NFL postseason QB comparison: Michigan vs. OSU

Submitted by What's Good Fo… on January 6th, 2020 at 3:36 PM

Someone on another thread mentioned that Tom Brady has 6 more Super Bowl rings than every OSU quarterback combined. That go me thinking about how we have had several decent QBs in the NFL, while OSU has had much less success. I decided to compile our respective postseason records. Specifically, I looked at playoff games started and playoff games won. I thought this might cheer me up a bit. It did.

I couldn't find a good comprehensive list of Michigan QBs who played in the NFL, so I didn't count anyone before Harbaugh, but I did find a complete OSU list (in an article about how little success they have had). Corrections are welcome.

MICHIGAN:
Harbaugh: started 5, won 2
Grbac: started 3, won 1
Collins: started 1
Griese: started 3, won 2
Henne: started 5, won 3
GOAT: started 41, won 30
Total without Brady: started 17, won 8
Total with Brady: started 58, won 38

OSU:
Tomczak: started 2, won 1.
That's it--that's also their total. In other words, looking at post-season accomplishments, OSU's best QB would rank #6 on our list, ahead of only Todd Collins.

Honker Burger

January 6th, 2020 at 4:00 PM ^

It mainly shows that it's far easier to 'out-athlete' somebody in college than the pros.

To not have a QB that can consistently pick up positive yards when the play breaks down is a HUGE disadvantage, and being athletic can make up for a lot of arm deficiencies. JT Barrett was a fairly competent passer at the college level, but think of how many plays he made by himself when nothing was open to extend drives. It absolutely kills me that Michigan has had really 1? QB (Denard) in the last 30 years with the ability and poise to truly do that routinely. Obviously a good arm can make up for some of that (think Grbac, Greise, Brady, Navarre, Henne) but damn it's frustrating.

UMFanatic96

January 6th, 2020 at 3:48 PM ^

Haskins, Cardale, JT Barrett, etc... have exemplified how OSU has a great SYSTEM that allows their QB's to succeed.

I mean Haskins looked like the best QB in the country last year and broke records. He looked objectively terrible in his rookie season. And while he is a rookie, most QBs with the accomplishments he had in college are successful rather quickly at the next level.

It will likely be the same for Fields after next season where he won't amount to much as a QB in the NFL. But hey, their system leads to winning games and lots of them 

buckeyejonross

January 6th, 2020 at 4:04 PM ^

Define "objectively terrible."

Here's his rookie season game log. Note that he didn't start in either of his first two appearances, he was just kinda tossed out there. Then his HC was fired before week 6. Haskins' first start was in week 9. Idk, I see a QB who objectively sucked when pressed into a starting role in the middle of games with no reps, before objectively improving and finishing strong after he got more practice and reps. It's a shame he got hurt in his last game, because he was 12/15 for 133 yards and 2 TDs before getting injured in week 16. He didn't get to start week 17 due to injury.

There is nothing that indicates that Haskins is the Redskins long-term answer at the position, but there's also nothing that indicates that he isn't. Let's give him more than a few starts in a rotten situation with a transition staff before we put the nail in his coffin?

Most rookie QBs are unsuccessful at the next level. That's kinda the whole deal. It's a gigantic crapshoot. Fields is probably going to be drafted second overall. So, you know, whatever. 

UMFanatic96

January 6th, 2020 at 4:15 PM ^

The Redskins aren't the best situation but you still have to admit he disappointed, especially given his success at OSU. Here are some comparisons just to this year's rookie QB's.

Dwayne Haskins: 7 TDs to 7 INTs, 58.6% Comp, 6.7 YPA, 76.1 Rating

Drew Lock: 7 TDs to 3 INTs, 64.1% Comp, 6.5 YPA, 89.7 Rating

Kyler Murray: 20 TDs to 12 INTs, 64.4% Comp, 6.9 YPA, 87.4 Rating

Gardner Minshew: 21TDs to 6 INTs, 60.6 Comp %, 7 YPA, 91.2 Rating

David Blough: 4 TDs to 6 INTs, 54% Comp, 5.7 YPA, 64 Rating

The fact that Haskins is closer to David Blough than anyone else here is astounding and shows how disappointing he was. You are correct that he improved as the season went along, but that doesn't mean he didn't disappoint. 

And before you can argue the situation he was in, NONE of the QB's I listed including Daniel Jones below are in good situations. The Giants were just as bad and he put up way better numbers

buckeyejonross

January 6th, 2020 at 4:52 PM ^

I mean I agree with you, Haskins didn't light the world on fire. But disappointing is different than "objectively terrible." He was objectively meh. I don't think Haskins did anything to make you think he is a long term starter. But again, as I said, he didn't do anything to make you think that he isn't either.

I do think that if you throw away Haskins' first two appearances, where he had no practice reps and no game prep, his numbers skew a lot better. His completion percentage rises up to 60% and his TD:INT ratio improves to 7:3 instead of 7:7. His YPA also improves slightly to 6.77. He's basically Drew Lock.

At the end of the day, wouldn't you expect Haskins to have worse numbers than Murray and Jones? Both were drafted over him. Minshew Mania was fun for a bit, then he got benched, then he was forced to play again due to injury. Would you rather have Minshew or Haskins? I don't know either way. I do know that Minshew got a lot more time to play. But he also got benched. 

I do think you're glossing over the fact that Haskins' coach was fired mid-season and the Redskins are objectively the most dysfunctional franchise among the teams we're comparing up there.

I have no confidence that Haskins will be "the guy." But you can't make an affirmative statement on him yet. 

hundred percen…

January 6th, 2020 at 4:39 PM ^

Objective - in a way that is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions.

Terrible - extremely or distressingly bad or serious.

You're trying to counteract his point by bringing in subjective reasoning as to why his stats were bad? Compare his stats objectively to the statistics of other first round QBs in the first round of the  last draft. You will see they are extremely or distressingly bad. The excuses you gave for his season are merely subjective. "IDK, I see" makes your whole point subjective.

His stats compared to the other QBs drafted in the 1st round are very disappointing. No one is putting a nail in any coffin, we are merely discussing his rookie season. 

Who cares if Fields is drafted 1st, 2nd, or 200th. The OP is about NFL postseason wins, getting drafted into the NFL doesn't add anything to that. 

Some Call Me.... Tim

January 6th, 2020 at 5:09 PM ^

 

I think it's also important to remember the systems here. Murray played in basically the same system and has a coach who designed the system specifically for him. Minshew played for Leach and has thrown every single route known to man. Lock threw basically every down in school. Jones is an unknown so I can't really comment on that.  Haskins had the disadvantage of playing with A TON of talented receivers. I think the talent is obviously there, he's just was used to his first read popping open all the time and having receivers that were FAR better than the competition. Now he has maybe one legit threat and a sieve for an Oline (missing williams and Scherff is more of a run blocker). Those are objective points, and I genuinely think he will be a very good player shortly

 

buckeyejonross

January 6th, 2020 at 5:24 PM ^

but haskins' stats weren't extremely bad, especially his stats as a starter, and that's the point.

and i wasn't ever talking to the op, i was talking to the guy who talked about haskins, and opined that fields would be just as bad. for the record, i think fields is already better than haskins, and will be better in the nfl as well. 

JPC

January 6th, 2020 at 3:54 PM ^

Too bad those great QBs can't come back to college to beat OSU because our current ones sure haven't been able to. 

ldevon1

January 6th, 2020 at 4:03 PM ^

I'm sorry, but this is a stupid post. Just beat OSU. Compare Brady, by himself to every other school in the country, and it will look pretty damn good.

ak47

January 6th, 2020 at 4:15 PM ^

Flexing about what guys did in nfl is one step below flexing about a school being ranked higher in meaningless shit in a football rivalry that you only talk about it because your team losses the actual game. 

Tex_Ind_Blue

January 6th, 2020 at 4:40 PM ^

It's flexing, but it also points out the difference in recruiting philosophies of the two teams in question. UM has always (or at least tried to) stuck to recruiting prototypical QBs. OSU has evolved and recruited QBs who are fit for the college games that OSU play. Their world-beating college QBs are good enough to be drafted in the NFL. That's the siren song for the top-level college QBs. Get to Columbus, showcase your talent and get to NFL. Whether they succeed there is a different story. 

This data is also telling in that the last "successful" Michigan QB left college in 2008! 

CLord

January 6th, 2020 at 4:42 PM ^

Agreed, sort of.  This OP is like the wimp whispering to his friends about his nicer hairstyle than the bully who kicks his ass every year.  Our ass is getting kicked.  Do something about that.  No one cares about our NFL QBs relative to theirs. Grasp another straw.

Sleepy

January 6th, 2020 at 10:05 PM ^

I took the OP's post as a roundabout way of wondering how OSU keeps getting elite QB recruits.  I mean, sure, you'll have a bunch of success in college.  But for true blue chip QB recruits, the goal of college is to prep them for the highest level.

And, despite being historically great for the better part of two decades, OSU's QBs have been universal failures in the NFL.

CLord

January 6th, 2020 at 4:37 PM ^

All you need to see is how in their recent NC year they plugged in their second string who was better than their first string, and then their third string who was better than both of them, and won the NC.  This is a testament to the fact that the OSU system is ridiculous, and built to make QB decisions relatively simple relative to the pro style complexities with shaky lines we've been charging our QBs with prior to Gattis.  

I genuinely think UM is finally elite on offense with Gattis, but the talent gaps kill us at various positions, this year Shea's obscene inconsistency.  Next year McCaff will likely be more accurate, but the line will likely take a step back from this year.  

Special Agent Utah

January 6th, 2020 at 4:43 PM ^

Really looking forward to those “Michigan Football: More NFL QB playoff wins than Ohio State” T-shirts and mugs. 

Indy Pete - Go Blue

January 6th, 2020 at 6:56 PM ^

Fortunately, their loss to Clemson was not only a classic choke job, it put them back where they belong, behind us in winning percentage (and yes, that includes our loss to Alabama)

Maybe OSU will catch up to us in these important categories in your lifetime, but I would not count on it. And I, as a Michigan fan, will enjoy every minute of our lead. Sorry that you buckeye fans have to wait so long to (maybe) catch up. Good luck with that!

Special Agent Utah

January 6th, 2020 at 8:51 PM ^

Yeah but I have this crazy personality trait of enjoying victories over our arch rival more when I’ve actually been alive to experience them.

Kind of hard the psyched about the whupping the 1948 squad laid on OSU en route to the NC when I’ve seen them beat us 17 of the last 19 years.