McKee is #1 - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: McKee is #1 (/thread-22298.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: McKee is #1 (/thread-22298.html)
RE: McKee is #1 - gailtate - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 03:33 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-19-2021, 02:59 PM)gailtate Wrote: One of the most flagrant is his exasperating, counter-productive loyalty to seniority. You ever see Nick Saban doing this?
funny you should mention Saban. Ever hear of a kid named Blake Barnett? He won the starting job over Jalen Hurts in 2016. Barnett transferred after the season to ASU via Palomar college, was beat out for the starting job there by Manny Wilkins, and subsequently transferred to the University of South Florida, started for a year, and then lost the starting job to a true freshman. Even Saban sometimes starts a dud.
The next year, of course, many were calling for Tua Taogaviloa to be named starter, but Saban stuck with Hurts until he was forced to bench him at halftime of the national championship game after Hurts led Alabama to a scoreless first half going 3/8 for 21 yards. Tua then came in and led Alabama to a comeback win in overtime. This one is a bit more excusable, since it's not like Hurts was a dud after transferring to OKlahoma, but it did nearly cost him a national title.
BC
Exceptions that prove the rule. And, needless to say, Saban's SIX (and counting) NCs speak for themselves. I'm done here.
RE: McKee is #1 - BostonCard - 09-19-2021
Thanks for making my point, which is that if six-time national champion coaches occasionally start the “wrong” QB, then maybe identifying the best QB from practice and a limited sample size of games is harder than you think.
BC
RE: McKee is #1 - CTcard - 09-19-2021
(09-18-2021, 09:43 PM)martyup Wrote: For the season, Tanner McKee has a QBR of 89.3. That ranks #1 in college football.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4685201/tanner-mckee
The stats table must have been updated since you posted that. McKee has an adjusted QBR of 88.3, which ranks him third in the country.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/qbr
A week ago he was #1 (which I had posted), perhaps with that 89.3 rating.
#1 is the quarterback from Liberty, which doesn't concern me much.
#2 is the sophomore QB for Oregon State (Nolan) who has won the job from the senior (Noyer) in a manner not unlike what we have seen.
-----
I am somewhat in the camp that says Shaw should have been able to tell by the time of the KSU game that McKee was the better QB. In any one case, without inside the program knowledge, it's very hard to know how difficult the call really was. In this case, it didn't take long to rectify and doesn't seem egregious. However, Shaw has now a rather consistent history of choosing the wrong QB to start the season, or at least finding a better QB after the season begins. It's really become a trend.
RE: McKee is #1 - qwerty49 - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 05:02 PM)CTcard Wrote:(09-18-2021, 09:43 PM)martyup Wrote: For the season, Tanner McKee has a QBR of 89.3. That ranks #1 in college football.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4685201/tanner-mckee
The stats table must have been updated since you posted that. McKee has an adjusted QBR of 88.3, which ranks him third in the country.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/qbr
A week ago he was #1 (which I had posted), perhaps with that 89.3 rating.
#1 is the quarterback from Liberty, which doesn't concern me much.
#2 is the sophomore QB for Oregon State (Nolan) who has won the job from the senior (Noyer) in a manner not unlike what we have seen.
-----
I am somewhat in the camp that says Shaw should have been able to tell by the time of the KSU game that McKee was the better QB. In any one case, without inside the program knowledge, it's very hard to know how difficult the call really was. In this case, it didn't take long to rectify and doesn't seem egregious. However, Shaw has now a rather consistent history of choosing the wrong QB to start the season, or at least finding a better QB after the season begins. It's really become a trend.
Shaw has demonstrated time and time again that seniority at QB is a big deal starting the season. And it probably is, as long as we have the 30000-page playbook. Having said that, the playbook seems much smaller under McKee. Now if they could only deep-six the Wildcat package and the handoff to the TE we armchair QBs will be so happy….
RE: McKee is #1 - CTcard - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 05:27 PM)qwerty49 Wrote: Having said that, the playbook seems much smaller under McKee.
I was thinking that the playbook seems larger under McKee. I was assuming that they trust McKee to run plays that they didn't trust with many recent QBs.
RE: McKee is #1 - DC 86 - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 05:48 PM)CTcard Wrote:(09-19-2021, 05:27 PM)qwerty49 Wrote: Having said that, the playbook seems much smaller under McKee.
I was thinking that the playbook seems larger under McKee. I was assuming that they trust McKee to run plays that they didn't trust with many recent QBs.
I think both are right. He's not being asked to make as many checks and to call two plays on every down, but he's definitely being trusted to attempt throws that wouldn't have been called for West.
RE: McKee is #1 - washingtonismoney - 09-19-2021
From my understanding McKee also looked lackluster in public practices. Is that wrong?
RE: McKee is #1 - Mick - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 01:25 AM)Austroturf Wrote:(09-19-2021, 12:29 AM)Mick Wrote:(09-18-2021, 10:30 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(09-18-2021, 09:43 PM)martyup Wrote: For the season, Tanner McKee has a QBR of 89.3. That ranks #1 in college football.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4685201/tanner-mckee
Wow! If he keeps that up he could come in 2nd in the Voldemort voting.
He's got three consecutive opponents ranked in the Top 25 coming up (#13 UCLA, #4 Oregon, #19 Arizona State). If he's still #1 in college football, he'll be a shoe in for the Top 25 for the Voldemort voting.
After yesterday's games, I don't think UCLA or ASU will be ranked in the top 25. In fact, probably only one Pac-12 team will be ranked: Oregon.
Not any other Pac-12 team....? Maybe one that's 2-0 in league...?
RE: McKee is #1 - CardinalSagehen - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 06:05 PM)washingtonismoney Wrote: From my understanding McKee also looked lackluster in public practices. Is that wrong?
I saw him throw a couple picks. Bad ones. But that's just practice, and who knows what he was being asked to do. His decision-making in games has been exceptionally good so far.
RE: McKee is #1 - Goose - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 09:05 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:Talk to Iverson about that. I am pretty sure the problem Shaw as concerned about was that McKee wasn't all that accurate in practice. Right now, in games, he is. It could have just been rust, but it was an issue in the spring for sure. It is interesting to me that people are totally willing to disregard data when it doesn't fit their model of events. I am quite confident Shaw really wanted McKee to be the starter. He isn't an idiot. He knows that having a younger QB with a bigger arm is better than a 5th year who can't throw deep. The fact Shaw didn't take the easy choice and choose McKee tells me the issues were real, not misguided loyalty to an experienced player. We have no way of knowing what happened during the summer, so how can we possibly say Shaw's decision was not justified?(09-19-2021, 06:05 PM)washingtonismoney Wrote: From my understanding McKee also looked lackluster in public practices. Is that wrong?
I saw him throw a couple picks. Bad ones. But that's just practice, and who knows what he was being asked to do. His decision-making in games has been exceptionally good so far.
RE: McKee is #1 - CardinalSagehen - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 09:41 PM)Goose Wrote:(09-19-2021, 09:05 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:Talk to Iverson about that. I am pretty sure the problem Shaw as concerned about was that McKee wasn't all that accurate in practice. Right now, in games, he is. It could have just been rust, but it was an issue in the spring for sure. It is interesting to me that people are totally willing to disregard data when it doesn't fit their model of events. I am quite confident Shaw really wanted McKee to be the starter. He isn't an idiot. He knows that having a younger QB with a bigger arm is better than a 5th year who can't throw deep. The fact Shaw didn't take the easy choice and choose McKee tells me the issues were real, not misguided loyalty to an experienced player. We have no way of knowing what happened during the summer, so how can we possibly say Shaw's decision was not justified?(09-19-2021, 06:05 PM)washingtonismoney Wrote: From my understanding McKee also looked lackluster in public practices. Is that wrong?
I saw him throw a couple picks. Bad ones. But that's just practice, and who knows what he was being asked to do. His decision-making in games has been exceptionally good so far.
I agree. As proof that McKee is human and therefore fallible, which most of us haven't seen in games, I found this in my camera roll from August 15. He underthrows Higgins in double-coverage and hits Williamson instead. It's just one throw, although I saw another one where he was trying to hit the TE over the middle with a little floater pass that was very ill-advised.
This isn't any kind of complete data set, but we really don't know what Shaw saw and can't start from the assumption that McKee was clearly superior in practice.
https://youtu.be/-toEkmAftMM
RE: McKee is #1 - SamuelMcF - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 09:02 PM)Mick Wrote:(09-19-2021, 01:25 AM)Austroturf Wrote:(09-19-2021, 12:29 AM)Mick Wrote:(09-18-2021, 10:30 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(09-18-2021, 09:43 PM)martyup Wrote: For the season, Tanner McKee has a QBR of 89.3. That ranks #1 in college football.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4685201/tanner-mckee
Wow! If he keeps that up he could come in 2nd in the Voldemort voting.
He's got three consecutive opponents ranked in the Top 25 coming up (#13 UCLA, #4 Oregon, #19 Arizona State). If he's still #1 in college football, he'll be a shoe in for the Top 25 for the Voldemort voting.
After yesterday's games, I don't think UCLA or ASU will be ranked in the top 25. In fact, probably only one Pac-12 team will be ranked: Oregon.
Not any other Pac-12 team....? Maybe one that's 2-0 in league...?
The only team that has played 2 conference games is 1-1 USC. Unless Vandy decided It Doesn't Mean More and defected to the west coast all of a sudden.
RE: McKee is #1 - BostonCard - 09-19-2021
Maybe he meant #15 BYU. After all, the Cougars have wins against Utah and ASU, so they would be 2-0 in the PAC-12.
Oregon is ranked #3, UCLA is ranked #24. That’s it for PAC-12 teams.
Among our other opponents, Notre Dame is ranked #12, and Kansas State is ranked #25.
BC
RE: McKee is #1 - TriangleTree - 09-20-2021
(09-19-2021, 10:25 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote: I agree. As proof that McKee is human and therefore fallible, which most of us haven't seen in games, I found this in my camera roll from August 15. He underthrows Higgins in double-coverage and hits Williamson instead. It's just one throw, although I saw another one where he was trying to hit the TE over the middle with a little floater pass that was very ill-advised.
Nothing to do with the thread other than your mention of Williamson
I happened to be at the game with my son and during the post win celebration, out of nowhere, Kendall ran over to him and handed him one of the Stanford embroidered towels the players use at the game, with a thank you and a big smile.
It made an already great day for him an awesome one. He has two fans for life, whatever he chooses to do.
RE: McKee is #1 - DC 86 - 09-20-2021
(09-19-2021, 10:51 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Maybe he meant #15 BYU. After all, the Cougars have wins against Utah and ASU, so they would be 2-0 in the PAC-12.
BC
Don't forget that they also beat Arizona in their opener; they are 3-0 vs the Pac-12.
RE: McKee is #1 - Bruce Wang - 09-20-2021
My theory is that Shaw weighs too much what he sees in practice. Remember the reports on our kicker that could consistently boom 50 yard field goals in practice, but had trouble with pressure situations? There's a pattern here where Shaw should have started the younger QB who could play when the bullets were flying when the older players could not: Hogan, Costello and now McKee. Increased pressure, speed and danger is the biggest factor as to who can make the jump to each higher level. Practice is deceiving on this front.
RE: McKee is #1 - BostonCard - 09-20-2021
(09-20-2021, 12:22 PM)Publius Wrote: Remember the reports on our kicker that could consistently boom 50 yard field goals in practice, but had trouble with pressure situations?
No, I don't. The three kickers who have kicked during the Shaw years are Conrad Ukropenia (2013 - 2016), Jet Toner (2017 - 2020), and Jordan Williamson (2011 - 2014). They rank 1st, 3rd, and 6th in Stanford's career field goal accuracy record books (82%, 79%, and 70%), respectively.
If you are talking about the new guy, he has three official field goal attempts; of which he nailed two and missed one (he also connected on a third field goal that was negated after Shaw accepted a penalty and went for it on fourth down). There's no evidence that Karty has trouble with pressure situations that I know of.
BC
RE: McKee is #1 - Papa John - 09-20-2021
Wasn't it Williamson who missed at least a couple of field goals at the end of the Fiesta Bowl loss to Oklahoma State? Then missed one (or two?) the next year versus Oregon but made the game-winner versus Oregon.
I'm going off of memory, so maybe I'm mistaken.
RE: McKee is #1 - BostonCard - 09-20-2021
Williamson missed three field goals in the FIesta (he was 1/4), including the potential game-winning field goal as time expired (35 yards) and a FG in OT (43 yards) that would have probably meant that we would have gone to a second OT after OSU made theirs; he also missed a 41 yarder on the first drive of the game. He made a 30 yarder.
Maybe that is what the poster was referring to. Overall, however, Williamson was a 70% field goal kicker, and as you point out, he made the game-winning 37-yard field goal in overtime the next year against Oregon (and your memory is correct, he did miss one earlier, but it was a 49 yarder early in the fourth quarter).
BC
RE: McKee is #1 - Papa John - 09-20-2021
Thanks for filling in the blanks, BC. Right, my sense was that Williamson took the Fiesta Bowl loss on himself, but after he made that not-a-chip-shot OT field goal versus Oregon, the burden was lifted from his shoulders. I think he even got the game ball from David Shaw, but maybe that was for a different game.
But maybe there were other pressure situations, outside of the Fiesta Bowl, where Williamson didn't come through. But I really don't feel like looking them up.