What university is the real quarterback U?

[happyone]

That was very impressive scr29

IIRC I read somewhere that one of the reasons Walsh started developing the west coast offense was the Carter couldn't throw long

[Paperback Writer]

Here is a link to something that I put together this summer stating BYU's case:

http://isportsweb.com/2010/07/26/b-y...quarterback-u/

In it I suggest the following formula

1. Quarterback Stats (30%). We all know what stats are important for quarterbacks: passing yards, touchdown passes, completion percentage, and passing efficiency. The stats will take into account season and career stats. (I wanted to include game stats, but game-by-game stats for the entire 35 year period were impossible to obtain.)

2. NCAA Records (35%). No school can lay claim on the title “Quarterback U” if they don’t have a sizable presence in the NCAA record books. Quarterback U infers that this school is not just a good passing school, but the best passing school. The best passers are the ones who set the records.

3. Awards and Accolades (15%). Just as with NCAA records, if you are Quarterback U, your quarterbacks better be bringing home some hardware, and that is on a national level. Conference player of the year and bowl MVP awards are nice, but they do nothing to settle a debate about being Quarterback U.

4. Win-Loss records (10%). While quarterbacks are not solely responsible for winning a game or losing a game, this position gets the most praise or the most criticism after a game. When the wins don’t pile up, the quarterback is the first one on the hot seat. It is widely accepted that it takes a good quarterback to win. The teams that end the year on top are the teams with good, if not great, quarterbacks.

5. Advancing to the NFL (10%). I agree with Dave that getting into the NFL should count for something, but I can’t put too much weight into it. As I look at the 2010 NFL draft, it is painfully obvious that the NFL places a lot of emphasis on uncontrollable measurables (height and weight) and not so much emphasis on controllable measurables (accuracy, decision making, reading defenses, efficiency). Injuries, new coaches, and roster depth are all factors to a player’s success in the NFL that are out of a university’s control. A school is very limited in even getting its players into the professional ranks. While I love to see former BYU players flourish in the NFL, it is very difficult to assess how much credit BYU can claim for that player’s success.


A few other notes:

1. As for the SEC, don't forget the Manning family.

2. I am surprised no body brought up Lee Grosscup yet. NFL first round draft pick and led the NCAA in passing yards one season.

3. What about Texas Tech and Hawaii?

4. Marc Wilson was "29-5 record in the NFL as a starter for the Raiders. Wilson’s downfall was playing on the same team as fumble prone but hall of famer Marcus Allen. Three of Wilsons 5 losses (two in the playoffs) were the result of Allen fumbles and yet Wilson is the guy who everyone remembers as the bust in Oakland." That is from Louis Deaux, a member of the FWAA, and can be found here in the comments section.

This analysis is heavily slanted to passing QBs and offensives. In the college game, the QB run game or option is much more prevalent. With that in mind, rushing statistics need to be taken into account. Further, I think more weight should be given to "Awards and Accolades" than with NCAA records because it's possible for a Texas Tech or Hawaii QB (as was mentioned) to hold conference records but not even be a first team all-conference selection. I don't put a lot of stock in NCAA records since they are a product of "the system" rather than individual greatness. Put much more stock in individual awards and winning percentage.

So by using this formula that puts a lot of weight on NCAA records, ignores QB rushing stats, and gives minimal weight to winning percentage, makes me think it is developed intentionally to work in BYU's favor. I wonder how one of the best college QBs to play the game in Vince Young of Texas would fare? No doubt Steve Young would do well, but Vince was the better college QB in my view.

[Jarid in Cedar]

This analysis is heavily slanted to passing QBs and offensives. In the college game, the QB run game or option is much more prevalent. With that in mind, rushing statistics need to be taken into account. Further, I think more weight should be given to "Awards and Accolades" than with NCAA records because it's possible for a Texas Tech or Hawaii QB (as was mentioned) to hold conference records but not even be a first team all-conference selection. I don't put a lot of stock in NCAA records since they are a product of "the system" rather than individual greatness. Put much more stock in individual awards and winning percentage.

So by using this formula that puts a lot of weight on NCAA records, ignores QB rushing stats, and gives minimal weight to winning percentage, makes me think it is developed intentionally to work in BYU's favor. I wonder how one of the best college QBs to play the game in Vince Young of Texas would fare? No doubt Steve Young would do well, but Vince was the better college QB in my view.

Statistics are like prisoners. Torture them long enough and they will say what you want them to say.

[wuapinmon]

Statistics are like prisoners. Torture them long enough and they will say what you want them to say.

That's how I feel about Blyleven's election to the BHOF this year.

[Top Ute]

Damn. That's some thinking there. Cool stuff SCR, and when I say "cool" I mean "if stat geekery is cool, you're Miles Freaking Davis."

Very interesting notes on Wilson - very interesting. I'd always felt he got a raw deal but had never seen it quantified like that.

As for T Tech and Hawaii - I discount them because all of their QBs, in my view, have been pure system guys. Have any of those guys gone on to success after college? They played in stat machine systems- which obviously can be said to some extent of BYU, but BYU's guys have routinely been validated by clearing the NFL bar. That's why I emphasize the NFL. As for uncontrollable variables like height etc.... Detmer is not even 6 ft tall and he made it in the NFL for 13 years. Max Hall might not last long but he's already made a roster and started a couple of NFL games.

Wilson was nowhere close to 29-5 as a Raiders starter. That's a stat so wrong, I don't know how it could've gotten in there. Profootballreference.com credits him with being 31-19 with the Raiders.

Any QB U. argument should start with this guideline: If he played after the merger, he's in. If he didn't, he's not. That's the official modern beginning of today's NFL, IMO, and coincides nicely with the return of two-platoon football in the college game in the mid-1960s.

[scr29]

Found this this weekend

http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/co....html?nav=5017

Doesn't mention BYU, but it pokes holes at several schools for having an incomplete resume. Funny thing is, BYU does have a complete resume.

In the super bowl era:
NFL starters (min. 1 game): 8
Heisman Winner: 1
College National Championship: 1
Super Bowl Winners: 2

(Note these are his criteria, not mine)

[SoCalCoug]

I have never heard anyone outside of this board refer to it as Quarterback U.

Don't look at this Wikipedia link as authoritative, but look at the articles it links which call various schools "Quarterback U".

[SoCalCoug]

Sorry but linking bleacher report as an authority on anything, you might as well just link Cougarboard.

I'm missing the part where she referred to it in any way as authoritative.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

I wish this thread was called "Which university is truly the Lord's?" then I would have a great excuse to post my all time favorite YouTube video which answers that very question.
[YOUTUBE]GXMgmh7xe1o[/YOUTUBE]