Ryan Mallett: #1 QB Rating After Week 2

Submitted by DoctorDave on
After Week 2 in the 2009 season, Mallett still has the highest QB rating in college football (210.25), based on a Week 1 17-22 (77.3%), 309 yd, 1 TD victory (48-10) over Missouri State. (Arkansas didn't play in Week 2.) Mallett's rating will likely fall when he faces #23 Georgia next week and #4 @Alabama the week following. The QBs following him in the rankings this week are: #2 – Tim Tebow, FLA: 197.9 (25-39, 64.1%; 425 yds: 5 TD/0 INT) #3 – Jimmah Clausen, ND: 196.3 (40-60, 66.7%; 651 yds; 7 TD/0 INT) #4 – Tony Pike, CIN: 195.5 (44-57, 77.2%; 591 yds; 6 TD/1 INT) #5 – Greg Alexander, HAW: 188.8 (47-68, 69.1%; 757 yds; 6 TD/1 INT) #6 – Kirk Cousins, MSU: 186.71 (23-35, 65.7%, 347 yds; 4 TD/1 INT) … #21 – Tate Forcier, MI: 161.69 (36-53, 67.9%; 419 yds; 5 TD/1 INT) Other Big 10/Michigan opponents' rankings: Daryll Clark (PSU) is #22, Scott Tolzien (WIS) is #28, Ben Chappell (IND) is #52, Ricky Stanzi (IOW) is #59, Mike Kafka (NW) is #62, Joey Elliot (PUR) is #70, Tim Hiller (WMU) is #75, Terrelle Pryor (OSU) is #79, Adam Weber (MIN) is #85, Juice Williams (IL) is #88, and Andy Schmitt (EMU) is #92. For the complete list, go here: http://espn.go.com/college-football/statistics

MCHammer-smooth

September 15th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^

I'm 99% sure this has been posted but it is interesting nevertheless. He hasn't played anyone yet but he should be good he was the number 2 QB in the nation out of high school and this is his 3rd year of NCAA football. Actually I changed my mind,Im 100% sure this has been posted.

DoctorDave

September 15th, 2009 at 11:04 AM ^

Ídeo fírmiter propóno, adiuvánte grátia tua, de cétero me non peccatúrum peccandíque occasiónes próximas fugitúrum...Amen! (A prayer of contrition seemed appropriate.) You are correct. I did a quick "Mallett" search to make sure I wasn't being a Redundant Poster, but apparently didn't dig into the search results deeply enough. FWIW, I was equally as interested in the relative ratings of other QBs of interest as I was in Mallett's position atop the rankings. I thought others might be as well. Mea culpa!

tricks574

September 15th, 2009 at 11:44 AM ^

Depends on who you ask. Clausen was higher on scout and rivals, but he was PS#5, and Mallet was PS#1, meaning Mallet was ranked higher by more recruiting services than Clausen. For those unfamiliar with PS#'s, Phil Steele compiles rankings from 8 different recruiting sources. I like it because I think it gives a better idea of the national opinion of recruits, and incorporates as many different scouts opinions as possible.

Eye of the Tiger

September 15th, 2009 at 11:16 AM ^

I think if we looked like last year, I'd be really irritated. If we'd had Mallet then, we would have been a lot better (duh). But Forcier fits out system way better, and now we're winning. So maybe I don't care anymore.

MGoTarHeel

September 15th, 2009 at 11:44 AM ^

Even though it has been posted, it is definitely interesting to see the numbers. I don't know too much about how exactly this is calculated, but I'm having trouble seeing why Cousins is rated so much ahead of Tate. I mean, Tate has the higher completion%, total yardage, and TD/INT ratio. Is YPA really that important? At the very least it's nice to see a tangible argument that Cousins isn't really a better QB than Tate in any way (not that I needed help, just you know how some State fans can be).

double blue

September 15th, 2009 at 12:42 PM ^

give mallet credit- he saw he didn't fit despite protestations from everyone, even rr, that he would. he's in a better place and although we had a suck year last year i think we are so much better off now and for the future by having tate and not mallet. not only better fit athletically but personality. from everything i read/read tate gets along with everyone and mallet got along with know one.

oriental andrew

September 15th, 2009 at 1:51 PM ^

for NFL, NCAA, and AFL QB ratings at the link: http://www.primecomputing.com/formula.htm NCAA formula: a = (Comp/Att) * 100 b = (TDs/Att) * 100 c = (Int/Att) * 100 d = Yards/Att QB Rating = a+(3.3*b)-(2*c)+(8.4*d) So it looks like the NCAA formula weights YPA very heavily (adv Cousins), followed by TD/Attempt (adv Cousins) and then INT/Attempt (adv Forcier). So Cousins, since he has only 1 fewer TD on many fewer attempts and better YPA, comes out looking pretty good. Forcier has a better completion percentage (not by much), but it's not weighted. Extrapolating out to the same number of attempts Forcier has now, Cousins' stats would look like this: 35/53, 525 yards, 6 TDs, 2 INT (some rounding involved) Forcier actuals: 36/53, 419 yards, 5 TDs, 1 INT