How good can Jake Rudock be?

Submitted by massblue on

There was a diary several days ago about how productive Rudock or Morris could be. It compared Jake to other UM's senior QBs of the past.  I am not sure that is very useful because so many factors have to be taken into account.  It is very difficult to predict either QBs' likely performance but more so for Morris because we have so little evidence.  However, we have a lot of evidence about Jake

The best way to predict how Jake is likely to perform is to look at this own progress: Here are his numbers from the last two years:

2013: games: 13  Effic: 126.5  A/C/Int: 204-346-13  %: 59.0  Yrds: 2383  TD: 18  Av: 183.3 

2014: games: 12  Effic: 133.5  A/C/Int: 213-345-5  %: 61.7  Yrds: 2436  TD: 16  Av: 203.

 

Jake made substantial improvements.  Still, I cannot understand why he was benched.  If he continues the same improvement (especially under Harbaugh), he should be 2nd All BIG next year and better than most QBs, including the 2014 version of Conner Cook.  

Here are the figures for Conner:

2013: 14  135.53  223-380-6   58.7 2755  22  196.8

2014: 13  149.4    212-365-8  58.1  3214  24  247.2 

I understand that Conner had good supporting casts both years, but I think UM's offensive supporting cast of 2015 is not that much below MSU's cast of 2013/2014. 

If he makes the same progress as he did from 2013 to 2014, we should see a significant improvement in our offensive output.  May be 10 wins.

LSAClassOf2000

July 4th, 2015 at 2:10 PM ^

If the statement makes you want to go four wide except with tight ends and throw screens on 3rd and 5 into decent coverage, it might be a good idea to seek some professional assistance. "Iowa Playcalling Syndrome" is a thing, you know. It is never too late....except if the full transformation into Greg Davis is now complete, that is. 

Go Blue 1984

July 4th, 2015 at 1:05 PM ^

with 10 wins and if Harbaugh didn't think he had a chance to be very good I don't think he would have wanted him. JH knows what he's doing and Jake will reach his full potential under Harbaughs Coaching. I mean Harbaugh did make Alex Smith look good.

charblue.

July 4th, 2015 at 1:17 PM ^

be based on his Iowa experience, because he wasn't asked to do more than manage the offense and was never a prolific thrower in their run-oriented attack. I see why Harbaugh would like him because his efficiency numbers are decent and he knows when to kill a play and not extend it when you really don't have a guy to throw to. 

If Michigan is running a West Coast offense that relies on efficiency passing to spilt receivers and tight ends and backs out of the backfield instead of longer downfield throws, then I think Rudock is the ticket. I think he had more drops and interceptions at Iowa when he was throwing deeper passes, fades and seam routes. But again, Iowa has never been a pass heavy team and Rudock is no gunslinger. 

Dawkins

July 4th, 2015 at 1:22 PM ^

The thing is, Connor Cook is not the primary reason MSU wins. The defense is. Cook is more of a game manager, albeit one who makes some clutch plays at times. But he's not the type of QB who just picks apart defenses, and he has no business showing up in the first round on some mock drafts like he has. So I'm not sure that saying Rudock could be as good as Cook means very much.

Ricky from Sunnyvale

July 4th, 2015 at 10:31 PM ^

because people check out Dawkins at mgoblog not NFL scouts opinions. Cook can play ball, he gets better every year and is a clutch playmaker. There is a reason he is compared to Carson Palmer. If Rudock is as good as Cook he'd of made a monumental leap and wouldn't of had to transfer to be a starter. 

Farnn

July 5th, 2015 at 12:40 AM ^

After the word "would", using "of" makes no sense.  And what I don't get about Cook being projected as a 1st round pick is the fact that he has a 58% completion percentage, which definitely won't cut it in the NFL.   I don't see how he's NFL starter material, at least not for a few years which would make him at 2nd or 3rd round pick up.

Ricky from Sunnyvale

July 5th, 2015 at 1:02 AM ^

Matt Ryan 59 % completion rate and threw 19 picks his senior year, somehow he was a first round pick. Hackenberg had a 55% rate last season and had more picks than touchdowns, yet somehow is thought to be a 1st rounder as well. Maybe the guys that get paid to evaluate qbs watch the tape and factor other things in. Just because they play for the enemy doesn't mean they aren't up to snuff. 

Hail Harbo

July 5th, 2015 at 9:22 AM ^

I've noticed that it has become somewhat common for people to say and write "could of", "should of" and, would of", instead of could have, should have and, would have, or the contractions could've, should've and, would've.

Before stomping around like a grammar Nazi stormtrooper you should probably look up the rule about starting sentences with conjunctions.

Farnn

July 5th, 2015 at 10:32 AM ^

The rule that doesn't exist?  It isn't actually a rule, similar to the idea of not ending a sentence with a preposition.

http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/can-i-start-a-senten…

http://grammarist.com/grammar/conjunctions-to-start-sentences/

The would of, could of, should of crap is really annoying, completely incorrect, and immediately makes me think of the writer as uneducated. 

Dawkins

July 4th, 2015 at 1:21 PM ^

Obviously Rudock isn't Russell Wilson, but I'd be interested to see a comparison of Wilson's final year at NC State compared to his year at Wisconsin. I assume he had better coaching and supporting cast at Wisc, which is the situation Rudock is in.

befuggled

July 4th, 2015 at 2:25 PM ^

Link.

What's interesting is that at least statistically Wilson seems to have regressed between 2009 and 2010 despite the fact that North Carolina State improved dramatically (going from 5-7 in 2009 to 9-4 in 2010).

He still made a hell of a jump in his only year in Madison.

 

Farnn

July 4th, 2015 at 1:41 PM ^

The drop in INTs from 13 to 5 is a really nice improvement.  He won't be a QB picking apart defenses and winning games on his own, but he should take care of the ball, and be as good as the OL and running game allows him to be.  My biggest concern on offense is the WRs without any real threats. 

WolverineHistorian

July 4th, 2015 at 2:32 PM ^

Taking care of the ball is so important. In the last five seasons, Denard threw 39 interceptions and then Gardner threw 32.

I love those guys. I always will. But I think we're all burned out on the number of turnovers we've been subjected to. A QB that can take care of the ball sounds like heaven right now.

I like that stat for Ruddock. Do we know what kind of offensive line he had to work with at Iowa? I assume it couldn't be the trainwreck we had.

wahooverine

July 5th, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^

I don't see why everyone says Ruddock is a "safe", low-ceiling, "game manager". Sure he's not some stud 5 star athlete, but aren't those labels more of a reflection of playing at Iowa in a bad Ferenz offense? His film (the UFR) shows he has ability to make some great downfield throws and his accuracy and decision making are legit- visible both on film and in stats (low INTs). Just saying, if he wins the job don't assume he is just a vanilla QB. He has some ability and seems to be a real gamer. He could be just what we need if the line and running game improve and the D is legit.

991GT3

July 4th, 2015 at 1:44 PM ^

in the conference is a huge plus. I cannot say he will be great but I am certain he will be very good for Michigan. The unknown is wheher he will start. Rudock is similar to Alex Smith and we all know what happened to him. JH opted for a gun slinger who can run sort of like Morris. It will be interesting.