Dr. Saturday Article on Freshman QBs
Good article up by Dr. Saturday analyzing how freshman quarterbacks do and how that relates to Michigan in 09. I was actually surprised Pryor's stats are that good.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Good-luck-w…
Spoiler: Comes to the conclusion that starting a freshman does not bode well for Michigan.
Discuss.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:47 PM ^
Cool, so can the "Pryor can't throw worth a damn" meme finally die? Not only did he complete over 60% of his passes, his average yards per attempt was just under 8 yards per attempt and his pass efficiency rating was over 145.
But people will still say, "Oh, well, Pryor is never going to be able to throw." And yes, he had Hartline, etc. around him, but Henne had Braylon and Avant (who are arguably way better than OSU's receiving corps this year) and Pryor still had better passing stats than him.
Pryor is a good passer. Sucks for us, but might as well not muddy the facts -- it just looks bad.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:56 PM ^
Hey, man, he had Hartline! And he declared early for the NFL draft, so he must be good!
February 19th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^
Pryor also threw rarely — presumably, he was told not to force it, and so he probably had an artificially low number of attempts but those attempts resulted in completions.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:29 PM ^
I think the reason people say that Pyror can't pass is because of his mechanics and the types of throws he is asked to make. For example, he doesn't throw far-side out patterns and 12 yard in routes like Henne was asked to do because it was too dangerous. Pyror just shot-puts the ball down field and puts more air under his deep balls than a mesko punt. His receivers would make great plays on the ball and make the catch.
I think the fact that Hartline declared early for the draft should tell you that his teammates don't believe in him. 5th round caliber receivers don't leave school early when they will be the number 1 receiver with a "stud quarterback" throwing them the ball. For example, Adrian Arrington entered the draft because he knew Steve Threet wouldn't be able to get him the ball and thus hurt his draft stock even more.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:19 PM ^
I suppose. I don't think I'd ever seen him throw tightly into traffic like Henne ever did. Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers took a bit of a dip next year with the WRs they have taking off. But to say that he's not a good passer is just dumb. Yeah, his mechanics are ugly. The pass gets there, though.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:04 PM ^
The guy only threw more than 20 times and for more than 200 yards once last season. He had less than 10 completions in 6 games last year. The man is a great playmaker, but he just isn't a good passer. He was 100-165 for 1311 yards and was sacked 21 times. When Henne was a freshman, he was 240-399 for 2743 yards and was sacked 29 times. My point being that I am not calling Pyror an average passer, his coaches and teammates are. So, I guess that they are the dumb ones.
P.S. He only had 5 completions against Michigan and he was picked off by Stevie Brown. If Stevie picks you off, there is no way you are a good passer.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:30 PM ^
I enjoy picking and choosing information to use and discard, too, but let's get a few things straight.
His teammates and coaches are calling him an average passer? No, they're not. They have never been quoted as saying that. You're assuming that because Hartline is leaving, it unequivocally MUST be because he thinks Pryor is a "bad" passer. It's certainly possible, but my guess is that Hartline is leaving because he did have a very good year, and feels his best chance to make it in the NFL is this year. Don't pass off conjecture as fact. Neither of us knows what Hartline is thinking for certain.
Two, his completion percentage was over 60% with a 145+ passer efficiency rating. That percentage is based on all of his throws across the entire season. Sure, he may not have thrown a ton, but let's be honest -- it's not like he threw 3 passes per season and made 2 of them. We both know a sample size of 20 times per game is statistically adequate to make an assessment about his ability as a passer. Even half of that is statistically significant. But that doesn't matter in the end, anyway. Again, his completion percentage for the season on the whole was over 60% and his passer efficiency rating was over 145 (for the season).
Three, I can point out bad games for lots of players. It's one game. It's an outlying example of him at his worst. That would be like me pointing at the Notre Dame game this year and saying, "See, Threet completed over 70% of his passes in that game! He's perfect for this offense!" or "Chad Henne threw an interception to a guy on Appalachian State, so he is a bad QB!"
We may have differing ideas on what "good" is, but we also apparently have different ideas on what "statistical significance" is.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:47 PM ^
Statistically speaking Pryor/OSU had a "good" year. I posted the specifics before on a thread I don't remember. What it boiled down to was that Pryor's completion pct was less than 1 pct better than Henne. Furthermore, 2004 Michigan put up more yards than 2008 OSU while playing one less game.
Sure, there are a lot of variables and intangibles. E.g. Pryor had 3rd year Beanie while Henne had 1st year Hart. And Henne had Braylon and Avant while Pryor had Robiskie and Hartline. But looking strictly at production and numbers, Pryor and OSU had a statistically "decent" season at best.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:05 AM ^
So, intangibles aside, the variables suggest that Pryor is better than a "bad" passer, right?
February 20th, 2009 at 9:10 AM ^
He's a good athlete and an unproven quarterback. Who know's what his numbers would look like if he had as many attempts as Henne? We never will.
Remember, Pryor brought back a returning class from a NC run the year before. And "better than bad" does not equal good to me. I know, semantics... I just think it's still too early to annoint him. No doubt, time will tell, though.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:09 PM ^
Pryor is an unproven quarterback in the same way that McDonald's is fine dining -- it's only true to the person who has to rationalize it ad nauseum to the rest of the world (in this case, people who are not Michigan fans, as much as I hate to say it).
Sure, no one "know's" what his numbers would have been like if he'd had as many attempts as Henne, but the number of attempts he had all season are nowhere near being statistically insignificant, so it's just a red herring to begin with (in the same way that the argument that "he only threw 10 passes in game X" is). If he'd thrown more passes, it is in all likelihood that the trend he set throughout the rest of the season would have continued. The likely reason he did not throw more is because he is a freshman and regardless of his ability, it is in the best interest of the team to let the experienced veterans of the team carry the load -- in this case, their stable of sophomore and junior running backs.
Obviously, I don't think Pryor is just "better than bad." I think Pryor is good, because the stats suggest that he is good.
It irks me to no end to see other Michigan fans taking this "Yeah, Pryor isn't a good passer," etc. approach because it just looks desperate and it reeks of sour grapes of not having gotten him instead of Tressel (whether or not he'd even be playing). Pryor is going to be a big pain in the ass the next couple of years -- no way around it.
February 21st, 2009 at 9:40 AM ^
It's not just Michigan fans. I have a cousin who's a Michigan fan living in Cincy. He tells me how he hears from OSU fans AND media who are wary of Pryor's abilities thus far. If Buckeyes are willing to admit this to a Michigan fan in Ohio, then why can't we?
What irks me is coming on a Michigan board and reading post after post of OSU apologists (***not you personally***). To me, all of this Pryor defense reeks of concession. A lot of Michigan fans seem to NEED OSU to be that good in order to justify the last five years.
Furthermore, it seems lately if a Michigan fan posts something about being excited or optimistic about a current or future player he is blasted on all angles for being delusional. But if he has any reservations about an OSU player he's an uninformed idiot.
Again, this isn't directed at you, personally; it's just a trend I'm noticing more and more
February 21st, 2009 at 12:12 PM ^
How is arguing that the 2nd highest rated passer in the Big 10 "doesn't suck" being "an apologist"? How is arguing that a true freshman who is not in the top 200 recruits in the nation may not be an elite QB as a starter "concession"?
These are realities.
February 21st, 2009 at 12:50 PM ^
Sorta;(semi-colon!) Sommy kinda changed his tune from "Pryor is a good passer", to he "doesn't suck". For the record, I don't think Pryor sucks at all, just a freshman.
Agree with you about the concession point though.
February 21st, 2009 at 2:03 PM ^
No, I kinda did nothing of the sort. The "doesn't suck" comment was meant as a compromise so this asinine argument could come to a close. I obviously think Pryor is a good passer.
February 21st, 2009 at 2:05 PM ^
I'm just speaking in generalities and venting a little (i.e. not comparing Forcier to Pryor specifically).
For the record I think Pryor is a tremendous athlete. He just did not live up to the hype IMO. Especially against a weak Big Ten with a returning cast of characters from a NC run. He had a "good" year. Plain and simple.
I just can't believe how anyone who isn't that impressed by Pryor gets so lambasted on a Michigan message board. Especially considering how many OSU people I have heard verbalize how unimpressed they were.
February 21st, 2009 at 3:09 PM ^
I have to agree with MGoEOD.
I think you're attempt to be so objective tends to cloud your rational mind sometimes.
You don't expect people to just look at Steven Threet's numbers, and just make an assessment based purely off of those statistical numbers this year. So why should people do that with Pryor?
Your defense of Threet (correctly) takes into account many other factors such as: poor line play, lack of a rushing attack, lack of a credible down field threat, wrong fit for this type of offense, a defense that could not stop the other team from scoring, etc.
Pryor didn't have these issues. He had a fantastic defense that didn't force him have to play catch-up (which would in turn force him to have to throw the ball when the defense knows it's coming). As a matter of fact, the only game in which he was required to throw the ball more than 20 times (PSU)...they lost. He also had an outstanding running back which opposing defenses were forced to have to honor. Obviously, it should be easier to throw the ball against a defense geared to stop the run. On top of that, he only averaged just over 12 attempts per game.
You have to take everything in context. Stats only tell part of the story.
For example, some people might say the OSU qb's couldn't have been very good this year because the OSU passing offense was only ranked 105 out of 119 teams. Heck, Michigan's passing offense was anemic, yet we aren't rated much lower than OSU's. Does that mean that OSU's passing offense OMG! SUCKED this year? Does it mean that every team ranked above them truly had a better passing offense? Of course not. This ranking only tells part of the story, just like Pryor's stats only tell part of the story.
Obviously, Pryor didn't SUCK this year. He played decent. IMO, he was not outstanding, and didn't play as well as the number one rated player (mind you, he's coming to a team that is already a perennial BCS contender) should have. I disagree with Sommy. I don't think he's a GREAT passer. That's all.
I'm not sure why you are so defensive of a player that plays for our most hated rival. You should feel unique though because I doubt there are very many Buckeye fans on the OSU boards right now trying to defend Threet's numbers from last year.
This isn't sour grapes on my part. I wish he would have come to Michigan, and I don't hate him for going to OSU. I mean, sure you'll get people that are like: "Fuck him! He's a Buckeye! He sucks!", but so what? Obviously, that's just plain stupidity, and every fan base has idiots like that. Why do you feel so compelled to stick up for Pryor?
And no, I don't look forward to watching him RUN all over us for the next three years. And yes, I wish we had him on our side. But when people question his passing ability, I don't think it's ludicrous. Heck, the one knock that he had coming out of high school was his passing...NO ONE questioned his athleticism.
I won't even get into the Tate Forcier argument with you. I have an idea how well he will do next year, and needless to say, you don't share those views.
As for the DR. Saturday article. It is completely irrelevant. It has ZERO bearing on how either of our freshman qb's would do this year. None.
February 21st, 2009 at 7:53 PM ^
I agree with most of what you say.
This:
Obviously, Pryor didn't SUCK this year.
Is really my point. Many posters act like he was a bust. He wasn't. Many act like we can write him off from ever being good. We can't. Just like we couldn't write off Threet.
I DO think the Dr. Saturday article is relevant merely because it shows how rare it is for:
a) a freshman QB to start
b) that starting freshman to actually be good
It's not a hard and fast rule, obviously, but still indicative of a trend.
February 21st, 2009 at 2:06 PM ^
Of course there are OSU fans who are worried about Pryor's abilities. OSU has had plenty of success the past few years and are able to nitpick their own team. Hell, I remember when I was still in school and people were bitching that Henne shouldn't be the starting QB and we needed a dual-threat guy, etc. But don't get it twisted -- it's certainly not even a majority of OSU fans that are worried about this.
February 21st, 2009 at 2:08 PM ^
Just the ones who aren't as smart as we...? :)
February 19th, 2009 at 10:21 PM ^
To be fair, he did not average 20 passes per game. If the 165 attempts is correct (I didn't check, lazy I know), he averaged "like" (meaning not quite)14 attempts/game. That is a pretty small sample size considering most of them were 'safer' throws. I don't know, he may well be a good passer, and I'm not really saying he isn't, but you can't say with certainty that he is.
Regarding Threet; I don't think you're being fair with his numbers either. You have to assign some value to the fact that he was injured a significant amount of time, and the fact that our O-line in no way compares with tOSU's, or ours in '04. Neither did our group of receiver's.
I'm not trying to completely discredit what you're saying about Pryor. He will undoubtedly be terror for our LB's and backfield the next few years. I just can't believe the bias that's out there against anything and everything M these day's.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:09 AM ^
Okay, cool. You're aware that 20 attempts is well above the mark of statistical significance, rigth? Nevermind that we're talking about an average of 12 games during the regular season.
February 20th, 2009 at 8:47 AM ^
It should be noted that he only started 10 games.
Regarding Threet; I don't think you're being fair with his numbers either. You have to assign some value to the fact that he was injured a significant amount of time, and the fact that our O-line in no way compares with tOSU's, or ours in '04. Neither did our group of receiver's.
This is 100% true. It's why I get frustrated when people want to condemn Threet as a sub-DI QB on the strength of this season's offense. Threet was not the only thing holding this offense back from being successful - that was a team effort.
February 20th, 2009 at 12:16 AM ^
"my guess is that Hartline is leaving because he did have a very good year, and feels his best chance to make it in the NFL is this year."
This seems unlikely. He had 21 catches for 479 yards and four touchdowns.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:10 AM ^
Okay. How good was Hartline last season?
February 20th, 2009 at 5:38 AM ^
Hartline's stats
2007
52 rec. 694 yards 6 tds
2008
21 rec. 479 yards 4 tds He wasn't injured either.
His stock must be on the rise after such a significant drop in production. It must have been because there was a new offensive line, oh wait they all returned like everyone else on the offense except for the QB. I wonder what caused the drop in numbers. The only plausible reason for him going pro would be he is about to flunk out of OSU (doubt that's possible) or he graduated; because I doubt he will even be picked.
I didn't say that pyror averaged twenty throws a game, I said he only threw more than 20 times once. Anyone that thinks he is a good passer, look up his stats on ESPN.COM. They have a game by game breakdown. I tried finding Pyror's pass efficiency ranking and he is not on the ncaa list because he didn't attempt enough passes to qualify.
FTR, the reason I don't think he is a good passer is from watching him play, not his numbers. His athleticism allows him to be productive in the passing game because you have to account for him taking off and college defenses don't have the linebackers and lineman to contain him. So, Ohio State runs deep routes that either drives the safeties downfield (Pyror takes off) or they hesitate (Pyror may take-off) creating a one-on-one jump ball downfield with the corners or they run screens because they are simple and don't require you to read the defense or they run him on a roll-out which cuts the field in half and makes reading the defense easier and the throw easier. That's their offense. Made for a kid who is a great athlete that has very little quarterback skill. That's what I meant by the coaches saying he was an average passer, it was in the play-calling. (If this sounds familar, Purdue ran something similar when they had their third-string QB who was converted to Running Back then back to QB)
February 20th, 2009 at 9:10 AM ^
FTR, the reason I don't think he is a good passer is from watching him play, not his numbers.
I've never understood this Joe Morgan-ish view of "I don't need to look at the numbers, I know a good player when I see one". STATISTICS (at least the good ones) are measures of performance. They aren't an arbitrary number floating in the ether - they reflect the performance of the individual. I work in hotels - when we have shitty guest scores, we don't say "screw the stats, I know good service when I see it", merely because the results (the stats) are infinitely more important than our empirical observation.
You may not like Pryor's delivery, or the quality of his spirals, or whatever, but the simple fact is that his duty is to complete passes for the most amount of yards possible, and (in his case) to be a weapon with his legs. Statistically, he accomplished both of these goals. Points don't get scored and games don't get won based on the visual beauty of his throwing motion - they get won by raw success - which statistics measure. 50 yard passes from heinous looking deliveries count just as much as those thrown by Peyton Manning.
His stock must be on the rise after such a significant drop in production. It must have been because there was a new offensive line, oh wait they all returned like everyone else on the offense except for the QB. I wonder what caused the drop in numbers.
OSU 2008 Pass attempts: 264
OSU 2007 Pass attempts: 330
Further, the overall quality of OSU's passing declined (completion % fell by 4 points, and y/a fell by half a yard). Before you lay that on Pryor, lets hang on:
Boeckman 2007: 148.9 passer efficiency, 8.0 yards/attempt
Pryor 2008: 146.5 passer efficency, 7.9 yards/attempt
Between the two, things were pretty much static - Boeckman completed a higher % of passes, but Pryor essentially made up for it by having a significantly higher number of yards per completion.
So why did the OSU passing O decline? Because Boeckman threw nearly 100 passes (lest you forget, Pryor only threw 165), and did so significantly worse than his previous year's performance:
130.7 passer efficiency, 6.7 y/a, a 4% drop in completion %.
The end result? Similar to the difference between Boeckman '07 and Pryor '08 - Hartline's number of catches drops, as OSU QB's had a lower completion % AND fewer attempts. His reception numbers are cut nearly in half, but his yardage is only cut by a quarter, as his yards per reception sky-rockets.
February 21st, 2009 at 12:27 AM ^
I've never understood this Joe Morgan-ish view of "I don't need to look at the numbers, I know a good player when I see one". STATISTICS (at least the good ones) are measures of performance. They aren't an arbitrary number floating in the ether - they reflect the performance of the individual.
Because completing a lot of dump passes doesn't make you a good passer.
February 21st, 2009 at 1:38 AM ^
Which is why I didn't just use completion percentage. Thanks for playing.
February 21st, 2009 at 3:18 PM ^
What else did you use, passer efficiency, yards per attempt?
These things are also highly dependent on context: offensive line protection, running game contribution (including Pryor as a threat), the spread offense, quality of competition, ability of WRs, etc. etc.
The idea of the spread offense (which Pryor runs at tOSU) is to create mismatches such that WR/TE/RB are open for easy throws and can then rack up YAC. When I reference dump passes, I'm talking about relatively easy throws to open receivers that break large gains because of the WR's athleticism and ability to operate in space. Your additional stats don't go against the idea that easy throws can inflate Pryor's stats.
Baseball stats work so well because context can be more readily adjusted for than in any other team game, and it's not close. Allusions to Moneyball (Joe Morgan) when comparing college football and baseball stats are misplaced.
Pryor was effective last year but a lot of NCAA QBs are effective without being particularly good at passing. Unless you think every QB coached by Mike Leach or June Jones are amazing talents...
If Pryor were put through a 7-on-7 workout where he could not run for a gain and instead was asked to consistently make NFL throws -- you'll only be able to approach how good he would do in that pure passing situation by watching him play.
February 20th, 2009 at 2:10 PM ^
Again, I thought it was plainly obvious I understood what you were trying to say about rarely throwing for even 20 times per game. You also said he sometimes only threw for just over 10 times per game. Okay. 10 individual times is a large enough sample size to be statistically significant, so it's a moot point, especially when on the season as a whole, he completed over 60% of his passes and had a 145 passer efficiency rating. The number of times he threw in any game doesn't matter at all. Period. The larger sample size we're drawing from suggests that he's good at what he does.
The "eyeball test" is nice when the stats don't agree with you, but it's not falsifiable whatsoever.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:47 PM ^
Starting a frosh at QB does not bode well for M? Did he use John Madden as a consultant for that article?
Seriously, though, I am a little reassured after the article. While success for a frosh at QB is not likely, it is not unheard of. Plus, TForce is going into spring ball knowing that he is the starter. He is going to get starter reps. Now, we just need TForce to not get injured. *knocks on wood and prays to God*.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:19 PM ^
BOOM! ToughActin'Tinactin!
February 19th, 2009 at 5:29 PM ^
Thank-you for this.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:48 PM ^
played in a conservatively called offensive system. He was king of the bubble screen and slants imo.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:04 PM ^
Don't forget the All-Braylon, All-the-time component of the offense. Forcier won't have that kind of safety net.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:50 PM ^
One thing that will help I think is that the run game is going to be relied on HEAVILY. If minor and brown stay healthy all year we are going to be a great running team with our improved and deep o-line. Forcier is not going to be asked to pass nearly as much as a freshman J. Clausen for example.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:34 PM ^
the O-line described as "deep" and our running game "great". From your lips to the football God's ears I hope. I will expect and be satisfied with a merely "improved" running game approaching a respectable B10 rushing attack. Not saying it can't get to your level, wish I had your optimism though...
February 19th, 2009 at 6:42 PM ^
The three top RB's in the big ten took off after last season, Brandon Minor may very well be the best back in the conference. Throw in Brown, Shaw and spot work from Moundros and Grady and I think that makes for one of the better running back groups in the Big Ten. Add in that we're returning all 5 of our O-linemen and any QB that will play will be a threat to run as well, and you have a running game that certainly has potential to be anywhere from "very solid" to "great."
February 19th, 2009 at 6:52 PM ^
In RR's first year Michigan ranked 59th in rushing offense, which I actually think was better than in Carr's last year.
Minor, brown and grady will all be seniors and shaw was pretty decent as a freshman. In 2009 we will have a QB who can run, which will immediately add yards. There is no reason to think the run game won't improved and good.
As far as the O-line - the entire line returns, plus all of the red shirt freshman who came in last year (some of whom will get playing time), plus freshmen from this year (who hopefully won't play, but will provide emergency injury depth).
So yea, the run game and the O and D line are probably the only things that I'm sure will be good.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:45 PM ^
Are you Carlos Brown?
February 19th, 2009 at 3:54 PM ^
Are you kidding this is great news!
8 of the 15 teams listed had BETTER records with a True Freshman QB than everyone is predicting for M next year!!
This is really going to upset the folks saying "TRUE FRESHMAN QUARTERBACK == lots of pain and suffering"
Actual stats say not so much.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:59 PM ^
I actually somewhat agree; even with the likelihood that a true freshman QB struggles, it certainly looks that teams can weather the storm and be successful overall.
BUT that depends on having a sound supporting cast, which is far from guaranteed based on last year. I think Michigan's overall record this year will depend less on the QB play than the defense and offensive line.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:13 PM ^
I don't know how many of those guys knew they were "guaranteed" starters before the season began (Henne didn't as he was #2 behind Gutz).
I think that makes a ton of difference because in Spring and Summer practices, Tate will get a majority of snaps, and not be relegated as the #2 guy, practicing with the second team.
This additional practice, along with the knowledge that you can't just chill and learn for a year may make a world of difference.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:16 PM ^
The early enrollment has to help. Not sure how many of the other true freshmen listed enrolled early.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:20 PM ^
People, head of out of the sand. This isn't a good thing The point is that the only Freshmen who actually posted good records did do with phenomenal talent around them:
Pryor was protected from passing because he had a first round pick playing tailback, and when he DID pass, he has to future NFL players at WR in Hartline and Robiskie. Plus an elite defense stopped from from needing to throw much.
Chad Henne had Mike Hart, Braylon Edwards, Steve Breaston, and an elite defense.
Mitch Mustain had the privelege of handing the ball to Darren McFadden and Felix Jones, thus ceding the need to ever throw.
We don't have Wells, McFadden, Jones, or Hart - we have Brandon Minor - who is above average. We don't have a great defense, and we don't have a real threat at WR. Come ON. If you're honestly saying "this is a good thing" - wake up.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:42 PM ^
Hartline may have entered the draft, but he is not a future NFL player. He'll be lucky to be on a practice squad.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:44 PM ^
"the only Freshmen who actually posted good records did do with phenomenal talent around them"
Kansas State 2005: 5-6
Josh Freeman frosh QB (2006): 7-6
In 2003, eleven Georgia Tech players were found academically ineligible. Despite the academic losses and the playing of true freshman Reggie Ball, Gailey would lead Tech to a 7 win season.
.