If he were eligible, would Jameis Winston be the top QB selected in May’s draft?
This upcoming quarterback class looks to be the “year of the quarterback” with a record number projected to go in the first two rounds. From a statistical standpoint, it’s easy to see why scouts and coaches are in love with this group. Let’s look at the 2013 collegiate passing numbers of some of the big name quarterbacks as of October 21.
Name | School | GS | CMP | ATT | YDS | CMP% | YPA | TD | INT | RAT | ADJ TQBR | INT/A |
Petty, Bryce | Baylor | 6 | 102 | 144 | 2023 | 70.8 | 14.05 | 15 | 1 | 221.8 | 95.1 | 0.69% |
Florida State | 6 | 112 | 157 | 1885 | 71.3 | 12.01 | 20 | 3 | 210.4 | 92.5 | 1.91% | |
Bridgewater, Teddy | Louisville | 7 | 154 | 214 | 2213 | 72.0 | 10.34 | 20 | 2 | 187.8 | 83.4 | 0.93% |
Mettenberger, Zach | Louisiana State | 8 | 135 | 207 | 2164 | 65.2 | 10.45 | 16 | 5 | 173.7 | 87.0 | 2.42% |
Manziel, Johnny | Texas A&M | 7 | 159 | 217 | 2289 | 73.3 | 10.55 | 18 | 7 | 182.8 | 90.2 | 3.23% |
Boyd, Tajh | Clemson | 7 | 140 | 222 | 1939 | 63.1 | 8.73 | 16 | 4 | 156.6 | 72.5 | 1.80% |
Murray, Aaron | Georgia | 7 | 139 | 224 | 1938 | 62.1 | 8.65 | 17 | 6 | 154.4 | 89.0 | 2.68% |
Mariotta, Marcus | Oregon | 7 | 123 | 197 | 2051 | 62.4 | 10.41 | 19 | 0 | 181.7 | 96.6 | 0.00% |
South Carolina | 7 | 92 | 145 | 1307 | 63.4 | 9.01 | 11 | 1 | 162.8 | 71.9 | 0.69% | |
McCarron, AJ | Alabama | 7 | 126 | 182 | 1587 | 69.2 | 8.72 | 14 | 3 | 164.6 | 79.6 | 1.65% |
Hogan, Kevin | Stanford | 7 | 100 | 159 | 1405 | 62.9 | 8.84 | 13 | 5 | 157.8 | 79.7 | 3.14% |
Mannion, Sean | Oregon State | 7 | 229 | 334 | 2992 | 68.6 | 8.96 | 29 | 3 | 170.7 | 81.7 | 0.90% |
Miller, Braxton | Ohio State | 5 | 71 | 102 | 831 | 69.6 | 8.15 | 8 | 2 | 160 | 74.4 | 1.96% |
Carr, Derek | Fresno State | 6 | 216 | 307 | 2276 | 70.4 | 7.41 | 23 | 4 | 154.8 | 84.3 | 1.30% |
Fales, David | San Jose State | 6 | 136 | 228 | 1943 | 59.6 | 8.52 | 12 | 8 | 141.6 | 62.0 | 3.51% |
Hundley, Brett | UCLA | 6 | 133 | 199 | 1661 | 66.8 | 8.35 | 13 | 6 | 152.5 | 70.4 | 3.02% |
Price, Keith | Washington | 7 | 149 | 231 | 1793 | 64.5 | 7.76 | 14 | 4 | 146.2 | 70.0 | 1.73% |
Grand Total | 136 | 204 | 1900 | 66.8 | 9.47 | 16.35 | 3.76 | 169.4 | 81.2 | 1.86% |
If you average out the quarterbacks per game, you’ll see that they’re passing for an average of 286 yards with about 2.46 TD per game and about 0.57 INTs per game. That’s a staggering 4.3 TD/INT ratio average for these big name quarterbacks. I have placed these quarterbacks into three tiers based on their half season performances.*not eligible for 2014 draft
ELITE (TIER 1)
Name | School | GS | CMP | ATT | YDS | CMP% | YPA | TD | INT | RAT | ADJ TQBR | INT/A |
Petty, Bryce | Baylor | 6 | 102 | 144 | 2023 | 70.8 | 14.05 | 15 | 1 | 221.8 | 95.1 | 0.69% |
Florida State | 6 | 112 | 157 | 1885 | 71.3 | 12.01 | 20 | 3 | 210.4 | 92.5 | 1.91% | |
Bridgewater, Teddy | Louisville | 7 | 154 | 214 | 2213 | 72.0 | 10.34 | 20 | 2 | 187.8 | 83.4 | 0.93% |
Mariotta, Marcus | Oregon | 7 | 123 | 197 | 2051 | 62.4 | 10.41 | 19 | 0 | 181.7 | 96.6 | 0.00% |
These four stars are the crème de la crème. Is it any surprise that all four of these QBs are on the Heisman list at the moment? Combined, they have tossed 74 touchdowns and only 6 interceptions with impressive completion percentages and yards per attempt.
SOLID (TIER 2)
Name | School | GS | CMP | ATT | YDS | CMP% | YPA | TD | INT | RAT | ADJ TQBR | INT/A |
Mettenberger, Zach | Louisiana State | 8 | 135 | 207 | 2164 | 65.2 | 10.45 | 16 | 5 | 173.7 | 87.0 | 2.42% |
Manziel, Johnny | Texas A&M | 7 | 159 | 217 | 2289 | 73.3 | 10.55 | 18 | 7 | 182.8 | 90.2 | 3.23% |
Boyd, Tajh | Clemson | 7 | 140 | 222 | 1939 | 63.1 | 8.73 | 16 | 4 | 156.6 | 72.5 | 1.80% |
Murray, Aaron | Georgia | 7 | 139 | 224 | 1938 | 62.1 | 8.65 | 17 | 6 | 154.4 | 89.0 | 2.68% |
South Carolina | 7 | 92 | 145 | 1307 | 63.4 | 9.01 | 11 | 1 | 162.8 | 71.9 | 0.69% | |
McCarron, AJ | Alabama | 7 | 126 | 182 | 1587 | 69.2 | 8.72 | 14 | 3 | 164.6 | 79.6 | 1.65% |
Mannion, Sean | Oregon State | 7 | 229 | 334 | 2992 | 68.6 | 8.96 | 29 | 3 | 170.7 | 81.7 | 0.90% |
Miller, Braxton | Ohio State | 5 | 71 | 102 | 831 | 69.6 | 8.15 | 8 | 2 | 160 | 74.4 | 1.96% |
Carr, Derek | Fresno State | 6 | 216 | 307 | 2276 | 70.4 | 7.41 | 23 | 4 | 154.8 | 84.3 | 1.30% |
While these Quarterbacks have numbers that are comparable to the elite, there are certain numbers that are concerning. The interception per attempt numbers are high, or the yards per attempt are too low. One interesting note is that Johnny Manziel has one of the highest Adjusted Total Quarterback Rating (ADJ TQBR), but also has one of the highest interception per attempt ratios.
BELOW EXPECTATIONS (TIER 3)
Name | School | GS | CMP | ATT | YDS | CMP% | YPA | TD | INT | RAT | ADJ TQBR | INT/A |
Hogan, Kevin | Stanford | 7 | 100 | 159 | 1405 | 62.9 | 8.84 | 13 | 5 | 157.8 | 79.7 | 3.14% |
Fales, David | San Jose State | 6 | 136 | 228 | 1943 | 59.6 | 8.52 | 12 | 8 | 141.6 | 62.0 | 3.51% |
Hundley, Brett | UCLA | 6 | 133 | 199 | 1661 | 66.8 | 8.35 | 13 | 6 | 152.5 | 70.4 | 3.02% |
Price, Keith | Washington | 7 | 149 | 231 | 1793 | 64.5 | 7.76 | 14 | 4 | 146.2 | 70.0 | 1.73% |
These four quarterbacks haven’t “struggled”, but have a few red flags midway through the season. Most of them have a high interception per attempt (and thus a low TD/INT ratio). In addition to this, they have low yards per attempts and low completion percentages when compared to their elite counterparts.
Preseason “tune-up” games are included in these stats. I expect the second half season numbers to take a slight dip as they begin to play tougher conference opponents with post-season implications. With all this excitement over quarterbacks, I imagine all GM’s, scouts, and coaches will be losing a lot of sleep over these signal callers. I know this writer will.
