Rudock v. Cook: common opponents in 2013 and 2014
I've been getting a little tired of the media praising Connor Cook as one of the top QBs in the conference while discussing how Michigan's QB situation is in trouble.
Any of you who have looked at Rudock's and Cook's respective 2013 and 2014 stats know that they put up pretty similar numbers on a seasonal basis (albeit with a slight edge to Cook). I decided to go a step further and look at all of their common opponents during the 2013 and 2014 seasons to see how they fared. I've color-coded the QB that had the better QB rating in each game. I'll let you draw your own conclusions, but here are a few basic points:
- They played 9 common opponents during 2013 and 2014: 6 in 2013, and 3 in 2014.
- Rudock had the better QB rating in 6 of those games, while Cook had the better QB rating in 3 of the games.
- In all 3 matchups where Cook has the edge, Rudock also played well against the same opponent, but the reverse isn't true (see Minnesota, WMU, and both Nebraska games).
- Cook is probably best known for his 2013 performance against Ohio State in the BTTG. Cook had better stats than Rudock against OSU, but Rudock was not far behind (despite having to play them in Value City Horseshoe Stadium).
I guess my biggest takeaway from this is that the sky is most definitely NOT falling for Michigan with Rudock as our probable starter. Far from it. If MSU can have success with a "game manager" at QB, then so can we. Also, HARBAUGH.
Note: while the QBs' respective ratings in the 2014 Maryland and Nebraska games might appear to be a sloppy copy/paste job due to them being the same, they are in fact correct. In both games, Rudock had a 112.9 and Cook had a 110.2.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
JR's
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.
CC's:
2013: games: 14 Effic: 135.53 A/C/Int: 223-380-
6 %: 58.7 Yrds: 2755 TD: 22 Av: 196.8
2014: games: 13 Effic: 149.4 A/C/Int: 212-365-
8 %: 58.1 Yrds: 3214 TD: 24 Av: 247.2
Cook has been a better QB. I think, there is hope that JR could match CC's 2013 stats. That should give us 9-10 wins
Cook's pre-season hype is similar to the type that UM offensive players have received in the past. They are pre-season "ones to watch" because the TEAM has been solid multiple years in a row. Individualy he is good, not great. His accolades come from the TEAM and primarily the defense being so good in 2013. What other QB is coming back with a team that has been top ten the last two years? He gets default hype this year.
Nice framing but I don't think its useful to delude ourselves here. We took Rudock because of his floor, not ceiling. Guy has good intangibles, experience, and maybe Harbaugh can squeeze a little more out of him than Ferentz did, but this guy is not likely to be a star here.
I did, which is why I responded. MSU finished 7th in pts scored in 2014. Iowa? 70th. (Michigan 113th) Yea, I'm sure there are plenty of factors that go beyond qb play, but the OP is framing and really, the conversation isn't a great one. Maybe Harbaugh can take Rudock to the next level. But given the choice of the two theres only one reasonable decision.
This team might do pretty well this year, but it will require a balanced offense and a dominant defense. If Rudock is asked to carry the team like Cook has done its bad news for Michigan.
Points scored? That is like saying that MSU won more games last year than Iowa, so that proves Cook is great.
Look, you try to isolate QB play to evaluate it. EVERYONE in sports does that type of "framing." Stepping back further to team points or team wins just gets further away from the evaluation of QB play (isolated).
In fact, the fact that MSU's overall offense was better than Iowas kind means that Ruddock must have REALLY outperformed Cook to get equal stats on a much worse offense, right?
That last paragraph is a doosy.
2/3 of this sample is from 2013, where MSU finished 50th in pts scored. I believe they finished strong but they had a true clunker of an offense to open the season. If you want to compare him to the average of the 2013 Cook, he might be better but thats not saying much.
So that leaves you with 3 games from 2014, one of which Cook outperformed, a second where Sparty won by 20+ (Maryland), and the Nebraska game that Sparty almost lost. I didn't see it, but seems like an off night.
I think its likely that Michigan has a better QB than Michigan State every year of the Harbaugh era but the first. Cook is entering his 3rd year starting in the same system. This thread is wishful thinking.
So now you are completely discrediting your first post where you relied on MSU's overall team offensive performance to laud Cook?
They played common opponents for a quarter of the games in 2014. I think that is a big enough sample for a comparison in football.
In my opinion, if Shane Morris never starts for Michigan again, then things are going right. If he does, then God help us. The handful of 80 yard TDs he'll inevitably throw will be overshadowed by numerous incompletions resulting from him throwing a fastball when only a changeup is warranted, and a general inability to win us games.
To me all this indicates is that UM now has a legit chance to perform above expectations. An experienced QB who has already performed in the top half of the conference and one that is known for being steady and making good decisions should not be undervalued. If he take to the hands on coaching of Harbaugh/Fisher and meshes with his teammates then this is a very different team.
In other words...imagine going into this season w/o Rudock on the roster? As much as I hope Morris develops into bonafide P5 starting QB...having vet QBs on the roster (including O'Korn) will make everyone better (now the skills players get to go out and practice with experience QBs, now the D is going up against experience QBs etc.)
September 4th, 2015 at 7:50 AM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 6:39 PM ^
November 22nd, 2015 at 3:02 PM ^
Just wanted to bump this and see if people still agreed with it.