You think the guy on the ND beat that knows football the best is posting to grasp at straws? It’s a legit concern when correlated with pressure rate.
From Jamie U
“Maybe it's harsh to call this a red flag, but let me just say that I’m monitoring that Angeli was pressured three times and sacked on all three. Combine that with the Oregon State game and he’s been pressured seven times and was sacked on five of them.
The highest percentage of pressures that turned into sacks for a quarterback last season was 36.8%, so being sacked five out of seven is not great, Bob.”
It’s a legit concern. But arguing to not give him a chance and stick with RL partly off a two game, 7 dropbacks-with-pressure sample size feels highly selective and ultimately noisy.
What about the few drives he had in 2023 regular season games, where he went unsacked and probably experienced dropback pressure at least a few times. Why are those excluded from his sack rate? (And we can’t say because they were irrelevant due to mop-up duty. If so, we should throw out the 3 for 3 from Purdue).
I think this almost proves my point - I feel people are overemphasizing the sack rate and grasping at some straws to justify the sunk cost of Riley.
Do I think Steve’s sack-on-dropback-rate is misleadingly high? Of course. As Jamie said, worst in CFB was 37% last year.
Do I still think Steve will often be sacked, possibly at a rate that is even above average? Sure, maybe.
Do I think it’s bad enough to the point where we shouldn’t try giving significant snaps to a QB who seems far more accurate throwing the ball? I don’t.