As far as I can tell, of the top 50 QBs by QB rating, only 5 had lower total passing+rushing yards than Ash: Boise State QB Middle Tennessee State QB Okie State QB, who only played half the season Purdue QB, who missed 5 games Oregon State QB, who missed 5 games It's like saying the guy who scores 10 pts a game in the NBA very efficiently is better than the guy who scores 25, but a bit less efficiently.
Fine. Average may have been a poor word choice, but either way, do you at least get what I'm trying to say? Oh well, I almost forgot about his alcohol incident.
It's like saying NBA players should be judged "per game" rather than by just adding everything up at the end of the season into totals.
Off topic - here's my list of the greatest NCAA QB's of all time: 1. Case Keenum* 19217 2007 2011 Houston 2. Timmy Chang* 17072 2000 2004 Hawaii 3. Landry Jones* 16646 2009 2012 Oklahoma 4. Graham Harrell* 15793 2005 2008 Texas Tech 5. Ty Detmer* 15607 1988 1991 Brigham Young 6. Kellen Moore* 14667 2008 2011 Boise State 7. Colt Brennan* 14193 2005 2007 Hawaii 8. Philip Rivers* 13484 2000 2003 North Carolina State 9. Colt McCoy* 13253 2006 2009 Texas 10. Kevin Kolb* 12964 2003 2006 Houston
Except most of the QBs on that list played the same number of games as Ash. And they threw or ran for a whole lot more yards. Again, I don't think anyone looks at last year and says David Ash was better than Collin Klein or Landry Jones. Being efficient at doing very little is not the same as being great.
Let's start over - Why don't you tell me why this statement that you are taking issue with is incorrect? When you're done - why don't you answer this: The bottom two guys btw were horrible runners - so I'm saving you the trouble on that .
That he's not as good as a 2nd year player as Vince Young or Colt McCoy were as 4th year players? I got that part.
This is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. It should be a list of the best spread QBs ever and even then it's still bad. As a diehard longhorn I can without a doubt say Colt doesn't belong anywhere on that list but VY does. He is easily in the top 5.
He was just listing the NCAA passing leaders to show how insignificant stats can be. Geez guys, Timmy Chang use a little common sense
I don't think #20 puts you in the top echelon in the NCAA, just as I wouldn't consider the #20 team in the country in the top echelon of teams. That said, my primary contention was against the idea that average was a bad description of Ash. He was better than the two guys on your list (who are below-average). Probably worse than some other guys ranked around there in a many ways (Mike Glennon, 4000 passing yards, 31 TDs, 17 INT, #66 QB Rating). I think he was probably generally fairly interchangable with any of 20 or 30 QBs in the NCAA last year, and clearly a tier below another 30 or so. I think average is a pretty good description of what he was last year.
Probably the better way to argue that he is average is to compare him with all other BCS conference QBs. I'm sure Sam will argue that the goalposts are being moved, but nobody cares to compare him to Texas State's QB. The reason I know he is not an upper echelon QB is that if he is asked to throw the ball 3 plays in a row, he will throw the ball up for grabs on one of those plays. Translation: you can't rely on him to create offense when the running game isn't working. Of course it isn't his fault that he is being depended upon to lead a high profile program to the promised land. He wasn't supposed to be the guy on the field right now. I believe he was only a 3 star recruit. He has lived up to and maybe exceeded his rating. The problem lies with the overall talent assessment of the staff over the past few years. How do we get so many of the dud 4-5 star recruits?
Then it's just semantics - being in the top 17% of QB ratings (let's say it's top quartile to be fair) isn't top echelon, top 10% is - no point in arguing where the cut off is, even in the relative uselessness spectrum of most internet arguing. I've seen Mike Glennon play about as much as you - very little. I can't say that the fact that he threw interceptions at a much higher rate than Ash, completed passes at a mcuh lower rate, and had significantly fewer yards per attempt - contribute to him having a substantially lower QB rating than Ash. But if you're going to take his aggregate numbers based largely on massive attempts in a spread offense, in order to boost him up - so be it. Based on efficiency, though, Glennon is a lot closer to Denard Robinson as a passer than he was to David Ash last year. What's certain is that Ash isn't "the definition of average" - he was a relatively efficient passer on a not-insignificant number of attempts, and even won a few shoot outs and led game winning drives. If that's "the defintion of average" - then so be it. It' snot though under any reasonable interpretation.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/co...be-the-best-team-we-ve-had-in-three-years.ece Longhorns coach Mack Brown: 'This will be the best team we've had in three years'
Kind of has to be given the first 2. Considering the overall drop in conference quality, Longhorns shouldn't have too much trouble improving in the record.
