11-03-2017, 01:40 PM
The big difference is that in 2012, none of the QB's had any meaningful game experience, and as spectators, we had essentially no in game information about any of the QBs. Nunes had 2 passes, 1 completion for seven yards in 2010 as the third string QB behind Luck and Loukas (between them, backup QB's attempted 7 passes). Nottingham was the backup in 2011, but again, got very few snaps (5 completions in 8 attempts, for 78 yards and 1 TD). Nunes did not attempt a pass in 2011. Hogan, of course, redshirted in 2011.
So, we had three QB's with all of 7 passes attempted between them. Pretty much any information about them came from practices, spring games, and their recruiting hype, and I suspect that the reason that people liked Nottingham (beyond not being Nunes) was that he had the highest recruiting profile of the three (per Scout, Nunes was 4*, 10th ranked QB in 2009; Nottingham was 4*, 7th ranked QB in 2010; Hogan was 3*, 9th ranked QB in 2011), despite not much of a difference between them.
Coming into this year, we had much more information about Burns and Chryst, with a year of starting experience between them. Burns had 167 pass attempts last year in 7 starts; Chryst had 133 in 6 starts. So unlike 2012, when all three QB's were essentially unknown qualities, in 2013 two of the quarterbacks were known qualities. Burns was 4-3 as a starter, had a PER of 120, but his production declined dramatically after the Kansas State game, and especially against Notre Dame and Colorado, both sub-100 PER games where he had no touchdowns and 4 interceptions combined. Chryst was 6-0 as a starter, and his PER was 133, though he played a much easier schedule than Burns. Still, he showed improvement from Arizona/Oregon State (both sub-100 PER games) to the last four games, where had pass efficiencies of 150 or higher in each. Against a decent North Carolina team, he was playing well until his injury. Although many people on this board maintain that his stats were inflated by playing against teams with poor defenses, and saw a bunch of red flags at the time, I think most of us were concerned about having to start the year without him, and were relieved when he was cleared to play.
What we did not have much actual information to go on was how Costello would do in game situations. That was answered through his solid efforts against UCLA, ASU, and a couple of drives against Utah. I still am not sure we have enough data points to be make a full assessment, but I concur with everyone here that Chryst is simply too inconsistent. I hope Costello is better.
With regards to Mills, we will see.
I would imagine that if Costello plays well, Chryst will be in a similar position that Burns was prior to the start of this season. Chryst might want to try the graduate transfer route; maybe a different system or a fresh start might work better for him. He may want to stay at Stanford; as he more than anyone knows how fragile the QB position can be and how easy it is to go from back-up to starter back to back-up. Or he may decide to go on with his life. No matter what he decides, I wish him well.
BC
So, we had three QB's with all of 7 passes attempted between them. Pretty much any information about them came from practices, spring games, and their recruiting hype, and I suspect that the reason that people liked Nottingham (beyond not being Nunes) was that he had the highest recruiting profile of the three (per Scout, Nunes was 4*, 10th ranked QB in 2009; Nottingham was 4*, 7th ranked QB in 2010; Hogan was 3*, 9th ranked QB in 2011), despite not much of a difference between them.
Coming into this year, we had much more information about Burns and Chryst, with a year of starting experience between them. Burns had 167 pass attempts last year in 7 starts; Chryst had 133 in 6 starts. So unlike 2012, when all three QB's were essentially unknown qualities, in 2013 two of the quarterbacks were known qualities. Burns was 4-3 as a starter, had a PER of 120, but his production declined dramatically after the Kansas State game, and especially against Notre Dame and Colorado, both sub-100 PER games where he had no touchdowns and 4 interceptions combined. Chryst was 6-0 as a starter, and his PER was 133, though he played a much easier schedule than Burns. Still, he showed improvement from Arizona/Oregon State (both sub-100 PER games) to the last four games, where had pass efficiencies of 150 or higher in each. Against a decent North Carolina team, he was playing well until his injury. Although many people on this board maintain that his stats were inflated by playing against teams with poor defenses, and saw a bunch of red flags at the time, I think most of us were concerned about having to start the year without him, and were relieved when he was cleared to play.
What we did not have much actual information to go on was how Costello would do in game situations. That was answered through his solid efforts against UCLA, ASU, and a couple of drives against Utah. I still am not sure we have enough data points to be make a full assessment, but I concur with everyone here that Chryst is simply too inconsistent. I hope Costello is better.
With regards to Mills, we will see.
I would imagine that if Costello plays well, Chryst will be in a similar position that Burns was prior to the start of this season. Chryst might want to try the graduate transfer route; maybe a different system or a fresh start might work better for him. He may want to stay at Stanford; as he more than anyone knows how fragile the QB position can be and how easy it is to go from back-up to starter back to back-up. Or he may decide to go on with his life. No matter what he decides, I wish him well.
BC