[CrazedZooChimp]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15867.msg174877#msg174877 date=1475782674]
RJ over on the Bootleg has a good breakdown of the game, if you can brave revisiting it, and a good assessment on how how much was the OL's fault and how much was Burns' fault.

http://www.scout.com/college/stanford/st...ing-triage

So Burns averaged 2.1 seconds on the plays where successfully got the pass off to a receiver.  On the sacks, he held the ball for an average of 3.01 seconds.

My sense is to agree with these conclusions, but for some reason the article isn't opening for me right now (either from your link or from the bootleg).

Of course the intervals are quite small and getting the numbers correct takes some care. Did RJ time the pass plays himself?
A comparison to other games would make this far more interesting, but it's not quite fair to tell other people they have to go do more work.

I think the problem with rollouts is that they conflict with what are generally accepted passing principles; e.g., balance, set stance, shoulders in line with target, etc.

There are other problems as well. Rollouts shrink the field available to the receivers by typically something more than half. No college QB is generally going to be able to roll out to his right and either see or throw the ball to the left hand side of the field.

They certainly have their uses, but come with significant trade offs.



----------------

[/quote]

The other problems with roll outs are that they take time (as does play action), and if the defense can get pressure by only rushing 4, there is probably a free linebacker who can more or less spy your QB.

Also, aren't UWs DBs like some of the best in the country? I think it's fair to say that for the most part they probably had pretty tight coverage on our WRs more often than not (without reviewing the film myself). I'm inclined not to blame Burns much for the performance.

Although I would argue that Luck was a college QB who could throw across his body. But he was Luck.

[CrazedZooChimp]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15867.msg174877#msg174877 date=1475782674]
RJ over on the Bootleg has a good breakdown of the game, if you can brave revisiting it, and a good assessment on how how much was the OL's fault and how much was Burns' fault.

http://www.scout.com/college/stanford/st...ing-triage

So Burns averaged 2.1 seconds on the plays where successfully got the pass off to a receiver.  On the sacks, he held the ball for an average of 3.01 seconds.

My sense is to agree with these conclusions, but for some reason the article isn't opening for me right now (either from your link or from the bootleg).

Of course the intervals are quite small and getting the numbers correct takes some care. Did RJ time the pass plays himself?
A comparison to other games would make this far more interesting, but it's not quite fair to tell other people they have to go do more work.

I think the problem with rollouts is that they conflict with what are generally accepted passing principles; e.g., balance, set stance, shoulders in line with target, etc.

There are other problems as well. Rollouts shrink the field available to the receivers by typically something more than half. No college QB is generally going to be able to roll out to his right and either see or throw the ball to the left hand side of the field.

They certainly have their uses, but come with significant trade offs.



----------------

[/quote]

The other problems with roll outs are that they take time (as does play action), and if the defense can get pressure by only rushing 4, there is probably a free linebacker who can more or less spy your QB.

Also, aren't UWs DBs like some of the best in the country? I think it's fair to say that for the most part they probably had pretty tight coverage on our WRs more often than not (without reviewing the film myself). I'm inclined not to blame Burns much for the performance.

Although I would argue that Luck was a college QB who could throw across his body. But he was Luck.