• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

SI's midseason AA's

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
High Lonesome said:
man you guys are spoiled by your lb play. 10 takles and a sack for a MLB, againts the #4 team in the nation running a spread offense is pretty good for me. I will agree that he makes his plays quietly and is not as flashy as many top LB's but i don't think top 4 in the nation so far this year is out of the question.

That said he isn't aj, who had 12 tackles, 1 ff, 1 fr, 2 sacks and 1 int returned for over 20 yards. That is called stepping up
Click to expand...

I agree with you that he had those stats quietly. I havent seen the rest of his games so I can't really comment. I was just thinking out loud that what did he do against us, to put him in the top 3 lb's in the country. I know Poz should for sure be on there b/c he is one hell of a lb. Not downgrading Harris.
 
Upvote 0
The biggest surprise to me is putting Young ahead of Leinart. I don't dispute what SI wrote about Young, and I don't like Leinart or USC, but the stats don't lie:

Leinart: 108/166 for 1646 yards, 65.1 comp %, 12 TD, 3 INT, 114.2 rating
Young: 68/109 for 1021 yards, 62.4 comp %, 10 TD, 5 INT, 104.6 rating
Young also has about 350 yds rushing and 2 TD.

Furthermore, while it is true UT isn't the same team without Young, USC isn't the same team without Leinart. Take him out, and they lose at least one of their first five games. Not that I think the "what does the player mean to his team" is relevant to All-American selection criteria, but to the extent that it is, I'm not sure Young wins out incredibly over Leinart; at least, not to cover the discrepancy in statistics.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyeboy said:
The biggest surprise to me is putting Young ahead of Leinart. I don't dispute what SI wrote about Young, and I don't like Leinart or USC, but the stats don't lie:

Leinart: 108/166 for 1646 yards, 65.1 comp %, 12 TD, 3 INT, 114.2 rating
Young: 68/109 for 1021 yards, 62.4 comp %, 10 TD, 5 INT, 104.6 rating
Young also has about 350 yds rushing and 2 TD.

Furthermore, while it is true UT isn't the same team without Young, USC isn't the same team without Leinart. Take him out, and they lose at least one of their first five games. Not that I think the "what does the player mean to his team" is relevant to All-American selection criteria, but to the extent that it is, I'm not sure Young wins out incredibly over Leinart; at least, not to cover the discrepancy in statistics.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Young is the heart and soul of the Longhorns.

At USC, with that scheme, that O-line, and those weapons at his disposal, an average QB would look like a world beater.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyeboy said:
The biggest surprise to me is putting Young ahead of Leinart. I don't dispute what SI wrote about Young, and I don't like Leinart or USC, but the stats don't lie:

Leinart: 108/166 for 1646 yards, 65.1 comp %, 12 TD, 3 INT, 114.2 rating
Young: 68/109 for 1021 yards, 62.4 comp %, 10 TD, 5 INT, 104.6 rating
Young also has about 350 yds rushing and 2 TD.

Furthermore, while it is true UT isn't the same team without Young, USC isn't the same team without Leinart. Take him out, and they lose at least one of their first five games. Not that I think the "what does the player mean to his team" is relevant to All-American selection criteria, but to the extent that it is, I'm not sure Young wins out incredibly over Leinart; at least, not to cover the discrepancy in statistics.
Click to expand...
True, the stats don't lie:
Leinart: 108/166 for 1646 yards, 65.1 comp %, 12 TD, 3 INT, 114.2 rating

Drew Stanton: 99/138 for 1466 yards, 71.7 comp %, 14 TDs, 3 INT, 190.1 rating.
Michigan State certainly isn't the team they are without Stanton.
What was your point again?
 
Upvote 0
I guess the question is this, so far this year, who would you want to lead your team? The authors answer would be VY. It is by no means an exact science but I think that there are more than a few people that would agree with him. Hell even aggy is now saying that they would rather have Vince than Reggie
 
Upvote 0
High Lonesome said:
I guess the question is this, so far this year, who would you want to lead your team? The authors answer would be VY. It is by no means an exact science but I think that there are more than a few people that would agree with him. Hell even aggy is now saying that they would rather have Vince than Reggie
Click to expand...

I agree with you here. Vince has been the better of the two so far this year. Also remember the post season awards are strongly based on the big games and he beat us in the Shoe' and he finally beat Okie to get that monkey off his back.
 
Upvote 0
High Lonesome said:
I guess the question is this, so far this year, who would you want to lead your team? The authors answer would be VY. It is by no means an exact science but I think that there are more than a few people that would agree with him. Hell even aggy is now saying that they would rather have Vince than Reggie
Click to expand...
shut yo mouth.
I though Reggie was like Mike Vick, only better :slappy:
At this point of the year I think Vince is the best QB in college, but I'd put Stanton a close second. Vince is a little more dynamic of a playmaker, and he hasn't lost yet. Leinart can lick em, along with the rest of USC.
 
Upvote 0
FindlayBucks said:
Drew Stanton: 99/138 for 1466 yards, 71.7 comp %, 14 TDs, 3 INT, 190.1 rating.
Click to expand...

First of all, Stanton's rating is 130.9, not the ridiculously high 190.1 that you reported.

Second, as I said before, I'm not disputing what SI wrote about Young. Moreover, Young and Leinart are both having great years, no one can doubt that. My point was simply that SI seemed to be giving Young extra credit for being extremely valuable to his team, while my position is that Leinart is just as valuable, has better stats (although Young's are impressive), and is also the QB of an undefeated team. Accordingly, I'd put Leinart ahead of Young, although I think a very strong case can be made that Young is second team All-American so far.

That being said, I have twice now logically presented my argument. Care to logically present yours, or would you rather just shoot holes in others' posts? :biggrin:
 
Upvote 0
buckeyeboy said:
First of all, Stanton's rating is 130.9, not the ridiculously high 190.1 that you reported.

Second, as I said before, I'm not disputing what SI wrote about Young. Moreover, Young and Leinart are both having great years, no one can doubt that. My point was simply that SI seemed to be giving Young extra credit for being extremely valuable to his team, while my position is that Leinart is just as valuable, has better stats (although Young's are impressive), and is also the QB of an undefeated team. Accordingly, I'd put Leinart ahead of Young, although I think a very strong case can be made that Young is second team All-American so far.

That being said, I have twice now logically presented my argument. Care to logically present yours, or would you rather just shoot holes in others' posts? :biggrin:
Click to expand...
IA National Player Report
Passing Efficiency


<TABLE cellSpacing=2 align=center><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=8>Year: 2005</TD><TD colSpan=8>Thru: 10/08/05 Minimum Pct. of Games Played 75</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=statstable align=center><TBODY><TR><TH>Rank</TH><TH>Player</TH><TH>Pos</TH><TH>Cl</TH><TH>Gm</TH><TH>Patt</TH><TH>Pcomp</TH><TH>Comppct</TH><TH>Int</TH><TH>Intpct</TH><TH>Pyds</TH><TH>Ydspatt</TH><TH>TDs</TH><TH>TDpct</TH><TH>Rating</TH></TR><TR><TD class=crailbg>1</TD><TD class=crailbg>Drew Stanton, Michigan St.</TD><TD class=crailbg>QB</TD><TD class=crailbg>SR</TD><TD class=crailbg>5</TD><TD>138</TD><TD>99</TD><TD>71.74</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>2.17</TD><TD>1466</TD><TD>10.62</TD><TD>14</TD><TD>10.14</TD><TD>190.1</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?div=4&rpt=IA_playerpasseff&site=org

Well, if the number is wrong, you'll have to blame the NCAA for faulty record keeping.

I did state my case. That Young deserves the nod over Stanton. Leinart can lick em.

My point to you was that the stats don't mean everything. If you want to use stats to say who is the best QB in the nation, it's Drew Stanton. His team is 4-1 with an overtime loss to their biggest rival, and his numbers are far better than Leinart or Young. He means more to his team than either, though Vince would be close.
 
Upvote 0
FindlayBucks said:
Well, if the number is wrong, you'll have to blame the NCAA for faulty record keeping.

I did state my case. That Young deserves the nod over Stanton. Leinart can lick em.

My point to you was that the stats don't mean everything. If you want to use stats to say who is the best QB in the nation, it's Drew Stanton. His team is 4-1 with an overtime loss to their biggest rival, and his numbers are far better than Leinart or Young. He means more to his team than either, though Vince would be close.
Click to expand...

Our disagreement has to do with two apparently different ways of measuring rating, b/c my source had Leinart's rating at 114.2, whereas yours has it at 168.6.

My point was not that stats mean everything. However, they do measure (at least decently) how well a player has performed. And to the extent that I think Leinart and Young are both incredibly valuable to their respective teams and are both undefeated, that's why I give Leinart the nod.

I do like your comment about Leinart, though. :lol:
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top