going forward because obviously none have proved they can be (yet).  It's important to remember DRob has only had this one solid game under his belt.  Not saying he can't do it again, but things will get tougher.  Most of us expected this win (though not so convincingly), but Tate was great opening against Western too, things don't always stay top level.  

Can't argue that Pryor wasn't very solid despite the opponent.  He put the ball where he needed and look fluid running.  Persa played like a Northwestern QB is supposed to.  Bolden had a lot of zip on his passes and made some pretty good decisions, he impressed me a lot for a true freshman.

I also think Cousins can be better and probably just had a mediocre game.  Nickel looks slow and runs bad routes (but he blocks really well on the outside) so I'm not believing in their "awesome" skill position guys at receiver.  On the other hand, MSU's run game was very solid (even considering Western).  Overall the Big Ten had a nice opening weekend.

Illinois guy was just not very good when I watched.

Also, I didn't see any Purdue or Minn. so I can't speak on them.

BigBlue02

September 5th, 2010 at 12:59 AM ^

Amazing you could question whether drob can keep it up because he has only had 1 good game to his name...then go on to praise bolden who has only played in 1 collegiate game. Ever. Plus, I don't know if you can really gameplan for drob's speed. Uconn had to know he was going to run it after his 100+ yards in the first quarter but he still moved the chains with his legs. He can just outrun people...and that is something very, very tough to simulate in practice if you are an opposing d coordinator.

steviebrownfor…

September 5th, 2010 at 1:16 AM ^

The 1 collegiate game that Bolden played was against Baby Seal U. He also has Evan Royster, 4 returning starters on the O-line, and 3 returning starters at Wide Reciever.  It'd be one thing if it was done against a powerhouse D like Marshall's, but YSU? Really?

How can you read ANYTHING into that game at all?

Space Coyote

September 5th, 2010 at 1:54 AM ^

I said DRob impressed.  I also thought Bolden impressed being it was the first time he ever set foot in a collegiate game.  Both need to show consistency going forward, I said QBs, pleural, not just DRob.  I pointed out that DRob might not be as good going forward just because this is a Michigan blog.  But obviously none of those QBs have shown consistency, I pretty much spelled that out.  I don't get how I put that DRob impressed in my post and you some how took that as me not saying DRod didn't do well and Bolden did.  

And to the poster above me questioning how you can take anything from how Bolden did, he had a high percentage against a team that was better than any team he played in high school in his first ever college game.  He through the ball with zip and accuracy and made good decisions.  Is his timing perfect?  I don't know, I'll have to wait and see how he reacts to better defenses, but he impressive considering the circumstances.  I don't no if people around here have an aversion to thinking PSU QBs can actually do well this year because they want to think otherwise or what, but he played very well, even against lesser competition, and did better than I'm guessing anyone thought he was going to.  If I was a PSU fan I would be very happy with how my freshman QB performed in his first college game, meaning he impressed.

BigBlue02

September 5th, 2010 at 2:10 AM ^

I just thought if u were going to point out that a qb might not be as good as advertised, you might point specifically to the true freshman who played youngstown state instead of our qb who hit over 80% of his passes and ran for nearly 200 yards against much better competition. I just found it curious that you singled out drob in your "needs to be consistent" argument when all signs point to it being much tougher for bolden to stay at that level.

Space Coyote

September 5th, 2010 at 2:17 AM ^

I wish we could have got him along with DG (though I think DG has a higher ceiling).  Obviously Bolden's numbers are set to decrease more, as you said.  I know everyone is super-high on DRob right now, but consistency has to be a worry in the near future, especially with how inconsistent Michigan has been at QB the past few years.

Anyway, I understand I'm pretty much being the Debby Downer to this flying high blog right now, so I'll leave it alone for tonight.

PS. I'm not saying I'm not flying high from the victory, it's just part of my mentality to look for areas that need to be addressed moving forward.

BigBlue02

September 5th, 2010 at 3:01 AM ^

I understand looking for something to improve on, and denard being consistent can be a concern, but I really don't see how teams are going to gameplan for him. All last year, my only thought concerning him was "if he could pass the ball, he would be unstoppable. After this game, I don't see how any team could say "when he is in, he is gonna run it" like they did last year. There are certain things denard can do with his athleticism that no other qb in the nation can do. This offense is going to be very tough with him as the leader.

PhillipFulmersPants

September 5th, 2010 at 9:15 AM ^

fast, athletic and looks big. He's a freak athlete (though he may not be a polished receiver yet, true). I was expecting more from Keyshawn Martin. Thought he'd make a big jump, but obviously just one game.  

If there's a hole, Denard sees it and hits it, he'll be be able to put numbers on everyone on the schedule. He may not throw as accurately week to week, but it's not like his burst will go away. There's your consistency.

Tater

September 5th, 2010 at 12:58 AM ^

Since OSU obsesses on Michigan, I'm sure Pryor was watching the game today.  I can only hope that watching Denard run in a scheme that takes advantage of his strengths makes Pryor contract the football equivalent of penis envy.  Anything that can cause doubt or discord within Pryor is a good thing for Michigan come November.

GWUWolverineFan

September 5th, 2010 at 1:06 AM ^

THe OSU-Marshall game, for the first half I was not at all impresesd with Pryors play.

He made the same mistakes o throwing up balls instead of taking hits, which against a somewhat athletic team would have ended in interceptions. Also, some of those calls against Marshall were crippling, and greatly aided OSU moving the chains. (Some seemed pretty homerish bullshit).

Pryor is good, but, Marshall wasn't a great opener for him in my opinion. I think he looked good in the late second quarter and second half just owing to the bigger size and better athleticism of the OSU team as a whole.

Super J

September 5th, 2010 at 3:28 AM ^

I do think the Rose Bowl winning Qb's Staff thinks how much he sucked in the opener.  They also think about how effin fast the corners are at Miami. Not to mention they have 4 guys in the front seven that will start in the NFL in two years.  The buckeyes are screwed.