For jrry32: QBs

[jrry32]

No that's not straight, sorry the point wasn't clear. The point is that a QB's numbers must take into account their system. No QB under James Franklin has had more than 22 TD. Sonny Dykes' QBs often throw over 30 TDs in a season. The baselines are a tad different.

This is true. But I don't think James Franklin's system stifles QB play either. Hackenberg and Josh Freeman are the only noteworthy QBs on the list.

I don't think his numbers were terrible, Hackenberg was 4-0 with 4 TD, 1 INT against the crappy defenses. If you mean he didn't put up video game numbers like 6 TDs per game or something, that's not Penn State's style. Here's some quotes from those game recaps that might help:

• Buffalo: "Penn State stuck to a conservative game plan ... Dropped passes, runs that went nowhere and questionable play-calling defined PSU’s first three quarters"
• Army: "Penn State, for some reason, decided to play it relatively conservative and didn’t really try to stretch the field ..."
• Against Indiana, Hackenberg put up more shiny stats. A "newer, flashier offense while the older model, clunky and conservative, remained in the garage". He threw for 2 TD and ran for 2 more TD.
• Against Illinois he was on his way to gaudy stats, but they subbed him out after the 3rd quarter.

I think you meant Rutgers instead of Illinois.(since he posted really good numbers against Illinois) In those four games, Penn State went 4-0...but that's not saying much considering it was against Army, Buffalo, Indiana, and Rutgers. Hackenberg's numbers across those four games were:
55/104
52.9%
687 passing yards
6.6 YPA
4 passing TDs
1 Int
82.5 QB Rating (NFL)

Those are bad college defenses. That's Case Keenum like production. And not college Case Keenum...NFL Case Keenum. Say what you will about Goff playing bad defenses but he produced.

I'm guessing James Franklin teams have never scored 50 points in a game, or if they did it was all rushing and less than 300 yards passing. Meanwhile Dykes teams score over 50 at least 3 times a year, or probably went over 50 points almost every game at LA Tech -- somehow without Goff.

Funny you mention LA Tech...their QBs weren't very productive until Colby Cameron emerged his final year there. And Cameron was a great college QB. Even got signed by the Panthers as UDFA.

Say what you will about system...Goff is still out there making plays that Hackenberg doesn't make with any sort of consistency.

Probably says about as much as Goff being a little better than Cody Hodges and Willie Tuitama, etc.

Ultimately, these guys will be judged on how they will be in the NFL, free of any misconceptions of their college systems and circumstances.

Well, no, that's not really the same thing. Hackenberg posted worse production than the guys I named. Goff posted better production than the guys you named...and it wasn't close.

We can judge them now. There are no misconceptions here. Hackenberg isn't near the prospect that Goff is. You even admit as much. Hackenberg just isn't that good.

 

[Fatbot]

We can judge them now. There are no misconceptions here. Hackenberg isn't near the prospect that Goff is. You even admit as much. Hackenberg just isn't that good.

Goff had better numbers than Hackenberg. In 2004 Matt Leinart (33 TD) had better numbers than Aaron Rodgers (24 TD). Rodgers didn't need 40 TD. Numbers, without context, often lie. Agreed that Hackenberg just isn't that good, but by the same token I'm not sold Goff is that good (yet, but you're doing a great job!). The entire reason this is a fun discussion is there are of course always misconceptions. It's amazing that a multi-billion dollar NFL product with people devoting 24/7 of their lives to it can't project these guys better.

 

[jrry32]

Goff had better numbers than Hackenberg. In 2004 Matt Leinart (33 TD) had better numbers than Aaron Rodgers (24 TD). Rodgers didn't need 40 TD. Numbers, without context, often lie. Agreed that Hackenberg just isn't that good, but by the same token I'm not sold Goff is that good (yet, but you're doing a great job!). The entire reason this is a fun discussion is there are of course always misconceptions. It's amazing that a multi-billion dollar NFL product with people devoting 24/7 of their lives to it can't project these guys better.

Okay but if you recall, you were the one that brought numbers into the conversation when I said that I don't want Sackenberg.

I think the struggle with projecting players is that there are so many variables that are extremely difficult to evaluate in college and so many variables that affect how good a guy becomes in the pros. It's educated guesswork.

 

[Athos]

I'll trust me eyes with prospects.

Doesn't usually fail me.

I nailed it on Hopkins, Robinson, Donald, Austins limitations as a WR, Carr, Mariota, Wheaton, and several others lately.

I trust what I see in Goff and I personally don't need his gaudy numbers to know it tho it helps.

Few QBs in college are truly great with anticipation throws and throwing guys own. Goff does it. Kid leads his WRs in their routes. Moves fluid and natural. Sliding in the pocket is essential.

Few times I've seen Hackenblunder he just doesn't look natural. All the physical talent but doesn't have the computing power to use it like Gabbert. Just doesn't look like he has any kind of feel to the game.