Anyone still think Pryor is over-rated?

Submitted by wolverine1987 on January 1st, 2010 at 8:37 PM

While he certainly underachieved at times (Purdue) I think tonight's game should dispel the criticism of those who have said all year that Pryor is not really good. That was an excellent performance by him, and indicates that next year, with another year of growth, and the increasing amount of confidence Tressel has in him, that we will have a lot for our defense to worry about. And the game also showed that those Buckeye fans that want Tressel out, are, as usual, too dumb to be allowed out of the house.

Comments

M-Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 4:26 PM ^

The difference between "why" and "way" might be nice too before you start hurling insults.

I was referring to not mentioning how Clausen et al. on the list, did his sophomore year (not that good), or the others.

The point you're proving for me is that it's silly to call a guy a great pro as evidence how good he is after one year. Give him time before you call him a great pro. Because as Vince Young shows, a good rookie year doesn't mean Hall of Fame.

M-Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 5:42 PM ^

Glad you can go trolling through posts for rebuttal typos. Pathetic.

I notice you had no answer for any of the football stuff "that I know nothing about", but whatever makes you feel better. Oops.

(I love how people who toss out insults get their panties in a bunch when they get it back. Can dish it out, but...).

scottbaez

January 2nd, 2010 at 7:02 PM ^

Dude, I wasn't even the guy you were arguing with earlier. I merely read your posts, disagreed with everything you said, and noticed that you like to throw around insults about grammar and yet don't know the difference between "you're" and "your".

I never insulted you. I am not a troll. Now stop with the hating on everyone and relax.

UMxWolverines

January 1st, 2010 at 9:44 PM ^

Yes I do. He did complete the short ball very well tonite, but he can't throw the long ball to save his life. And the way espn announcers jizz in their pants over him makes me sick.

Tater

January 1st, 2010 at 9:47 PM ^

...but Tressel showed signs of utilizing his strengths while hiding his weaknesses tonight. That is a very scary thought. Tressel has just made OSU a lot harder to beat the next two years.

I guess that just means RR will have to work that much harder.

Clair Voyant

January 1st, 2010 at 9:53 PM ^

Let us see, Pryor is not intelligent enough to execute the game plan, has a terrible arm, but has won 2 big ten championships, played in 2 bcs bowl games, and is MVP of the Rose Bowl, after his Sophomore campaign. Yall can rate him anyway you want but he is undeniably successful.

Blue_Bull_Run

January 1st, 2010 at 10:02 PM ^

What makes people think he can't hit the long ball? It's not the greatest, but when you can run like him, then you don't need to be perfect on the long ball.

Honestly, the thing that scares me about him is that his running ability hasn't even been fully exploited yet. King of Belch (what ever happened to him, anyways) once said that Tressel treats offense like some guy (who was it again?) treats a dick measuring contest - he only pulls out as much as he needs to beat you.

Blue_Bull_Run

January 1st, 2010 at 10:08 PM ^

His hype was enormous, and he probably hasn't lived up to it. On the other hand, all that talk about Tate being better and Pryor moving to wide receiver is probably unreasonable right now.

clarkiefromcanada

January 1st, 2010 at 10:12 PM ^

Pryor showed what a full month of coaching and preparation can do against a relatively weak defense (indeed, 49th best scoring defense in the nation). There is no question that Tressel can scheme when given that much time and against a defense with that many holes.

My sense was that Pryor looked like a world beater when scrambling and in moving the pocket (either intentionally or otherwise) and he got away with a number of brutal throws (duck like) that his receivers came back on to save. He is effective in short and underneath routes. It is his elusiveness in the pocket that presents the longer term problem; regrettably for Oregon their coverage was outplayed badly on the broken plays.

Guess we find out what GERG is made of next fall with this; although, those who recall the November game might note that GERG schemed the hell out of that game given the talent he has on hand. Just sayin'

mgoblue1

January 1st, 2010 at 10:17 PM ^

Well with the ridiculous amount of hype placed on him, than yes maybe he is overrated. But I would sure as hell like him on my team, he's going to be very good the next two years.

Durham Blue

January 1st, 2010 at 10:51 PM ^

is a good player. Man, was it me or was Brent Muffburger drooling all over Pryor? And what was with the "our man Ballard" comment? Weird.

Anyway, the thing that makes OSU tough to beat is 1) great defense and 2) Pryor's nearly unstoppable bootleg runs. Defense wins championships and that defensive line is big, strong and quick. They are arguably the best in the country. And Pryor running with speed outside of the pocket is a terror. Tressell did a good job of playing to these strengths and controlling the clock with some key 3rd down conversions. Granted, Oregon shot themselves in the foot with a bunch of penalties and a costly, potentially game-turning fumble. And Masoli did not have a good passing day.

In the end, and I hate to f***ing say this because it pisses me off to no end, but I give credit to OSU for stepping up and taking the Rose Bowl.

KBLOW

January 1st, 2010 at 10:55 PM ^

Pryor didn't win the game as much as not lose it. While that's an admirable quality in any QB, he still made some very poor decisions and was bailed out by his receivers (especially right before the last TD), the D and a game changing fumble when Oregon was likely to score.

Yes, he's a good college QB (or will be by his senior year), but so is Tony Pike and look what's happening to him right now with no defense to help. Tressel has not changed his stripes or "figured out" how to use Pryor. I'd guess that he doesn't trust Pryor more than any other time. Oregon packed the box all night and tOSU had to throw to even have a chance. Even Tressel was going to let his QB throw more often in that circumstance.

psychomatt

January 2nd, 2010 at 10:18 AM ^

Your question was not whether Pryor is good, it was whether he is overrated. The answer is yes. He was picked as the preseason B10 offensive player of the year -- which he was not. He was mentioned early on as a potential 2009 Heisman winner (and probably will be again next year) -- yet, based on how he has played thus far, he does not even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with any of the players that were invited to NY for the ceremony this year. He is very big and fast and athletic for a QB. Fine. But his natural born physical abilities mask his poor passing and judgment. Probably the most damning of all, he is barely any better today as a QB than he was the first time he stepped on the field at OSU. Bottom line: TP is a very good but not great QB and would do just as well at tight end, safety or linebacker based purely on his physical abilities (except, of course, that he does not like to get hit).

FWIW, the fact that OSU beat Oregon in the Rose Bowl changes nothing. OSU also lost at home to a below average USC and to a Purdue team that did not even go to a bowl game. And they lost both of those games due to lack of offense. OSU's defense had far more to do with its victory in the Rose Bowl than TP. TP's stats were solid, but nothing spectacular unless you are using his own past performances as the benchmark comparison. TP is a good QB, and being only a sophomore he has time to get better if he is willing to put in the work, but so far he is not even close to being as good as his hype.

MinorforPresident

January 2nd, 2010 at 1:06 AM ^

I will reserve my judgment on him until he plays the season next year. Bowl games sometimes launch players over the hump in their next season (see Jimmy Clausen). I won't deny he played a good game tonight and will go on record as saying bar none he has the best stiff arm in college. But let's see how he fares next season as OSU is losing some key seniors on defense and has quite a few starting underclassmen at least thinking about testing the draft. If their defense has to replace a large portion of their starters he will have to more than likely put up points and I'm still not sure he can do that. Hats off to OSU and it's nice to see the Big Ten playing well in the bowl games thus far. Very close to being 4-1 but 3-2 with wins against the Pac 10, ACC, and SEC works for me.

Blue since birth

January 2nd, 2010 at 1:22 AM ^

He isn't really "young" as a sophmore considering there's a good chance he's now 2/3's through his colllege career(as seems fairly common these days).Some act as if he redshirted last year...Or even a true freshman.

He's an amazing athlete and a mediocre QB.He'll be riding a bench(or playing another position)in the NFL a couple/few years from now.

Clarence Beeks

January 2nd, 2010 at 1:30 AM ^

I completely disagree with the positions asserted by the OP that Pryor had an "excellent" game. To quote my most diehard OSU fan friend: "Pryor managed the game". That's all he did. Nothing more. No spectacular runs. No spectacular throws. He was just good. Not great, and certainly not excellent. So basically they are happy to have their prized recruit be the equivalent of Craig Krenzel. I really don't know what game Musberger was watching to give such a full throated endorsement of Pryor, unless he wasn't actually watching the game and was just looking at the stat line. There are probably 50 quarterbacks in FBS right now that would have put up a better game and better numbers if placed in Pryor's position tonight. I do, however, give Tressel a lot of credit for creating a game plan (finally) that actually utilizes the skill set that Pryor has as opposed to the skill set that people wish/believe Pryor has.

big john lives on 67

January 2nd, 2010 at 2:03 AM ^

If OSU ever has to open up the offense big time (ala Troy Smith in 2006), they will be in some trouble. Poor decisions and an awkward throwing motion will hurt him in the long run. Right now, and the Michigan and Rose Bowl games are prime examples, he is not forced into doing anything special, has no pressure on him, and takes what opportunities fall into his lap. I will not be convinced that he is a special player until he can put the team on his back. Look at Texas, USC, Purdue games to name a few to see how well he does in these situations.

Hoken's Heroes

January 2nd, 2010 at 3:44 PM ^

TP is a very big threat running the ball. He has great vision and is very elusive. His stiff arm is a thing of beauty. His passing is just plain ugly. He pushes the ball like a girl throwing, especially on the short touch/fade passes. HE had some dandy long passes yesterday but I also thought that Oregon's pass D was UM like...meaning non existent for the most part. If TP can continue to develop his passing, he's going to be one tough hombre to stop.

MichiganExile

January 2nd, 2010 at 4:58 PM ^

I'm still not ready to claim him overrated. He is s true Sophomore playing in an offense not tailored to his strong points. He didn't have a great "year" but just played a great bowl game. Simple statistics say we need to assess based on the season and not the one bowl game, but I think we will really see next year. Do I think he is overrated? Not yet. He is still 2-0 against us and 1-1 in BCS bowls. I'll wait to see how he does throughout the 2010.

Next year he may not have as great a D to bail him out and unfortunately that may be a good thing for his development.