Jacobs Draft hype
- PGY Tiercel
- Salmon of Doubt

- Posts: 2642
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 2:00 pm
- Location: Pittsfield township, UofM
- Contact:
Here's a link to check out the list.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/statistic ... 4&group=80
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/statistic ... 4&group=80
--nullius in verba--
When i was a HS cb/wr i always prefered cover 3 (we ran a 4-4 d), so the olb's had the flats usually. then i could line up 7 off the ball and as long as communication was there btw us in the secondary there weren't problems. The times we ran cover 2 or man i preferred to be right up in the WR's junk so i could funnel him where i wanted him to go. playing man to man or cover 2 but playin soft in the corners is a sure fire way to get abused. cover 2 is helps slower corners who are strong. the safeties have deep halves usually, so playing tight and forcing the reciever inside is an absolute must as the corner.
What confuses/frustrates me here is we play too soft in the secondary. line up 5-7 off for cover 2 and man to man and you're going to be hung out to dry because the reciever can choose which way they release and find a nice soft spot 12-18 yds down fieldnear the sideline.(or in man to man make a double move) 5-7 yds off also invites the screen because it's easier to block a late arriving db. If the coaches would put the corners up closer they would be all over the screen. instead of letting it develope, they could disrupt it.
tightening up the corners also allows for the added element of suprise cb blitzes that take little time to develope, and then faking the blitz to cause a hot route audible, which prompts feasting on the qb's misreading. With this said i think it's important to disguise coverages, so sometimes playing a cover 2 5-7 yds off is wise, but not every stinkin play....
ANother problem i see in our pass d is the fact that TE's and recievers never get touched when they cross an Lb's face. When someone crosses the middle they should never cross your face without you rerouting them somewhat. at least stand in their way or something. but letting them run unrestricted doesn't cut it.
I could go on and on, but the bottom line is if there is safety help, let the corners play aggressive instead of reacting from 7 yds away. reaction = slower than action = losing ability to cover.
What confuses/frustrates me here is we play too soft in the secondary. line up 5-7 off for cover 2 and man to man and you're going to be hung out to dry because the reciever can choose which way they release and find a nice soft spot 12-18 yds down fieldnear the sideline.(or in man to man make a double move) 5-7 yds off also invites the screen because it's easier to block a late arriving db. If the coaches would put the corners up closer they would be all over the screen. instead of letting it develope, they could disrupt it.
tightening up the corners also allows for the added element of suprise cb blitzes that take little time to develope, and then faking the blitz to cause a hot route audible, which prompts feasting on the qb's misreading. With this said i think it's important to disguise coverages, so sometimes playing a cover 2 5-7 yds off is wise, but not every stinkin play....
ANother problem i see in our pass d is the fact that TE's and recievers never get touched when they cross an Lb's face. When someone crosses the middle they should never cross your face without you rerouting them somewhat. at least stand in their way or something. but letting them run unrestricted doesn't cut it.
I could go on and on, but the bottom line is if there is safety help, let the corners play aggressive instead of reacting from 7 yds away. reaction = slower than action = losing ability to cover.
insane in tha membrane
- Falcon30
- Tubist / Human SubWoofer

- Posts: 2613
- Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:52 pm
- Location: South Amherst, Ohio
PGY Tiercel wrote:Here's a link to check out the list.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/statistic ... 4&group=80
look at the top four - who would you rather have
Code: Select all
Passing Statistics
NAME CMP ATT YDS CMP% YDS/A TD INT SACK RAT
1. QB 1 189 257 2596 73.5 10.10 20 3 9 181.7
2. QB 2 214 317 2952 67.5 9.31 32 4 18 176.5
3. QB 3 188 270 2700 69.6 10.00 20 7 13 172.9
4. QB 4 309 462 4002 66.9 8.66 41 4 10 167.2Just looking at those stats, I would rank them QB #4, #2, #1 and #3, IMHO
Here is the list unedited - why the heck is Omar so low?
Code: Select all
Passing Statistics
NAME CMP ATT YDS CMP% YDS/A TD INT SACK RAT
1. Stefan LeFors, Louisville 189 257 2596 73.5 10.10 20 3 9 181.7
2. Alex Smith, Utah 214 317 2952 67.5 9.31 32 4 18 176.5
3. Jason Campbell, Auburn 188 270 2700 69.6 10.00 20 7 13 172.9
4. Omar Jacobs, BGU 309 462 4002 66.9 8.66 41 4 10 167.2
5. Bruce Gradkowski, Toledo 280 399 3518 70.2 8.82 27 8 14 162.6
6. Jason White, Oklahoma 255 390 3205 65.4 8.22 35 9 9 159.4
7. Matt Leinart, USC 269 412 3322 65.3 8.06 33 6 24 156.5
8. Aaron Rodgers, California 209 316 2566 66.1 8.12 24 8 25 154.3
9. Lester Ricard, Tulane 143 231 1881 61.9 8.14 21 9 13 152.5
10. Kyle Orton, Purdue 236 389 3090 60.7 7.94 31 5 22 151.1
wtf.
Inventor of the Clusterf**k and Shoot offense.
Apparently yards per attempt and completion % are more heavily weighted than the others.
I agree with you though. TDs, yards, and Ints tell me if a QB is performing well or not and no one was better than Omar when you look at those three categories.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools."
- Ernest Hemingway
- Ernest Hemingway
- UK Peregrine
- Transcendent Illuminati

- Posts: 2875
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 11:48 am
- Location: Grand Valley State University
- Contact:
A lot of NCAA QB rating has to do with completion percentage and yards per attempt. Omar is last for these two categories of the four players, hence he QB rating is slightly lower.
You can actually figure out NCAA, NFL and AFL QB ratings at this site:
http://www.primecomputing.com/javaqbr.htm
You can actually figure out NCAA, NFL and AFL QB ratings at this site:
http://www.primecomputing.com/javaqbr.htm
I'll tell you why he isn't leading. It's one stat that jumps right out at you if you look at it, but you probably glossed over it:
ATTEMPTS. Omar had 452, the others all had FAR fewer.
In the formula for QB rating all the stats are at some point divided by the number of attempts. So, essentially, you're looking at completion % (completions per attempt), Interception % (INTs per attempt), TD % (TDs per attempt), and Yards per attempt. I don't have the exact formula for the colleges anywhere, but that is the basis for why he is a little lower.
His yards per attempt is what is really bringing down his rating in comparison to the others you listed. We throw so many short balls that his yp/a is bound to be lower than your QBs who get to thrown downfield more often.
As for who I'd rather have, that's easy. I'll take #2 and be undefeated please
ATTEMPTS. Omar had 452, the others all had FAR fewer.
In the formula for QB rating all the stats are at some point divided by the number of attempts. So, essentially, you're looking at completion % (completions per attempt), Interception % (INTs per attempt), TD % (TDs per attempt), and Yards per attempt. I don't have the exact formula for the colleges anywhere, but that is the basis for why he is a little lower.
His yards per attempt is what is really bringing down his rating in comparison to the others you listed. We throw so many short balls that his yp/a is bound to be lower than your QBs who get to thrown downfield more often.
As for who I'd rather have, that's easy. I'll take #2 and be undefeated please
- UK Peregrine
- Transcendent Illuminati

- Posts: 2875
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 11:48 am
- Location: Grand Valley State University
- Contact:


