Quarterback Competition Update (4-11-11)

[returnofthemack]

I don't subscribe to 247 so I can't read the article, but I must say that it's very hard to see a legitimate comparison between the two. For every success story you see about a coach sticking to his guns with a guy, there are hundreds of stories that go the other direction.

For example, the Denver Broncos coaching staff was adamant about starting Kyle Orton and keeping Tebow off the field. The fans called for Orton's head and begged for Tebow. The organization realized they were at a point where they had to do something and Tebow came in and led them to the playoffs. Not that he's a great QB, but he did the job.

To be honest, the best comparison for Tommy in college football is that he has the passing ability of Denard Robinson and the legs of Kellen Moore. Denard actually had a little better passer rating, while Kellen rushed for -10 more yards than Tommy. So saying "Tommy could get better" is an obvious statement. How could he get worse?

Statistically speaking, the kid had the 55th best passer rating, the 41st most passing tds, the 11th most INTs. That is just unacceptable at the University of Notre Dame.

Talk about the O-Line all you want but Tommy was tied for 88th for most sacked QB. That's less than guys like RG3, Russell Wilson, and Case Keenum.

It's just very hard back that horse...

You can also see the aforementioned quote in an earlier post from Keith Arnold's Inside the Irish piece. The main issue I have with the argument is that Tony Rice was fast as hell and had a powerful, if inaccurate arm - when running an option offense, not being able to throw well can be mitigated by speed, which was the case. So yeah, he may have been a little one-dimensional, except there was nobody denying he was fast as hell. Rees does not excel in any department except keeping composed after throwing interceptions (when he does it so often, he's gotta get used to it eventually, right?). He does not have a strong arm, I could run a faster 40 time from my deathbed, and he makes incredibly bad decisions at inopportune times. He has no dimension that redeems his faults. Thus, the comparison to Tony Rice is terrible.

Jimmy Clausen threw more picks than Rees did last year, but I wouldn't have dreamed of wanting another QB starting. It was obvious from watching the games that he was plagued by terrible offensive line play and the total lack of a running game. And yet, he made accurate passes and threw one of the most gorgeous deep balls you could find in college football. He improved throughout his sophomore year. Rees stayed at the same mediocre level, or got worse, throughout his sophomore year. He has no strengths to build on. He's a good kid and he stays composed, but he is by no means an elite QB. I think all of us can agree on that. If we had an SEC defense with illiterate shutdown corners and monstrous linebackers and D-linemen, he'd be fine at QB because all the offense would need is a game manager. That's obviously not the case in our situation.

 

[Patulski]

To be honest, the best comparison for Tommy in college football is that he has the passing ability of Denard Robinson and the legs of Kellen Moore. Denard actually had a little better passer rating, while Kellen rushed for -10 more yards than Tommy. So saying "Tommy could get better" is an obvious statement. How could he get worse?

He passed for 700 more yards than Robinson.

How did you forget that?

I know: The Derp-NDNation type post has infected this board.

How could he get worse? How could the Derp get worse?

 

[returnofthemack]

He passed for 700 more yards than Robinson.

How did you forget that?

I know: The Derp-NDNation type post has infected this board.

How could he get worse? How could the Derp get worse?

Yeah, I think Robinson's ~1200 yards rushing makes up for his passing yards. Denard is the worst passer I have seen at a major college football program (Martinez at Nebraska is a close second) and he passed for the same number of TDs and only one more interception than Rees. However, Denard also rushed for 1200 yards and scored 16 touchdowns. Rees' arm is weaker than Denard's, and while he has better accuracy most of the time, Denard is infinitely better in the red zone.

There are two extremes at work on this board: extreme pessimists (me) and extreme optimists (you). Most likely, the end results will fall somewhere in the middle, but probably closer to my prediction.

 

[Patulski]

First of all, our offensive line played incredibly well overall last year in pass protection. For the vast majority of the season I remember we were in the top 10 in sacks allowed per drop back.

Go watch the Stanford and Florida State games. Our pass protection blew goats. The O-line has to get better. Watt consistently gets beat on stunts, Golic can't hold the line of scrimmage and Dever is getting beat on the edge, when he's not giving a free shot on missed assignments

The point you raise about the OL not playing well against USC, BC, and Stanford is semi-valid only with respect to the Stanford game. They did not play well in that game overall and had multiple breakdowns against complicated pressures. With that being said, Andrew Hendrix came in and with a very limited playbook/practice reps was able to move the team much more effectively than Tommy and didn't get blown repeatedly... because he's not a statue.

I like the way Hendrix runs. I don't like the way he throws the football directly to linebackers standing 7 yards in front of him. There is good reason to question his peripheral vision.

BC and USC did not "whip" our OLs in any sense of the word. BC got ZERO sacks and allowed us to rush for 161 yards. And USC also got ZERO sacks in 43 pass attempts. So while you try to blame the OL, they did just about as good of a job as possible in protecting the passer. Which brings us to.....

We had 41 and 57 yards rushing against USC and Stanford. They made us one dimensional. That's whipping us.

"Of course all you couch potato QB's would get right up and be slinging it fearlessly. Right?"

Well, frankly, that's what's expected of a QB. It's truly a part of the job description. Peyton Manning or any great QB will always step up in the pocket and deliver the ball even though they know they're going to get destroyed.

You just compared a college sophomore to Peyton Manning?

My problem with Tommy is not him getting hit... it's what happens when he gets hit. He has an astronomical fumble rate on hits he takes because of his small hands.

No argument there. He's got to be stronger inside the pocket.

And against Stanford and Florida State.... the only two teams to hit him.... as soon as he took a big lick he got inexcusable jitters. Just completely shell shocked. For someone who gets hit as little as he does, it just makes no sense.

After getting knocked out of the game against Stanford, Rees completed his next four passes, and was sacked once. Doesn't fit your "inexcusable jitters" narrative. Go watch the game again. Herbstreit is pointing out the obvious: Stanford is dominating our pass protection and putting heavy pressure. Herbstret keeps pointing out the obvious.

 

[Patulski]

There are two extremes at work on this board: extreme pessimists (me) and extreme optimists (you). Most likely, the end results will fall somewhere in the middle, but probably closer to my prediction.

I'm not being extremely optimistic about Rees. I'm pointing out the Derp. If you're going to compare Rees and Robinson as passers, you should give the whole picture, not just the Derp.

 

[returnofthemack]

Go watch the Stanford and Florida State games. Our pass protection blew goats. The O-line has to get better. Watt consistently gets beat on stunts, Golic can't hold the line of scrimmage and Dever is getting beat on the edge, when he's not giving a free shot on missed assignments



I like the way Hendrix runs. I don't like the way he throws the football directly to linebackers standing 7 yards in front of him. There is good reason to question his peripheral vision.



We had 41 and 57 yards rushing against USC and Stanford. They made us one dimensional. That's whipping us.



You just compared a college sophomore to Peyton Manning?



No argument there. He's got to be stronger inside the pocket.



After getting knocked out of the game against Stanford, Rees completed his next four passes, and was sacked once. Doesn't fit your "inexcusable jitters" narrative. Go watch the game again. Herbstreit is pointing out the obvious: Stanford is dominating our pass protection and putting heavy pressure. Herbstret keeps pointing out the obvious.

What's your rationale for how pathetically bad Rees was against Pitt and BC? And to a lesser extent Wake and MSU? He had plenty of time in all of those games and was downright awful (the exception being the final drive against Pitt). You're right about him not having help against USC and Stanford, he was getting messed up like Jimmy used to. But when you rewatch some of the games from last season, you've gotta cringe seeing how bad Rees was. I don't want to have to watch that again this season, especially since we play a harder schedule.

 

[clashmore_mike]

If Rees starts this is Clashmore's dog:

Why can I never see your images??

 

[Patulski]

What's your rationale for how pathetically bad Rees was against Pitt and BC? And to a lesser extent Wake and MSU? He had plenty of time in all of those games and was downright awful (the exception being the final drive against Pitt). You're right about him not having help against USC and Stanford, he was getting messed up like Jimmy used to. But when you rewatch some of the games from last season, you've gotta cringe seeing how bad Rees was. I don't want to have to watch that again this season, especially since we play a harder schedule.

Football is a team game. After rewatching the games, there were lots of plays and players that made me cringe, including Rees. That doesn't mean the team and players can't improve, including Rees

 

[DillonHall]

Football is a team game. After rewatching the games, there were lots of plays and players that made me cringe, including Rees. That doesn't mean the team and players can't improve, including Rees

I doubt the offensive line will play much better than it did last year. You point out a couple of games in which they didn't perform well (especially after Cave was injured), but they had a great season both in pass protection and run blocking. Going forward, I doubt they'll get much better, and I'd be pleased if the 2011 line was the benchmark for future offensive lines.

You want them to get better, but this is only because the QB is such a weakness. If we had a competent playmaker at QB, this line would be more than good enough to get to the BCS.

 

[IrishLax]

haha, you guys are ridiculous. You can't tell that from those pics. Does he look like a kid that is 6'2" in those pics? Probably not, but he is.


If we are at the point where we are hating on Rees for hand size, then maybe that should be a sign for everyone to take a chill pill.

Clausen had the smallest hands of any QB in his draft. How did he do at Notre Dame?

Yeah.... it's hilarious.... until he inexplicably drops the ball on 1st and goal in a game altering play against Michigan.

 

[Patulski]

I doubt the offensive line will play much better than it did last year. You point out a couple of games in which they didn't perform well (especially after Cave was injured), but they had a great season both in pass protection and run blocking. Going forward, I doubt they'll get much better, and I'd be pleased if the 2011 line was the benchmark for future offensive lines.

If you think a combined 98 yards rushing against USC and Stanford is consistent with "a great season in...run blocking", then you have a different standard than I do for ND offensive lines.

Personally, I think the O-line will improve in 2012.

 

[Patulski]

Yeah.... it's hilarious.... until he inexplicably drops the ball on 1st and goal in a game altering play against Michigan.

You're just not gonna stop with the Derp, are you.

 

[RuntheBall]

I think some people need medication, seriously its April and we have already analyzed every piece of info we have over 9000 times...

 

[Cali_domer]

You're just not gonna stop with the Derp, are you.

It is a valid point that he has small hands.

Oh and he has cement in his legs.

 

[returnofthemack]

You're just not gonna stop with the Derp, are you.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to when Rees dropped the ball while ND was inside scUM's ten-yard line and Floyd was one-on-one with a corner. The image is seared into my mind.

 

[Patulski]

It is a valid point that he has small hands.

No it isn't. The only relevant thing about hand size is the grip. The smaller the hand throwing the ball, the closer the grip should be to the point. Because the circumference of the ball gets smaller at the points, it’s easier to grip.

Here's Clausen's grip

 

[DillonHall]

If you think a combined 98 yards rushing against USC and Stanford is consistent with "a great season in...run blocking", then you have a different standard than I do for ND offensive lines.

Personally, I think the O-line will improve in 2012.

There were circumstances in each of those games (falling behind against both teams by three scores and not having Gray and Cave against Stanford) that help explain those stats. If you choose to ignore the fact that we rushed for over 2000 yards in a season for the first time since 2001, then there's not much I can say to convince you that the offensive line had an impressive year.

Why's your 'standard' for the OL so high when your standard for Rees is so low? It's as if there's an idiot paired with a smart kid on a group project, and you're blaming the smart kid for not carrying the dumb kid enough.

 

[IrishFBfanatic]

If you think a combined 98 yards rushing against USC and Stanford is consistent with "a great season in...run blocking", then you have a different standard than I do for ND offensive lines.

Personally, I think the O-line will improve in 2012.

So are you saying Tommy struggled because our O-Line couldn't run block?
This O-line gave up 13 sacks on Tommy this year. 13. That is 14 less than heisman trophy winner RG3 was sacked. How was he so successful when his o-line wasn't protecting him?
Maybe there's more to qb play than how well the O-Line protects them...

 

[IrishLax]

Go watch the Stanford and Florida State games. Our pass protection blew goats. The O-line has to get better. Watt consistently gets beat on stunts, Golic can't hold the line of scrimmage and Dever is getting beat on the edge, when he's not giving a free shot on missed assignments

......... OK...... you didn't even mention the Florida State game in your post................. yes, the pass protection was bad in those two games. For sure. I already said as much about Stanford.

I like the way Hendrix runs. I don't like the way he throws the football directly to linebackers standing 7 yards in front of him. There is good reason to question his peripheral vision.

I've said multiple times in this thread and others that I'm fine with Tommy getting the starting nod if he earns it as long as Hendrix is used in packages (particularly in the red zone). But we're not discussing Hendrix right now, we're discussing Tommy, so let's shelf this for now.

We had 41 and 57 yards rushing against USC and Stanford. They made us one dimensional. That's whipping us.

That's much more because we got down early in those games than it was them "whipping" us. We got down 21-0 to Stanford and 17-0 to USC. We ran for 4.6 YPC against USC (not great but solid) and yeah... against Stanford we were awful... but that was as much because of their slippery turf as anything else.

You just compared a college sophomore to Peyton Manning?

No I didn't. I compared him to all "great QBs" and I meant that term loosely. I could have named someone like Sam Bradford or Brady Quinn or Tim Tebow... I truly mean any successful QB at the college level is not afraid of contact and can step up in the pocket. For instance, Sam Bradford gets destroyed every game... takes 10x the hits Tommy does... and doesn't get shell shocked. He hangs in there. It is part of the job.

No argument there. He's got to be stronger inside the pocket.

Cool.

After getting knocked out of the game against Stanford, Rees completed his next four passes, and was sacked once. Doesn't fit your "inexcusable jitters" narrative. Go watch the game again. Herbstreit is pointing out the obvious: Stanford is dominating our pass protection and putting heavy pressure. Herbstret keeps pointing out the obvious.

OK I understand what you're saying here with Stanford. But I think it's more a progressive collapse if you look at what happens as he gets hit. On the first sack-fumble by Tommy (9:16 of the 1st quarter) he starts teetering. I'm not drawing a line in the sand with the singular big hit Tommy took. I mean that, in general, he got totally rattled as time wore on. And his entire second quarter of production shows that. He went a grand total of 1/6 with an interception in the entire second quarter. His entire stat line, after the sack fumble, was a whopping 4/10 with an interception.

I think my point clearly stands about the FSU game. As soon as they got to him consistently in the second half the wheels fell off the cart.

 

[PANDFAN]

Go watch the Stanford and Florida State games. Our pass protection blew goats. The O-line has to get better. Watt consistently gets beat on stunts, Golic can't hold the line of scrimmage and Dever is getting beat on the edge, when he's not giving a free shot on missed assignments



I like the way Hendrix runs. I don't like the way he throws the football directly to linebackers standing 7 yards in front of him. There is good reason to question his peripheral vision.



We had 41 and 57 yards rushing against USC and Stanford. They made us one dimensional. That's whipping us.



You just compared a college sophomore to Peyton Manning?



No argument there. He's got to be stronger inside the pocket.



After getting knocked out of the game against Stanford, Rees completed his next four passes, and was sacked once. Doesn't fit your "inexcusable jitters" narrative. Go watch the game again. Herbstreit is pointing out the obvious: Stanford is dominating our pass protection aputting heavy pressure. Herbstret keeps pointing out the obvious.

There is so much I agree with

 

[Patulski]

There were circumstances in each of those games (falling behind against both teams by three scores and not having Gray and Cave against Stanford) that help explain those stats. If you choose to ignore the fact that we rushed for over 2000 yards in a season for the first time since 2001, then there's not much I can say to convince you that the offensive line had an impressive year.

Why's your 'standard' for the OL so high when your standard for Rees is so low? It's as if there's an idiot paired with a smart kid on a group project, and you're blaming the smart kid for not carrying the dumb kid enough.

730 of our rushing yards came against Purdue, Air Force and Maryland. And rushing better than the Willingham and Weis eras isn't very persuasive to me.

My standard for Rees isn't low. I just don't think he's solely to blame for our offensive woes.

 

[Patulski]

So are you saying Tommy struggled because our O-Line couldn't run block?

No, but it is a common goal to make offenses one dimensional. Stanford and USC did that,

This O-line gave up 13 sacks on Tommy this year. 13. That is 14 less than heisman trophy winner RG3 was sacked. How was he so successful when his o-line wasn't protecting him?
Maybe there's more to qb play than how well the O-Line protects them...

Of course there is. And Rees made a lot of mistakes. That still doesn't excuse how poorly we ran the ball and protected Rees against USC, Stanford. g Rees was a sophomore QB, with most of the burden of offensive production on his shoulders when we couldn't run the ball. That's not commonly a recipe for success, and has never been a recipe for success at ND.

 

[Meacon Irish]

The argument about our O-Line not being very good is dumbfounded. We went...what was it?...five or six straight games without giving up a single sack? And as someone else said, RG3 was sacked two times as much as Tommy was. Obviously, RG3 is just a smidge bit more athletic than Tommy, but you can't point to him getting sacked thirteen times in a fourteen game season and say our O-Line was subpar. Not when Cierre ran for over 1100 yards.

Bash our quarterbacks all you want, but I'll be damned if I'm going to let our O-Line get thrown under the bus...

 

[IrishFBfanatic]

No, but it is a common goal to make offenses one dimensional. Stanford and USC did that,



Of course there is. And Rees made a lot of mistakes. That still doesn't excuse how poorly we ran the ball and protected Rees against USC, Stanford. g Rees was a sophomore QB, with most of the burden of offensive production on his shoulders when we couldn't run the ball. That's not commonly a recipe for success, and has never been a recipe for success at ND.

Don't forget the part about how Rees was a sophomore QB throwing the ball to arguably the best WR and the best TE in college football behind a line that only allowed him to be sacked 13 times all season.

I believe the National champs had a sophomore QB. Washington's Keith Price was a sophomore and demolished Tommy's production. Aaron Murray had a better year than Rees and yet he was a sophomore as well.

 

[Patulski]

That's much more because we got down early in those games than it was them "whipping" us. We got down 21-0 to Stanford and 17-0 to USC. We ran for 4.6 YPC against USC (not great but solid) and yeah... against Stanford we were awful... but that was as much because of their slippery turf as anything else.

Stanford whipped our line from snap one. I don't know how you can debate otherwise. I consider USC was less of a whipping, because Kelly decided to abandon the run. So, I think there's more leeway there, though I don't know if we could have run even if we wanted to. We had a finesse running game, and they were simply more physical. Being a more physical O-line is something I am hoping the new O-line coach produces.

No I didn't. I compared him to all "great QBs" and I meant that term loosely. I could have named someone like Sam Bradford or Brady Quinn or Tim Tebow...

Yes, you did. You wrote "Peyton Manning or any great QB will always step up in the pocket." My point is that not many college sophomore pocket QB's are going to play well under the kind of pressure Rees faced against Stanford. They naturally start peaking for two reasons (a) because they don't want to get knocked out and (b) they look early for ways to escape to try to make things happen when they can't trust their o-line. Furthermore, comparing NFL and college QB's is not an accurate comparison: the NFL protects pro QB's more than college. You can barely touch them these days.

OK I understand what you're saying here with Stanford. But I think it's more a progressive collapse if you look at what happens as he gets hit. On the first sack-fumble by Tommy (9:16 of the 1st quarter) he starts teetering. I'm not drawing a line in the sand with the singular big hit Tommy took. I mean that, in general, he got totally rattled as time wore on. And his entire second quarter of production shows that. He went a grand total of 1/6 with an interception in the entire second quarter. His entire stat line, after the sack fumble, was a whopping 4/10 with an interception.

See above

I think my point clearly stands about the FSU game. As soon as they got to him consistently in the second half the wheels fell off the cart.

The wheels fell off the cart because the defense could not hold a 14-3 lead, which was helped along by Hendrix throwing the ball into the hands of their linebacker. Also, our kicking game sucked: We missed field goals and gave up a long return. And Floyd dropped a perfectly thrown bomb that should have been a TD. And Rees misread the coverage in the red zone, resulting in their linebacker tipping the ball and taking points off the board.

Football's a team game. If you'd stop obsessing about Rees, you'd see that there's a lot more to fix than him. The good news is that everybody can improve. Let's hope its happening this spring.

 

[The Polish Irishman]

Don't forget the part about how Rees was a sophomore QB throwing the ball to arguably the best WR and the best TE in college football behind a line that only allowed him to be sacked 13 times all season.

I believe the National champs had a sophomore QB. Washington's Keith Price was a sophomore and demolished Tommy's production. Aaron Murray had a better year than Rees and yet he was a sophomore as well.

All 3 of those QBs redshirted their freshman year. Rees did not.

 

[Patulski]

Don't forget the part about how Rees was a sophomore QB throwing the ball to arguably the best WR and the best TE in college football behind a line that only allowed him to be sacked 13 times all season.

We gave up10 sacks against Stanford, FSU and MSU. Is it any surprise those were our weakest offensive performances?

And we were 79th in penalties. How often were we in 3rd and long situations. This has been a common occurrence in the Kelly regime.

I believe the National champs had a sophomore QB.

Redshirt sophomore, who attempted 83 less passes than Rees and who's offense rushed for 54 more yards per game. Clearly, less of a burden for production was placed on him, even though he'd be considered a Jr. at ND.

Washington's Keith Price was a sophomore and demolished Tommy's production. Aaron Murray had a better year than Rees and yet he was a sophomore as well.

Another Redshirt Sophomore. In our two common opponents he produced more than Rees against Stanford, and didn't produce as much as Rees against USC.

 

[IrishLax]

Yes, you did. You wrote "Peyton Manning or any great QB will always step up in the pocket." My point is that not many college sophomore pocket QB's are going to play well under the kind of pressure Rees faced against Stanford. They naturally start peaking for two reasons (a) because they don't want to get knocked out and (b) they look early for ways to escape to try to make things happen when they can't trust their o-line. Furthermore, comparing NFL and college QB's is not an accurate comparison: the NFL protects pro QB's more than college. You can barely touch them these days.

You're literally arguing semantics. If someone says "I like clementines, or really any orange" what are they presenting a preference towards ORANGES not just clementines. The only reason I explicitly listed Manning was that it was typing in a train of thought and he stuck out first was a guy who first stuck out as being immobile and willing to stand in and make a throw.

To the idea that a Sophomore lacks poise in the pocket because he is you and inexperienced... sure, I can buy that. He might get better. I hope he does.

Your whole thing about NFL QBs being protected is completing irrelevant to the discussion. Every QB that plays in the NFL or was a good college QB has to be able to step up in the pocket. Every guy who does it in the pros also did it in college. And while big hits get penalized and fined in the NFL... QBs still take them. Just ask David Carr, Jay Cutler in '10, Sam Bradford, etc. etc. if they get hit hard. Arguing that player safety rules have eliminate or mitigated big hits to the degree that there is a discernible difference between college and the NFL is a completely un-provable hypothesis. I do know that QBs in the NFL get hit with more frequency than those in college though. Don't know how you want to attempt to measure the violence of the hits.

Football's a team game. If you'd stop obsessing about Rees, you'd see that there's a lot more to fix than him. The good news is that everybody can improve. Let's hope its happening this spring.

Come on... you put RGIII or Andrew Luck at the head of last year's team and we probably go at least 11-1. Instead, we went 8-5. In those 5 losses, the QB play was a MAJOR factor in all 5. We had top 5 positional talents at WR and TE... an all-around very effective running game with Jonas and Cierre... one of the best pass blocking OLs in the country... an OK DL.... a guy who's going to be the second safety drafted in the NFL... solid LBs.... and iffy CBs. The only position on our team last year that was more of a liability than QB was pun returner.

Like I've said, I totally support Tommy starting if he ends up being the guy as long as Hendrix gets touches in the red zone. It's absolutely necessary to improve our efficiency. But for people not to be frightened of Tommy's little hands or lack of proven vertical passing game or lack of mobility is sheer insanity. It's terrifying to think how much he will hamstring this team if he hasn't made monumental gains in confidence, ability, strength, poise, and understanding. Here's to hoping he has. The only position on this entire team with more question marks coming into this year than QB is CB.

 

[STLDomer]

Late to the Convo but would like to say Rees can have perfected mechanics and decision making and he would still not succeed due to his lack of confidence in his physical mobility which sucks

Look at the BC game for evidence than anytime can beat us if they just pressure Rees because he wont run

 

[IrishFBfanatic]

All 3 of those QBs redshirted their freshman year. Rees did not.

You are correct. There weren't many true sophomore qbs starting for major teams last year. But if we want to get technical: as a true sophomore in his first year starting qb Russell Wilson threw 17 tds and 1 int. Kellen Moore as a true sophomore threw 39 tds and 3ints. Matt Barkley threw 26 tds and 12 ints. Andrew Luck as a true sophomore threw 13 tds and 4 ints. Geno Smith as a true sophomore threw 24 tds and 7 ints. Kirk Cousins as a true sophomore threw 19 tds and 9 ints. Tim Tebow as a true sophomore won a heisman trophy. Heck, even Denard Robinson as a true sophomore threw 18 tds and 11 ints with a 149.6 passer rating.

Being a true sophomore is no excuse. Especially when you have Michael Floyd and Tyler Eifert to throw the ball to. Most QBs would kill to have receivers like those guys to throw to.