Jackson's Trajectory...

[zipp]

This is probably what young Lamar has going for him as much as anything else...

It's not that he's a great QB already. It's that trajectory thingy shown by the blue line. The same reason BTW that Doc Ramsey tells us we were invited to the ACC.

Jackson looks like a shoo-in to catch Teddy by the end of the year. Considering that three of the remaining four teams we face have defenses ranked 79th or lower nationally--Pitt's ranked 26th--we can maybe look forward to our offense showing a little more pop. Despite that, he'd be a longshot IMO to catch Lefors (whose number shown was for his junior season), and there's really no chance he can catch SI cover-boy Brian Brohm...

 

[Senore2006]

Nice. His 27 second, 78 yard drive late in the first half against BC was easily his best drive of the year outside his one play scores, lol. The kid's passing was brilliant.

 

[wilkie01]

He is lucky Petrino will groom him.

 

[fredburgcard]

It's interesting that of the teams reflected in the chart, Teddy's freshman team was the worst of the bunch. They lost to Florida Intl and Marshall at home. It's tough to have a great QB rating when you don't have a pretty good supporting cast. Brohm's freshman team is the best in the chart. It won the Liberty Bowl against an undefeated Boise State. Plus he was only playing about one quarter a game in relief of the senior Lefors. Opposing teams had to spend most of their time preparing for Lefors. Not taking anything away from Brohm but I believe that when you factor all of that in Teddy had a more impressive freshman season.

 

[tkdcoach]

This is probably what young Lamar has going for him as much as anything else...

It's not that he's a great QB already. It's that trajectory thingy shown by the blue line. The same reason BTW that Doc Ramsey tells us we were invited to the ACC.

Jackson looks like a shoo-in to catch Teddy by the end of the year. Considering that three of the remaining four teams we face have defenses ranked 79th or lower nationally--Pitt's ranked 26th--we can maybe look forward to our offense showing a little more pop. Despite that, he'd be a longshot IMO to catch Lefors (whose number shown was for his junior season), and there's really no chance he can catch SI cover-boy Brian Brohm...

Cool, zipp, thanks, very interesting. I wonder what the ranking of Ds we faced in 2010 and the other relevant years were? - and I'm guessing not very good but don't know that for sure. Why are the other QBRs flatlined -- is that just a total for the given year or something? Also, what did Doc Ramsey say with respect to ACC invites? Missed that.

 

[zipp]

Good question about the other QBs... The horizontal lines are where they finished those years. I could plot every QB's numbers game-by-game, but that would be more of academic interest, and we're through two-thirds of the season anyway.

You're right about the defenses. I could have built that into the graphic somehow, but it would have been more info to digest. Suffice to say, one reason Jackson's data are below the other guys is our strength of schedule--as high as it's ever been to this point.

I'm joking a little about the "trajectory" reference. But Ramsey and Jurich over the last few years have used that word many times to describe U of L generally. It's not where we are, it's where we started from and how fast we've gotten here. Our rate of increase, in other words. The same could be said about Jackson. You want any of your guys to be showing improvement from game to game. From this point forward, of course, the defenses weaken considerably which will bias a conclusion about true improvement.

But I like the kid's trajectory!...

 

[Ipartiedwithhopgood]

Zipp my concern is his health. He has taken too many shots lately and I am not positive he finishes out each of the next four games. But nice work on the graph. The arrow is headed in the right direction no doubt.

 

[zipp]

Don't disagree about Jackson's health which is a big reason you don't see more running-style QBs in the NFL. But here's where I think that argument falls short a little, at least as far as this year's team is concerned...

• I don't think Petrino necessarily wants to run his QB a lot. I just think he wants the THREAT of a running QB, so that the defense has to account for that. Yes, the QB does have to occasionally run to make that threat real.
  
• Petrino does want a mobile QB. Lefors is the classic example. Petrino many times talks about avoiding "negative plays". A QB who can often escape an unblocked defender is more what I think Petrino wants. I don't think you'll ever see us recruit a QB anymore without some scrambling ability.
  
• The last thing we need this year is a lead footed QB willing to stay in the best that we could come up with for a "pocket". Not sure that Bolin wouldn't have had a couple of concussions by now.
• Petrino says that an agile, athletic QB is less susceptible to injury. Brian Brohm and Hunter Cantwell were injured while playing under Petrino. Gardner was as well. Bolin himself has just recovered this year. All of these guys are dropback passing QBs.
• If you have a roster of reliable, mobile QBs, an injury to one means the next guy goes in. Just like a roster of dropback passers. It's a numbers game no matter which way you go.

There's a perception that standing in the pocket is safer, but that's probably more myth than reality. And our pocket is esp. risky!...

 

[mrFootballFan]

At least our QBs are more talented than.towels and thug wannabe Barker....

 

[beantowncard]

Don't disagree about Jackson's health which is a big reason you don't see more running-style QBs in the NFL. But here's where I think that argument falls short a little, at least as far as this year's team is concerned...

• I don't think Petrino necessarily wants to run his QB a lot. I just think he wants the THREAT of a running QB, so that the defense has to account for that. Yes, the QB does have to occasionally run to make that threat real.
  
• Petrino does want a mobile QB. Lefors is the classic example. Petrino many times talks about avoiding "negative plays". A QB who can often escape an unblocked defender is more what I think Petrino wants. I don't think you'll ever see us recruit a QB anymore without some scrambling ability.
  
• The last thing we need this year is a lead footed QB willing to stay in the best that we could come up with for a "pocket". Not sure that Bolin wouldn't have had a couple of concussions by now.
• Petrino says that an agile, athletic QB is less susceptible to injury. Brian Brohm and Hunter Cantwell were injured while playing under Petrino. Gardner was as well. Bolin himself has just recovered this year. All of these guys are dropback passing QBs.
• If you have a roster of reliable, mobile QBs, an injury to one means the next guy goes in. Just like a roster of dropback passers. It's a numbers game no matter which way you go.

There's a perception that standing in the pocket is safer, but that's probably more myth than reality. And our pocket is esp. risky!...

You are right that standing in the pocket is not safer, but having a QB specifically serve as a running back, like in the read option, is more dangerous. I'd like to see LJ be more like Teddy and run only when necessary. Pass should be the first option.

 

[zipp]

You are right that standing in the pocket is not safer, but having a QB specifically serve as a running back, like in the read option, is more dangerous. I'd like to see LJ be more like Teddy and run only when necessary. Pass should be the first option.

I think as long as Petrino sees the opposing defense respect his QB's ability to take off and run with the ball, he's fine if the QB never crosses the line of scrimmage. Unfortunately, to get that respect, you occasionally have to make good on your bluff.

I doubt seriously that Charlie Strong ever looked at his own offense at that level of detail...

 

[Red Rager]

Would not the chart be more representative if it showed the progression of the other three seasons, rather than treating the seasons as a flat line?

 

[Knucklehank1]

What about Bolin's trajectory?

 

[Red Rager]

With all due respect, you two seem to be two sides of the same coin. It's as if one of you is always gleeful that a kid that chose to play for the Cards is not doing well. I don't get it.

I think KB should be the starter, but I don't gloat over mistakes/mishaps by LJ or RB. Both are representing the Cards.

Maybe a little lighter tone is called for here.

 

[ThreeCardMonte]

You are right that standing in the pocket is not safer, but having a QB specifically serve as a running back, like in the read option, is more dangerous. I'd like to see LJ be more like Teddy and run only when necessary. Pass should be the first option.

If pass is your first option, there would be a convincing argument that Bolin would be the better QB moving forward - until Lamar refines his passing game, reading the defenses, making check-offs, knowing when to tuck and run (and not), and improving footwork and angles for taking snaps directly under center and making effective hand-offs to running backs.

The talking point suggesting Bolin would have so many concussions is an old wives tale which fits the narrative of pushing for a mobile run-first quarterback over the more desirable pro-style offense - which is why we hired CBP back. Let's move beyond the FUD as we know it is a bunch of nonsense. "The offensive line is so bad, only a mobile QB will survive". That has been debunked.

As for Cantwell, let's keep in mind that he was a serviceable quarterback who plug-in-played quite nicely in the Petrino offense as intended. Anyone telling me that they would prefer the zone read approach with a mobile QB as featured this year, over Cantwell era, is kidding themselves. In my opinion. Let's get Petrino Ball rolling again folks. Special packages for Bonnafon and Jackson while grooming Jackson in a methodical fashion as a backup to Bolin. We can't open the playbook with Reggie or Lamar and the last 18 months proves that.

p.s. Let's look at "Offensive Trajectory" as a whole at end of season and not be so concerned about individual performance for now. This is a team sport and the W's and L's are what matter.

 

[Ipartiedwithhopgood]

With all due respect, you two seem to be two sides of the same coin. It's as if one of you is always gleeful that a kid that chose to play for the Cards is not doing well. I don't get it.

I think KB should be the starter, but I don't gloat over mistakes/mishaps by LJ or RB. Both are representing the Cards.

Maybe a little lighter tone is called for here.

Looks like my posts got deleted. Strange. Whatever. Anyway, in those posts, I made it clear I loved Lamar Jackson and hoped to see him on the field ASAP. We need all the players to win. Everybody has a role in helping the team win, and all efforts are appreciated win or lose. Sorry if my posts lead you to believe I'd be hoping for anyone on our team to fail.

I don't even have an opinion on who the QB should be.

To be clear, I created the thread attached in support of Lamar early this morning.

I do appreciate your response though RR...

http://louisville.forums.rivals.com...-the-sidelines-already-has.15749/#post-161687

 

[zipp]

Would not the chart be more representative if it showed the progression of the other three seasons, rather than treating the seasons as a flat line?

Perhaps if we were early in the season. This close to the finish line, I don't think it much matters unless you're just curious how those other QBs progressed in their first years...

 

[zipp]

What about Bolin's trajectory?

Less data to work with, but it's pretty flat. He started the season at 147 against Houston, and he's now at 143 season-to-date...

 

[ThreeCardMonte]

How about a trajectory for the offense when using a run-first quarterback and the McGee coordinated zone read offense, versus other offensive coordinators in Petrino's prior stint which adhered to pro-style in principle?

 

[zipp]

How about a trajectory for the offense when using a run-first quarterback and the McGee coordinated zone read offense, versus other offensive coordinators in Petrino's prior stint which adhered to pro-style in principle?

If you wanna produce the "prior stint" data, anything's possible. Make sure schedule strength data are included.

Based on G-man's analysis of Petrino's all time results based on SOS, I wouldn't get your hopes up. I know for sure--because I looked recently at the data--we couldn't run the ball very well in the Orange Bowl year against the better teams (WVU, Rutgers, Miami, Wake). Barely cracked 100 ypg.

But eff the facts, right?...

 

[rentalman]

Zipp do you do anything other than post on this board? You are a prolific poster.

 

[tkdcoach]

If you wanna produce the "prior stint" data, anything's possible. Make sure schedule strength data are included.

Based on G-man's analysis of Petrino's all time results based on SOS, I wouldn't get your hopes up. I know for sure--because I looked recently at the data--we couldn't run the ball very well in the Orange Bowl year against the better teams (WVU, Rutgers, Miami, Wake). Barely cracked 100 ypg.

But eff the facts, right?...

Zip you're causing me pain about that OB year because Michael Bush. Singlemost dashed hope of my adult life of fanhood. I say we were at least 20% better if M Bush had been in the backfield after the U of K game.

 

[65bird]

Just getting ready to post on the Bush 'effect'.
No doubt we beat Rutgers. Bush makes those 3rd and shorts, no FG funny business. The QB and the entire O is better. That was a Top 3 team with Michael.

 

[nccardfan]

Again what zipp fails to mention is the misleading use of SOS and how it is a dynamic stat. Whereas our SOS was top 5 early on it is now #32. Of course that is sagarin and zipp may want to pick another source.

 

[wilkie01]

You are entitled to your opinion Zipp, but a lot of us do not agree with you.

 

[Louisvillian]

Zip you're causing me pain about that OB year because Michael Bush. Singlemost dashed hope of my adult life of fanhood. I say we were at least 20% better if M Bush had been in the backfield after the U of K game.

Me too. We'll never know but there was a good chance we win the National Title that year if Michael didn't get hurt. I really believe what cost us the Rutgers game was not being able to run the ball in the 2nd half.

Some people like to say that that they wouldn't have put us in but I disagree. Just like the following year when all WVU had to do was beat Pitt and they were in, I feel if we beat Rutgers and ended up undefeated we would have faced Ohio St for the Title.

After seeing what Florida did to the Buckeyes 41-7, I would have liked our chances. I know at least one player from that 06 team that agrees with me. Eric Wood.

 

[65bird]

Agree, I remember a lot of talk about us possibly playing OSU. That year, we were fast, like UF. How can I disagree with Eric!

 

[zipp]

Zip you're causing me pain about that OB year because Michael Bush. Singlemost dashed hope of my adult life of fanhood. I say we were at least 20% better if M Bush had been in the backfield after the U of K game.

As good as Bush was, keep in mind we had a good line-up behind him. Backs like Stripling, A. Allen, and Kolby Smith; and linemen like Wood, Quarterman, and Bussey. I dare say all of those guys are as good as or better than the guys we have now in those positions.

Unfortunately, there's too much revisionist history that under Petrino, we have lined up and run the ball against good defenses. Against the four teams I mentioned in 2006, we averaged just 3.1 yards per carry. We TRIED to run, and we had good personnel even without Bush.

We didn't run the ball well against Clemson, BC, NC State, etc. in large part because they have good defenses too...

 

[zipp]

Again what zipp fails to mention is the misleading use of SOS and how it is a dynamic stat. Whereas our SOS was top 5 early on it is now #32. Of course that is sagarin and zipp may want to pick another source.

Our SOS per RPI declined about 20 spots simply by playing Syracuse. We knew our schedule was front end loaded--less so, now, the way Auburn's turned out. But it's gonna decline more as the rest of that schedule is played.

 

[nccardfan]

No I am also referring to your use of Petrinos altime SOS in a previous post. That would mean after the games were played instead of you using stats that occurred previously. Again your use of stats is for convenience purposes and misleading. You assume because you know there is no way to prove it that because Syracuse was a weaker opponent that LJ would have had twice the game that Bolin. That just shows how ignorant your conclusions are.

 

[zipp]

No I am also referring to your use of Petrinos altime SOS in a previous post. That would mean after the games were played instead of you using stats that occurred previously. Again your use of stats is for convenience purposes and misleading. You assume because you know there is no way to prove it that because Syracuse was a weaker opponent that LJ would have had twice the game that Bolin. That just shows how ignorant your conclusions are.

Rather than accuse me without evidence, you'll have to contact G-man about his analysis. I don't think he used SOS data to group opponents. IIRC it was something like teams in the Top 20.

Now THAT would be real time--ranking at the time played--as opposed to end-of-season. Arguably, it's better to use end-of-season or to-date rankings of opponents because you would otherwise, for example, be overrating a team like Auburn this year.

Or do you wanna hang Auburn's #6 national ranking on that loss in which Bolin did NOT play?

 

[nccardfan]

So zipp how do you ignore Bolins performance against #9 Georgia (top 20 defense) in the Belk bowl? 20-40, 2 TDs, 1 int, 300 yards? I know it was last year, Georgia had their backups in, Georgia didn't game plan for bolin....

 

[Capt Tony]

Less data to work with, but it's pretty flat. He started the season at 147 against Houston, and he's now at 143 season-to-date...

Yes, it's hard to have an upward trajectory when your numbers are THAT high to begin with. And if you consider that he finished last season with a paltry 178.5, he actually sucks this year. On top of those dismal numbers, we've somehow managed to cover the spread in the two games Kyle's started this year, as opposed to just 1 out of 5 games for Lamar. And when considering all of these numbers, remember that Lamar has started more games than Kyle, and thrown more passes than Kyle in their respective careers here at UofL. Yes, I can see why you want to play the guy with potential. Actually, I can't. I believe that we have a guy ALREADY that is playing football at a higher level, and he's done it with less playing time. Fortunately for us, Coach Petrino has figured this out as well.

And I love how you tried to downplay the fact that Kyle's trajectory was flat. And yet he's still 17 points higher than Lamar with 'flat' numbers. That's precious. Let's revisit this at the end of the year and we'll see if he is still 'flat'.

 

[zipp]

Yes, it's hard to have an upward trajectory when your numbers are THAT high to begin with...

A 143 rating would rank him about 40th nationally if he had enough PT.

So how "high" did you think Bolin was?



Glad to see you still hating on everyone else. Helps make your points...

 

[zipp]

So zipp how do you ignore Bolins performance against #9 Georgia (top 20 defense) in the Belk bowl? 20-40, 2 TDs, 1 int, 300 yards? I know it was last year, Georgia had their backups in, Georgia didn't game plan for bolin....

Who's ignoring it? His QB rating for that game was 111? Is that good in your eyes?...

 

[nccardfan]

What was Bonnafon's?

 

[zipp]

What was Bonnafon's?

Are you changing the debate?

Isn't 111 good enough for you? That will probably beat Virginia...

 

[zipp]

Yes, it's hard to have an upward trajectory when your numbers are THAT high to begin with...

I'll try to read a mind and rephrase my answer so it doesn't get deleted this time...

Bolin's QB rating this season is in the 140s. Nationally, if he had enough PT, that would rank him around 40th.

Teddy's QB rating his junior year was around 170. B. Brohm's junior year (last year under Petrino) was 160. Stefan Lefors was 180 his senior year. Those are high QB ratings.

You may need to recalibrate your QB rating gauge.

Perhaps I should add "please"...

 

[ThreeCardMonte]

Zipp's trajectory has definitely hit a downward slope, as he fails to understand many intangibles and the "it" factor.

Root for the team today and hope our Offense excels to the point we see the Petrino playbook opened up.

 

[nccardfan]

So zipp. Let's get this straight. I guess you go to the games but you're not excited by Passing TDs and yards passing. You're just waiting till after the game to see what his QBR is to determine if he had a good game or not. That's not a fan that's a nerd.