[lex24]

Under very trying circumstances. Good for him. I don't like revolving QBs. And I think KJ has the better upside. But Keller was good Sat night. Hit a bunch of key third down passes. Was accurate. No mistakes. Didn't take a sack. Made good use of read option.

[lex24]

Under very trying circumstances. Good for him. I don't like revolving QBs. And I think KJ has the better upside. But Keller was good Sat night. Hit a bunch of key third down passes. Was accurate. No mistakes. Didn't take a sack. Made good use of read option.

[Redrum]

...how tough Utah's defense has been on us in the last three games, Chryst did a good job. Came out with a win, which is more than our previous starting QBs could do. But there were times when his physical limitations (either nagging injury effects or innate physical limitations) seemed apparent.  I don't know why Utah has always seemed to be really tough on defense compared to even some higher ranked teams we've played, but it was great to break their mojo at home.  The loss of two defense starters is going to be bad, baaad news against Oregon. That'll be my only in-person game in three years, of course.  Whoever is our QB for that game will be stellar I have to hope.

And, as noted,  Utah's OC was former Kal QB Troy Taylor.  The transitive property of Weenie-ness one hopes.

[Redrum]

...how tough Utah's defense has been on us in the last three games, Chryst did a good job. Came out with a win, which is more than our previous starting QBs could do. But there were times when his physical limitations (either nagging injury effects or innate physical limitations) seemed apparent.  I don't know why Utah has always seemed to be really tough on defense compared to even some higher ranked teams we've played, but it was great to break their mojo at home.  The loss of two defense starters is going to be bad, baaad news against Oregon. That'll be my only in-person game in three years, of course.  Whoever is our QB for that game will be stellar I have to hope.

And, as noted,  Utah's OC was former Kal QB Troy Taylor.  The transitive property of Weenie-ness one hopes.

[martyup]

Hit a bunch of key third down passes.

Well, we were 4 for 13 on 3rd down.  He did throw some clutch conversions, however.

[martyup]

Hit a bunch of key third down passes.

Well, we were 4 for 13 on 3rd down.  He did throw some clutch conversions, however.

[Hurlburt88]

I think in first half KC was 7 of 10, and for the game was 7 of 14 . . . meaning 0 of 4 in 2nd half.  Is that right?  If so, seems like a tale of 2 halves for him

[Hurlburt88]

I think in first half KC was 7 of 10, and for the game was 7 of 14 . . . meaning 0 of 4 in 2nd half.  Is that right?  If so, seems like a tale of 2 halves for him

[CTcard]

I think in first half KC was 7 of 10, and for the game was 7 of 14 . . . meaning 0 of 4 in 2nd half.  Is that right?  If so, seems like a tale of 2 halves for him

My count has Chryst 7/12 in the first half, 1/3 in the second.

Costello at 3/7 first half, 2/2 in the second.

The official play by play has one 25 yard completion by Chryst to Irwin in the second half attributed to Costello.

[CTcard]

I think in first half KC was 7 of 10, and for the game was 7 of 14 . . . meaning 0 of 4 in 2nd half.  Is that right?  If so, seems like a tale of 2 halves for him

My count has Chryst 7/12 in the first half, 1/3 in the second.

Costello at 3/7 first half, 2/2 in the second.

The official play by play has one 25 yard completion by Chryst to Irwin in the second half attributed to Costello.

[winflop]

Chryst 7/14 for 106, 62.2 QBR
Costello 6/10 for 82, 79.3 QBR

[winflop]

Chryst 7/14 for 106, 62.2 QBR
Costello 6/10 for 82, 79.3 QBR

[Phogge]

Taylor coached Browning to 222 TD's in HS.

[Phogge]

Taylor coached Browning to 222 TD's in HS.

[CTcard]

Chryst 7/14 for 106, 62.2 QBR
Costello 6/10 for 82, 79.3 QBR

As I stated above those numbers appear to be incorrect. One should transfer 1 attempt, 1 completion, and 25 yards from Costello to Chryst.

I guess it is possible that they also flipped one the other way, but I couldn't find it (though I was going off my own tape of the FA1 broadcast, which didn't kick in until the start of the second quarter).

So, that would make the lines,
Chryst 8/15, 131, 0, 0  PER = 127
Costello 5/9  57, 0, 0  PER = 109
QBR = who knows - it's not a formula you can calculate for yourself.

[CTcard]

Chryst 7/14 for 106, 62.2 QBR
Costello 6/10 for 82, 79.3 QBR

As I stated above those numbers appear to be incorrect. One should transfer 1 attempt, 1 completion, and 25 yards from Costello to Chryst.

I guess it is possible that they also flipped one the other way, but I couldn't find it (though I was going off my own tape of the FA1 broadcast, which didn't kick in until the start of the second quarter).

So, that would make the lines,
Chryst 8/15, 131, 0, 0  PER = 127
Costello 5/9  57, 0, 0  PER = 109
QBR = who knows - it's not a formula you can calculate for yourself.

[terry]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=17624.msg205321#msg205321 date=1507550961]
Chryst 7/14 for 106, 62.2 QBR
Costello 6/10 for 82, 79.3 QBR

As I stated above those numbers appear to be incorrect. One should transfer 1 attempt, 1 completion, and 25 yards from Costello to Chryst.

I guess it is possible that they also flipped one the other way, but I couldn't find it (though I was going off my own tape of the FA1 broadcast, which didn't kick in until the start of the second quarter).

So, that would make the lines,
Chryst 8/15, 131, 0, 0  PER = 127
Costello 5/9  57, 0, 0  PER = 109
QBR = who knows - it's not a formula you can calculate for yourself.
[/quote]

Yep, there was a mistake in the stats as originally published. The box score and play-by-play have been corrected on Stanford's website. The box score and play-by-play on ESPN still are wrong.

[terry]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=17624.msg205321#msg205321 date=1507550961]
Chryst 7/14 for 106, 62.2 QBR
Costello 6/10 for 82, 79.3 QBR

As I stated above those numbers appear to be incorrect. One should transfer 1 attempt, 1 completion, and 25 yards from Costello to Chryst.

I guess it is possible that they also flipped one the other way, but I couldn't find it (though I was going off my own tape of the FA1 broadcast, which didn't kick in until the start of the second quarter).

So, that would make the lines,
Chryst 8/15, 131, 0, 0  PER = 127
Costello 5/9  57, 0, 0  PER = 109
QBR = who knows - it's not a formula you can calculate for yourself.
[/quote]

Yep, there was a mistake in the stats as originally published. The box score and play-by-play have been corrected on Stanford's website. The box score and play-by-play on ESPN still are wrong.

[RedShift]

An important role of the QB is to energize the offense, impart confidence to the other 10 players, and move the chains consistently.  Irrespective passing and related stats, I've seen enough of both QBs to conclude (barring a massive backslide by Costello) that the offense is less likely to stagnate with Costello as QB. He may not have the command of the playbook, or the skill at pre-snap read, as Chryst. But I think that Costello gives a better chance for the Card to go 2-1 against Huskies, Cougs and Domers.

[RedShift]

An important role of the QB is to energize the offense, impart confidence to the other 10 players, and move the chains consistently.  Irrespective passing and related stats, I've seen enough of both QBs to conclude (barring a massive backslide by Costello) that the offense is less likely to stagnate with Costello as QB. He may not have the command of the playbook, or the skill at pre-snap read, as Chryst. But I think that Costello gives a better chance for the Card to go 2-1 against Huskies, Cougs and Domers.

[BostonCard]

An important role of the QB is to energize the offense, impart confidence to the other 10 players, and move the chains consistently.  Irrespective passing and related stats, I've seen enough of both QBs to conclude (barring a massive backslide by Costello) that the offense is less likely to stagnate with Costello as QB. He may not have the command of the playbook, or the skill at pre-snap read, as Chryst. But I think that Costello gives a better chance for the Card to go 2-1 against Huskies, Cougs and Domers.

Against this lies the fact that here are the drive results for each QB in the game against Utah
Costello: punt, missed FG, punt: 87 yards (29 yards per drive)
Chryst: FG, punt, TD, FG, FG, TD, punt, punt, kneeldowns: 302 yards (37.8 yards per drive, excluding the end of game kneeldowns)

I don't know how that data would be consistent with an offense that is less likely to stagnate under Costello than Chryst.  Chryst led scoring drives of 74, 71, and 71 yards; Costello's longest drive was the 57 yard drive that ended in a missed field goal.  His other two drives were 3 plays, -1 yards and 5 plays, 31 yards.

The data is different if you look at UCLA, but against Utah, the offense worked better with Chryst behind center, both moving the ball further and scoring more.

BC

[BostonCard]

An important role of the QB is to energize the offense, impart confidence to the other 10 players, and move the chains consistently.  Irrespective passing and related stats, I've seen enough of both QBs to conclude (barring a massive backslide by Costello) that the offense is less likely to stagnate with Costello as QB. He may not have the command of the playbook, or the skill at pre-snap read, as Chryst. But I think that Costello gives a better chance for the Card to go 2-1 against Huskies, Cougs and Domers.

Against this lies the fact that here are the drive results for each QB in the game against Utah
Costello: punt, missed FG, punt: 87 yards (29 yards per drive)
Chryst: FG, punt, TD, FG, FG, TD, punt, punt, kneeldowns: 302 yards (37.8 yards per drive, excluding the end of game kneeldowns)

I don't know how that data would be consistent with an offense that is less likely to stagnate under Costello than Chryst.  Chryst led scoring drives of 74, 71, and 71 yards; Costello's longest drive was the 57 yard drive that ended in a missed field goal.  His other two drives were 3 plays, -1 yards and 5 plays, 31 yards.

The data is different if you look at UCLA, but against Utah, the offense worked better with Chryst behind center, both moving the ball further and scoring more.

BC

[washingtonismoney]

You could argue, by the way, that the Utah game was Chryst's *best* performance -- he hasn't produced pretty well against a good defense on the road before. Given Chryst's general inconsistency over the course of almost a year now, I doubt it's the beginning of a trend. (And, even in his best performance, he was barely above a 50% completion rate -- granted, with a couple drops thrown in.) Still, notable.

[washingtonismoney]

You could argue, by the way, that the Utah game was Chryst's *best* performance -- he hasn't produced pretty well against a good defense on the road before. Given Chryst's general inconsistency over the course of almost a year now, I doubt it's the beginning of a trend. (And, even in his best performance, he was barely above a 50% completion rate -- granted, with a couple drops thrown in.) Still, notable.

[BostonCard]

Chryst did competently against USC, on the road.  15/28 (above 50%, if barely), 172 yards (6.1 ypa, which is meh), 2 TDs and 0 INTs.  His rating was 128.  I guess it is fair not to characterize that as producing "pretty well", but it wasn't bad either.  I think the problem is that Chryst hasn't had many opportunities to produce against a competent defense.  In fact, before this year, the only real competent defense he faced was UNC, in which he was playing pretty well until his injury (3/6 for 68 yards, 11.3 ypa, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER 200).

On the road/neutral games against competent defenses, we have:
UNC (Sun Bowl) very good in a very limited sample
@USC  passable
@SDSU awful
@Utah pretty good

Costello has an even smaller dataset of games against good defenses.  We basically have Utah and that's about it.

Lastly, I would characterize Costello's ceiling as unknown, rather than higher.

BC

[BostonCard]

Chryst did competently against USC, on the road.  15/28 (above 50%, if barely), 172 yards (6.1 ypa, which is meh), 2 TDs and 0 INTs.  His rating was 128.  I guess it is fair not to characterize that as producing "pretty well", but it wasn't bad either.  I think the problem is that Chryst hasn't had many opportunities to produce against a competent defense.  In fact, before this year, the only real competent defense he faced was UNC, in which he was playing pretty well until his injury (3/6 for 68 yards, 11.3 ypa, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER 200).

On the road/neutral games against competent defenses, we have:
UNC (Sun Bowl) very good in a very limited sample
@USC  passable
@SDSU awful
@Utah pretty good

Costello has an even smaller dataset of games against good defenses.  We basically have Utah and that's about it.

Lastly, I would characterize Costello's ceiling as unknown, rather than higher.

BC

[washingtonismoney]

Lastly, I would characterize Costello's ceiling as unknown, rather than higher.

BC

Hmmm, I would quibble. Nearly by definition -- in the sports sense -- if you have a ceiling it's unknown. (It's basically the "upper bound of realistic possibilities." That automatically introduces uncertainty: both in whether the athlete will reach that ceiling, and whether that's an accurate description at all. Unrealistic things happen reasonably frequently, right?)

Anyway, with that in mind, I think it's pretty fair to say Costello has a higher ceiling. We've seen nearly three-quarters of a season of Chryst's play by now, so we have a sense of his performance, both statistically and by eye. It's hard to imagine Chryst can get *way* better than he is now; for example, Hogan, who had some ups and downs, didn't get below 7.2 yards per attempt (in his redshirt freshman year's half-season) or 7.9 YPA (in his redshirt junior year). I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of QBs, of course, so if any examples of QBs playing as ... mediocre ... as Chryst has early in his career come to mind, please do mention him. Meanwhile Chryst is currently a redshirt junior. He's pretty experienced! I feel pretty confident in saying what we've seen is what we've got, with the caveat that he has some strong plays or even games where you get to thinking.

It's hard to fix *really* precisely what Costello's realistic ceiling is, by contrast. We've got at least some performance to go on. (Notably, Costello's four games have featured an equal number 60+% completion days as Chryst has in his career so far -- excluding cameo appearances for both.) He's a redshirt freshman; in general, they tend to have more upside than your random redshirt junior. He visually looks the part. So pretty comfortable in saying Costello has more potential than Chryst. How much more? I can't say. Costello could realistically be Sean Mannion, or he could also realistically be Kevin Hogan. (He could less realistically be even better.) But either option is comfortably better than Chryst's optimized season-long best -- at least that's my strong hunch.

[washingtonismoney]

Lastly, I would characterize Costello's ceiling as unknown, rather than higher.

BC

Hmmm, I would quibble. Nearly by definition -- in the sports sense -- if you have a ceiling it's unknown. (It's basically the "upper bound of realistic possibilities." That automatically introduces uncertainty: both in whether the athlete will reach that ceiling, and whether that's an accurate description at all. Unrealistic things happen reasonably frequently, right?)

Anyway, with that in mind, I think it's pretty fair to say Costello has a higher ceiling. We've seen nearly three-quarters of a season of Chryst's play by now, so we have a sense of his performance, both statistically and by eye. It's hard to imagine Chryst can get *way* better than he is now; for example, Hogan, who had some ups and downs, didn't get below 7.2 yards per attempt (in his redshirt freshman year's half-season) or 7.9 YPA (in his redshirt junior year). I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of QBs, of course, so if any examples of QBs playing as ... mediocre ... as Chryst has early in his career come to mind, please do mention him. Meanwhile Chryst is currently a redshirt junior. He's pretty experienced! I feel pretty confident in saying what we've seen is what we've got, with the caveat that he has some strong plays or even games where you get to thinking.

It's hard to fix *really* precisely what Costello's realistic ceiling is, by contrast. We've got at least some performance to go on. (Notably, Costello's four games have featured an equal number 60+% completion days as Chryst has in his career so far -- excluding cameo appearances for both.) He's a redshirt freshman; in general, they tend to have more upside than your random redshirt junior. He visually looks the part. So pretty comfortable in saying Costello has more potential than Chryst. How much more? I can't say. Costello could realistically be Sean Mannion, or he could also realistically be Kevin Hogan. (He could less realistically be even better.) But either option is comfortably better than Chryst's optimized season-long best -- at least that's my strong hunch.

[Hulk01]

I don't care about ceilings.  I care about beating Oregon. 

[Hulk01]

I don't care about ceilings.  I care about beating Oregon. 

[CTcard]

On the road/neutral games against competent defenses, we have:
UNC (Sun Bowl) very good in a very limited sample
@U$C  passable
@SDSU awful
@Utah pretty good

Costello has an even smaller dataset of games against good defenses.  We basically have Utah and that's about it.

Well, I'd have to go with BC on the numbers. I'd also go with Hulk that for this particular question, I don't much care about ceiling, I care about beating Oregon - then the next game, etc.

Chryst may have a small data set against decent defenses, but at this moment it is a bigger and better record than has Costello.
By the way, with the correction from the Utah game (that Terry confirmed), Costello is averaging 7.09 yds/att, Chryst 7.11 yds/att. Essentially identical, though Chryst has played a higher percentage of the time against good defenses.


I also think it is silly to claim games against lesser opponents simply don't count, there just aren't enough data points to throw most away. In addition, one can observe what a QB actually does despite the quality of the defense. Throwing the ball into a tight window, throwing the ball into the feet of a receiver, can both be evaluated despite the defense.

Costello is clearly a smoother athlete than Chryst. He moves well in the pocket, has a fine throwing motion, and runs pretty well (and even seemed to start getting the idea that he needs to actually make a read on the read-option).
I think this is the overwhelming thing the pro-Costello folks see.

The coaches use more of the playbook with Chryst.
And the plays Costello does run seem designed to limit his options. The rollouts appear to have basically one receiving option. I don't think I have seen him do play-action out of the I (turn his back on the defense).

Neither is a particularly accurate passer.

There is also reason to believe both can improve.
Costello, of course, has barely played.
Chryst improved during his time playing last season.
I think Chryst may have taken a step back from then to the start of this season, but still after averaging 6.7 yds/att last year is currently at 7.1 yds/att.


In the end I would choose Costello at this moment. I think his better movement matters, I like the ball out of his hand more, and I liked the fact that he wasn't overwhelmed by Utah and managed to move the ball (at least once).
But, the case for Costello might be wishful thinking, and I can see the argument for Chryst. Plus, seeing the guys every day in practice is very important information that I don't have.

[CTcard]

On the road/neutral games against competent defenses, we have:
UNC (Sun Bowl) very good in a very limited sample
@U$C  passable
@SDSU awful
@Utah pretty good

Costello has an even smaller dataset of games against good defenses.  We basically have Utah and that's about it.

Well, I'd have to go with BC on the numbers. I'd also go with Hulk that for this particular question, I don't much care about ceiling, I care about beating Oregon - then the next game, etc.

Chryst may have a small data set against decent defenses, but at this moment it is a bigger and better record than has Costello.
By the way, with the correction from the Utah game (that Terry confirmed), Costello is averaging 7.09 yds/att, Chryst 7.11 yds/att. Essentially identical, though Chryst has played a higher percentage of the time against good defenses.


I also think it is silly to claim games against lesser opponents simply don't count, there just aren't enough data points to throw most away. In addition, one can observe what a QB actually does despite the quality of the defense. Throwing the ball into a tight window, throwing the ball into the feet of a receiver, can both be evaluated despite the defense.

Costello is clearly a smoother athlete than Chryst. He moves well in the pocket, has a fine throwing motion, and runs pretty well (and even seemed to start getting the idea that he needs to actually make a read on the read-option).
I think this is the overwhelming thing the pro-Costello folks see.

The coaches use more of the playbook with Chryst.
And the plays Costello does run seem designed to limit his options. The rollouts appear to have basically one receiving option. I don't think I have seen him do play-action out of the I (turn his back on the defense).

Neither is a particularly accurate passer.

There is also reason to believe both can improve.
Costello, of course, has barely played.
Chryst improved during his time playing last season.
I think Chryst may have taken a step back from then to the start of this season, but still after averaging 6.7 yds/att last year is currently at 7.1 yds/att.


In the end I would choose Costello at this moment. I think his better movement matters, I like the ball out of his hand more, and I liked the fact that he wasn't overwhelmed by Utah and managed to move the ball (at least once).
But, the case for Costello might be wishful thinking, and I can see the argument for Chryst. Plus, seeing the guys every day in practice is very important information that I don't have.

[needle]

If we were to make a highlight reel of the best QB play in 2017, how many plays by Chryst vs. plays by Costello? Chryst has had a few good moments, but I think Costello would have the edge.

[needle]

If we were to make a highlight reel of the best QB play in 2017, how many plays by Chryst vs. plays by Costello? Chryst has had a few good moments, but I think Costello would have the edge.

[BostonCard]

Very good points all, CTCard, as usual.

I think Chryst may have taken a step back from then to the start of this season, but still after averaging 6.7 yds/att last year is currently at 7.1 yds/att.

Rhetorical question... could him tearing his ACL in the final game last season have played a role in his regression?

I don't buy the idea that Chryst is necessarily closer to his ceiling than Costello.  Andrew Luck made a big jump in efficiency after a season with the offense:
2009 56% completion, PER of 143
2010 71% completion, PER of 170

Kevin Hogan made an even bigger jump in efficiency, but it was after two and a half seasons running the offense:
2014 7.9 ypa, PER of 145
2015 9.4 ypa, PER of 171

Both players saw a > 25 point improvement in PER.  Chryst has 9 complete games under his belt.  His combined stats from last year and this are:
2016 77/136, 56.6%, 905 yards, 6.7 ypa, 10 TD, 2 INT, PER 133.8
2017 47/89, 52.8%, 640 yards, 7.19 ypa, 4 TD, 2 INT, PER 124.5
total 124/225 (55.1%), 1545 yrds 6.9 ypa, 14 TD, 4 INT, PER 129.8

Chryst is starting from a lower baseline than Hogan and Luck did, but if he has a similar improvement, a 10 percentage point improvement in completion percentage (to the mid-60's), a 1 ypa improvement to about 8 ypa and a PER improvement of 25 points to ~155 is all reasonably attainable for Chryst, given precedent.  A rating of 155 would put him in the top 25 of QB's, and 8 ypa would place him around 30th.

And keep in mind that this is against a baseline of less than a year in the system, and with several games after a recent severe knee injury.

BC

[BostonCard]

Very good points all, CTCard, as usual.

I think Chryst may have taken a step back from then to the start of this season, but still after averaging 6.7 yds/att last year is currently at 7.1 yds/att.

Rhetorical question... could him tearing his ACL in the final game last season have played a role in his regression?

I don't buy the idea that Chryst is necessarily closer to his ceiling than Costello.  Andrew Luck made a big jump in efficiency after a season with the offense:
2009 56% completion, PER of 143
2010 71% completion, PER of 170

Kevin Hogan made an even bigger jump in efficiency, but it was after two and a half seasons running the offense:
2014 7.9 ypa, PER of 145
2015 9.4 ypa, PER of 171

Both players saw a > 25 point improvement in PER.  Chryst has 9 complete games under his belt.  His combined stats from last year and this are:
2016 77/136, 56.6%, 905 yards, 6.7 ypa, 10 TD, 2 INT, PER 133.8
2017 47/89, 52.8%, 640 yards, 7.19 ypa, 4 TD, 2 INT, PER 124.5
total 124/225 (55.1%), 1545 yrds 6.9 ypa, 14 TD, 4 INT, PER 129.8

Chryst is starting from a lower baseline than Hogan and Luck did, but if he has a similar improvement, a 10 percentage point improvement in completion percentage (to the mid-60's), a 1 ypa improvement to about 8 ypa and a PER improvement of 25 points to ~155 is all reasonably attainable for Chryst, given precedent.  A rating of 155 would put him in the top 25 of QB's, and 8 ypa would place him around 30th.

And keep in mind that this is against a baseline of less than a year in the system, and with several games after a recent severe knee injury.

BC

[washingtonismoney]

Costello is clearly a smoother athlete than Chryst. He moves well in the pocket, has a fine throwing motion, and runs pretty well (and even seemed to start getting the idea that he needs to actually make a read on the read-option).

Given the number of times both Costello and Chryst pulled on the read-option against Utah -- versus barely at all (if at all) early in the season -- I have a hunch this was a deliberate coaching point designed to reduce the risk of injury earlier in the season. Early in the season, you have one guy coming back from injury (Chryst), one guy who once was competent but now is seemingly unable to play even decently (Burns) and one question mark (Costello). Now you believe Costello is at worst a competent backup and possibly much more. And Chryst, certainly, is also at worst a competent backup. So allowing the QBs to scamper a bit more adds a dimension to the offense with (from a strategic perspective) minimal risk.

I think you're correct, though, that the coaches have been simplifying the offense for Costello.

PARAPHRASE:...some arguments to the effect of Stanford QBs improving over the course of their career

Food for thought, but ultimately I disagree BC.

On the Luck point, let's keep in mind that while his completion percentage was quite low as a freshman, I view that more as a designed feature of the offense -- favoring deep bombs -- rather than a commentary on his actual passing ability at the time. His YPA between freshman and sophomore years was identical. The big difference, of course, was having Toby Gerhart versus not having Toby Gerhart. With Toby, efficiency in the passing game is a bit like adding yet another romantic star to Love Actually, or adding another comedian to Airplane!: it's kind of superfluous. Without Toby, well, you need to figure out where your low-variance gains are going to come from. "Andrew Luck" is as good a place as any.

With respect to Hogan, I think his career is ambiguous. Like Luck, he was used as a bomb-thrower in 2013 -- meaning his brobdingnagian gain in YPA (from 7.2 as a freshman to 8.9 as a sophomore) is a truer mark of his performance changing. I think ESPN deleted the page outlining this fact, but Hogan was one of the most efficient deep throwers in the country that year.

Given that perspective, Hogan's 2012-2014 stretch is less continuity than roller coaster: first year operating conservatively with only a few weapons; markedly improved gunslinger his second; and a bunch of on- and off-the-field travails undermined him in his third year. So for me his 2015 year may be less "brobdingnagian improvement from experience" and more "regression to the mean."

But I'll concede my interpretations aren't clear-cut ones. The best argument here remains that Costello is younger. Chryst, a redshirt junior, is older than your previous examples; Costello, in the same age range as Luck and Hogan. That is, if experience really helps a QB -- helps him to a fantastic degree -- why wouldn't we favor Costello, who can potentially reap multiple jumps from experience rather than just one? If that's true, Chryst has to be much better than Costello to favor him in the present. And he's not, I think we can all agree.

That being said, one nice point on the QB play: Utah is a very good passing defense. According to Bill Connelly's stat profiles, the Utes surrender a 32.7% success rate through the year. By my count Stanford QBs got up to 41% on Saturday. Whether that's simply because both Costello and Chryst played reasonably well, or it's the offensive line doing a very good job, or something else, I can't complain.

[washingtonismoney]

Costello is clearly a smoother athlete than Chryst. He moves well in the pocket, has a fine throwing motion, and runs pretty well (and even seemed to start getting the idea that he needs to actually make a read on the read-option).

Given the number of times both Costello and Chryst pulled on the read-option against Utah -- versus barely at all (if at all) early in the season -- I have a hunch this was a deliberate coaching point designed to reduce the risk of injury earlier in the season. Early in the season, you have one guy coming back from injury (Chryst), one guy who once was competent but now is seemingly unable to play even decently (Burns) and one question mark (Costello). Now you believe Costello is at worst a competent backup and possibly much more. And Chryst, certainly, is also at worst a competent backup. So allowing the QBs to scamper a bit more adds a dimension to the offense with (from a strategic perspective) minimal risk.

I think you're correct, though, that the coaches have been simplifying the offense for Costello.

PARAPHRASE:...some arguments to the effect of Stanford QBs improving over the course of their career

Food for thought, but ultimately I disagree BC.

On the Luck point, let's keep in mind that while his completion percentage was quite low as a freshman, I view that more as a designed feature of the offense -- favoring deep bombs -- rather than a commentary on his actual passing ability at the time. His YPA between freshman and sophomore years was identical. The big difference, of course, was having Toby Gerhart versus not having Toby Gerhart. With Toby, efficiency in the passing game is a bit like adding yet another romantic star to Love Actually, or adding another comedian to Airplane!: it's kind of superfluous. Without Toby, well, you need to figure out where your low-variance gains are going to come from. "Andrew Luck" is as good a place as any.

With respect to Hogan, I think his career is ambiguous. Like Luck, he was used as a bomb-thrower in 2013 -- meaning his brobdingnagian gain in YPA (from 7.2 as a freshman to 8.9 as a sophomore) is a truer mark of his performance changing. I think ESPN deleted the page outlining this fact, but Hogan was one of the most efficient deep throwers in the country that year.

Given that perspective, Hogan's 2012-2014 stretch is less continuity than roller coaster: first year operating conservatively with only a few weapons; markedly improved gunslinger his second; and a bunch of on- and off-the-field travails undermined him in his third year. So for me his 2015 year may be less "brobdingnagian improvement from experience" and more "regression to the mean."

But I'll concede my interpretations aren't clear-cut ones. The best argument here remains that Costello is younger. Chryst, a redshirt junior, is older than your previous examples; Costello, in the same age range as Luck and Hogan. That is, if experience really helps a QB -- helps him to a fantastic degree -- why wouldn't we favor Costello, who can potentially reap multiple jumps from experience rather than just one? If that's true, Chryst has to be much better than Costello to favor him in the present. And he's not, I think we can all agree.

That being said, one nice point on the QB play: Utah is a very good passing defense. According to Bill Connelly's stat profiles, the Utes surrender a 32.7% success rate through the year. By my count Stanford QBs got up to 41% on Saturday. Whether that's simply because both Costello and Chryst played reasonably well, or it's the offensive line doing a very good job, or something else, I can't complain.

[BostonCard]

Yes, what Hogan was asked to do changed year-to-year made a difference.  Still, if you look at PER, you get:
2012: 148
2013: 151
2014: 145
2015: 171

I think he gets dinged a lot in 2014 because our offense underperformed overall, and there was the expectation that he would continue to improve, and he didn't (also 2014 was really two seasons: the first 8 or so games, and the last 5).  But clearly, regardless of which year you take as a baseline, he jumped after 2 1/2 years as the starter.  There was no comparison between 2015 Hogan and any other version of Hogan.

On Luck, his usage increased dramatically between 2009 and 2010 (372 vs. 288 attempted passes).  Usually, when usage goes up, stats go down somewhat, since the defense is less geared to stopping the run.  Gerhart's presence in 2009 should have made Luck's job easier.  Basically, give the ball to Toby on first and second down so that you rarely face a third and long, and occasionally play action pass when the defense is stacking the box and hit a receiver in single coverage (or even uncovered).

I agree Costello is younger, and that ought to give him a longer runway to launch, if you assume that at some point after a year or two behind center the proverbial "light" will go off, and IF two quarterbacks are otherwise equally capable at the moment, then it makes sense to play the younger one.  I mean, if it is going to take a year and a half for the big jump in performance to happen to Chryst, then you only see an efficient Chryst for one year.  If it takes two and a half years, you don't get to see it at all.  On the other hand, if it takes Costello a year and a half to approach his ceiling, then you get to see him play at a high level for two years.  But it seems that the coaches don't see them as equiavalent players at this point.  I think the fact that Chryst can run the whole offense probably is a big factor.  I also think that the coaches discounted some of his poor performances (really only SDSU, and the first couple series against UCLA) as temporary, and perhaps injury related.

BC

[BostonCard]

Yes, what Hogan was asked to do changed year-to-year made a difference.  Still, if you look at PER, you get:
2012: 148
2013: 151
2014: 145
2015: 171

I think he gets dinged a lot in 2014 because our offense underperformed overall, and there was the expectation that he would continue to improve, and he didn't (also 2014 was really two seasons: the first 8 or so games, and the last 5).  But clearly, regardless of which year you take as a baseline, he jumped after 2 1/2 years as the starter.  There was no comparison between 2015 Hogan and any other version of Hogan.

On Luck, his usage increased dramatically between 2009 and 2010 (372 vs. 288 attempted passes).  Usually, when usage goes up, stats go down somewhat, since the defense is less geared to stopping the run.  Gerhart's presence in 2009 should have made Luck's job easier.  Basically, give the ball to Toby on first and second down so that you rarely face a third and long, and occasionally play action pass when the defense is stacking the box and hit a receiver in single coverage (or even uncovered).

I agree Costello is younger, and that ought to give him a longer runway to launch, if you assume that at some point after a year or two behind center the proverbial "light" will go off, and IF two quarterbacks are otherwise equally capable at the moment, then it makes sense to play the younger one.  I mean, if it is going to take a year and a half for the big jump in performance to happen to Chryst, then you only see an efficient Chryst for one year.  If it takes two and a half years, you don't get to see it at all.  On the other hand, if it takes Costello a year and a half to approach his ceiling, then you get to see him play at a high level for two years.  But it seems that the coaches don't see them as equiavalent players at this point.  I think the fact that Chryst can run the whole offense probably is a big factor.  I also think that the coaches discounted some of his poor performances (really only SDSU, and the first couple series against UCLA) as temporary, and perhaps injury related.

BC