[JohnR34231]

Interesting list of QB alma maters, but Joe Burrow is missing so I'm not sure I trust it. Kevin Hogan is on the Bengals practice squad but is poised to move up to backup given the injury to Burrow and possible unavailability of Brandon Allen.

As far as incentives go, I think that Stanford's main selling point is the 40-year decision. So why push that aside?

I don't think we should push it aside. However, I'm afraid that the cold hard truth is that a lot of top drawer recruits won't want to come to Stanford if they think going to another school gives them a better path to the NFL.

[JohnR34231]

Interesting list of QB alma maters, but Joe Burrow is missing so I'm not sure I trust it. Kevin Hogan is on the Bengals practice squad but is poised to move up to backup given the injury to Burrow and possible unavailability of Brandon Allen.

As far as incentives go, I think that Stanford's main selling point is the 40-year decision. So why push that aside?

I don't think we should push it aside. However, I'm afraid that the cold hard truth is that a lot of top drawer recruits won't want to come to Stanford if they think going to another school gives them a better path to the NFL.

[cardcrimson]

Interesting list of QB alma maters, but Joe Burrow is missing so I'm not sure I trust it. Kevin Hogan is on the Bengals practice squad but is poised to move up to backup given the injury to Burrow and possible unavailability of Brandon Allen.

As far as incentives go, I think that Stanford's main selling point is the 40-year decision. So why push that aside?

Burrow's not on the list because he's out for the year (I presume). Garoppolo isn't on the list, either.

[cardcrimson]

Interesting list of QB alma maters, but Joe Burrow is missing so I'm not sure I trust it. Kevin Hogan is on the Bengals practice squad but is poised to move up to backup given the injury to Burrow and possible unavailability of Brandon Allen.

As far as incentives go, I think that Stanford's main selling point is the 40-year decision. So why push that aside?

Burrow's not on the list because he's out for the year (I presume). Garoppolo isn't on the list, either.

[teejers1]

As far as incentives go, I think that Stanford's main selling point is the 40-year decision. So why push that aside?

True . . . but remember when it wasn't necessarily the "main selling point" - i.e., when you could come to Stanford and play for CFP/NY6 Bowls?

Squandered.

[teejers1]

As far as incentives go, I think that Stanford's main selling point is the 40-year decision. So why push that aside?

True . . . but remember when it wasn't necessarily the "main selling point" - i.e., when you could come to Stanford and play for CFP/NY6 Bowls?

Squandered.

[Papa John]

We'll have to agree to disagree, teejers1. I think that academics/40-year decision should always be *the* main criterion presented to Stanford's recruits. Stanford has never been in the CFP, so I'm not sure how that could be considered a factor. We almost won the Pac-12 championship game in 2017, lost close games to UW and WSU and finished a game back in the north in 2018, and had a disastrous 2019/beginning of 2020. As far as NY6 bowls, I continue to believe that Shaw has the creds to convince recruits that he will turn the ship around. He deserves the opportunity to try, so I'm not willing to admit at this point that Stanford's football future has been squandered.

[Papa John]

We'll have to agree to disagree, teejers1. I think that academics/40-year decision should always be *the* main criterion presented to Stanford's recruits. Stanford has never been in the CFP, so I'm not sure how that could be considered a factor. We almost won the Pac-12 championship game in 2017, lost close games to UW and WSU and finished a game back in the north in 2018, and had a disastrous 2019/beginning of 2020. As far as NY6 bowls, I continue to believe that Shaw has the creds to convince recruits that he will turn the ship around. He deserves the opportunity to try, so I'm not willing to admit at this point that Stanford's football future has been squandered.

[cardcrimson]

We'll have to agree to disagree, teejers1. I think that academics/40-year decision should always be *the* main criterion presented to Stanford's recruits. Stanford has never been in the CFP, so I'm not sure how that could be considered a factor. We almost won the Pac-12 championship game in 2017, lost close games to UW and WSU and finished a game back in the north in 2018, and had a disastrous 2019/beginning of 2020. As far as NY6 bowls, I continue to believe that Shaw has the creds to convince recruits that he will turn the ship around. He deserves the opportunity to try, so I'm not willing to admit at this point that Stanford's football future has been squandered.

Back to the original question, has Mills done enough to impress the NFL. I'm not a QB expert, or even an armchair QB expert. However, I have to look at the track record of QBs recently at Stanford and their success at the next level. Not very impressive at all. If Mills has a shot, it will be with a team that can afford time to develop him, doubtful he'll be ready to step in as Burrows, Herbert, and Tua have done. . . .

[cardcrimson]

We'll have to agree to disagree, teejers1. I think that academics/40-year decision should always be *the* main criterion presented to Stanford's recruits. Stanford has never been in the CFP, so I'm not sure how that could be considered a factor. We almost won the Pac-12 championship game in 2017, lost close games to UW and WSU and finished a game back in the north in 2018, and had a disastrous 2019/beginning of 2020. As far as NY6 bowls, I continue to believe that Shaw has the creds to convince recruits that he will turn the ship around. He deserves the opportunity to try, so I'm not willing to admit at this point that Stanford's football future has been squandered.

Back to the original question, has Mills done enough to impress the NFL. I'm not a QB expert, or even an armchair QB expert. However, I have to look at the track record of QBs recently at Stanford and their success at the next level. Not very impressive at all. If Mills has a shot, it will be with a team that can afford time to develop him, doubtful he'll be ready to step in as Burrows, Herbert, and Tua have done. . . .

[pefloresjr]

We'll have to agree to disagree, teejers1. I think that academics/40-year decision should always be *the* main criterion presented to Stanford's recruits. Stanford has never been in the CFP, so I'm not sure how that could be considered a factor. We almost won the Pac-12 championship game in 2017, lost close games to UW and WSU and finished a game back in the north in 2018, and had a disastrous 2019/beginning of 2020. As far as NY6 bowls, I continue to believe that Shaw has the creds to convince recruits that he will turn the ship around. He deserves the opportunity to try, so I'm not willing to admit at this point that Stanford's football future has been squandered.

This is exactly right.  I think having some stars come from a school that is competitive at high levels is enough to attract football recruits.  Players like Luck, McCaffrey, and Sherman along with a bunch of other players in the league are enough.  Quarterbacks who are looking for big stats and a campus based on football culture wouldn't come here regardless of the number of qb's currently in the NFL.  We are still limited to the small number of players who are both academically focused and NFL focused.  

The biggest failing I see for Shaw is in recruiting but it is not because Shaw hasn't given it enough priority or hasn't worked hard enough as some say or at least imply.  I think Shaw just has a different philosophy and approach than most coaches and has been too slow to adjust to the new timelines.  Shaw has an approach to recruiting that attempts to be focused and honest.  He doesn't want to play games and mislead recruits and their families about their chances.  He also doesn't want to end up having to rescind offers if the hit rate is too high.  Based on the recruit hit rate he was getting early on when he became head coach, it seemed like we could be very targeted and limited in the number of offers we put out.  That hit rate has worsened and we are now adjusting by making a lot more offers for 2022.  (Whether that hit rate dropped because of the new signing dates, the team's performance and/or other factors is pretty hard to determine with any accuracy.)  I do want us to start using all of our allowable campus visits and identifying more players early in the process to encourage the academic commitment needed for admission.  The reason we held off on using those visits was because Shaw loves the impact the Big Visit used to have before the dates were changed and wanted to try to preserve it.  It turned out that it wasn't possible to do that because recruits won't wait anymore and recruiting is clearly adopting a different approach.  I like Shaw's open honest approach and think it is a good fit for Stanford.  Lots of coaches come in with a rah-rah salesman pitch and I think it's smart to present a contrast when it comes to Stanford recruiting.  In many players statements about their recruiting, that difference is what brought them here.  It won't work for everyone.  I also think that Shaw's response to the changes in recruiting have been too slow but that he has earned the chance to right the ship based on his accomplishments.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

We'll have to agree to disagree, teejers1. I think that academics/40-year decision should always be *the* main criterion presented to Stanford's recruits. Stanford has never been in the CFP, so I'm not sure how that could be considered a factor. We almost won the Pac-12 championship game in 2017, lost close games to UW and WSU and finished a game back in the north in 2018, and had a disastrous 2019/beginning of 2020. As far as NY6 bowls, I continue to believe that Shaw has the creds to convince recruits that he will turn the ship around. He deserves the opportunity to try, so I'm not willing to admit at this point that Stanford's football future has been squandered.

This is exactly right.  I think having some stars come from a school that is competitive at high levels is enough to attract football recruits.  Players like Luck, McCaffrey, and Sherman along with a bunch of other players in the league are enough.  Quarterbacks who are looking for big stats and a campus based on football culture wouldn't come here regardless of the number of qb's currently in the NFL.  We are still limited to the small number of players who are both academically focused and NFL focused.  

The biggest failing I see for Shaw is in recruiting but it is not because Shaw hasn't given it enough priority or hasn't worked hard enough as some say or at least imply.  I think Shaw just has a different philosophy and approach than most coaches and has been too slow to adjust to the new timelines.  Shaw has an approach to recruiting that attempts to be focused and honest.  He doesn't want to play games and mislead recruits and their families about their chances.  He also doesn't want to end up having to rescind offers if the hit rate is too high.  Based on the recruit hit rate he was getting early on when he became head coach, it seemed like we could be very targeted and limited in the number of offers we put out.  That hit rate has worsened and we are now adjusting by making a lot more offers for 2022.  (Whether that hit rate dropped because of the new signing dates, the team's performance and/or other factors is pretty hard to determine with any accuracy.)  I do want us to start using all of our allowable campus visits and identifying more players early in the process to encourage the academic commitment needed for admission.  The reason we held off on using those visits was because Shaw loves the impact the Big Visit used to have before the dates were changed and wanted to try to preserve it.  It turned out that it wasn't possible to do that because recruits won't wait anymore and recruiting is clearly adopting a different approach.  I like Shaw's open honest approach and think it is a good fit for Stanford.  Lots of coaches come in with a rah-rah salesman pitch and I think it's smart to present a contrast when it comes to Stanford recruiting.  In many players statements about their recruiting, that difference is what brought them here.  It won't work for everyone.  I also think that Shaw's response to the changes in recruiting have been too slow but that he has earned the chance to right the ship based on his accomplishments.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[Snorlax94]

Back to the original question, has Mills done enough to impress the NFL. I'm not a QB expert, or even an armchair QB expert. However, I have to look at the track record of QBs recently at Stanford and their success at the next level. Not very impressive at all. If Mills has a shot, it will be with a team that can afford time to develop him, doubtful he'll be ready to step in as Burrows, Herbert, and Tua have done. . . .

So using this logic, any NFL team would have been a fool to draft Patrick Mahomes II because he is the only QB from Texas Tech in the NFL at this time.

If you look at the NFL draft, teams will take a player out of anywhere, because it's based on the player. True, a program's reputation, competition, and character can help (or hurt) players get drafted generally. And from my perspective, Stanford football players do better in the NFL draft. 

Stanford runs a pro-style scheme; it is not a gimmicky system. The spread and air raid don't translate to the NFL as well (how did Chip Kelly do?) in part because most *college* defenses can't field 5 high-quality defensive backs, and 11 defensive players who can make an athletic solo tackle. In the NFL, you can't throw a bubble screen to a tiny WR who will then juke one defender, outrun another defender who takes a poor angle, then run free 80 yards free for a touchdown. College football also has unique rules like how wide apart the hash marks are that make gimmicky college systems not translate into the next level. 

Second, Stanford has a great reputation in the NFL. A lot of NFL coaches know Coach Shaw and trust his advice and recommendations, and know that he recruits well and develops well. Look at how many Stanford players Coach Carroll drafted to Seattle. Coaches who played against Stanford respect Stanford players. And former Pac 12 coaches go everywhere, winning championships as a coordinator at Alabama, winning a championship at LSU, winning a Super Bowl in Seattle. By playing in the Pac 12, players are going up against some of the best college football coaching minds anywhere.

And most importantly to me, Stanford has a reputation for developing smart, disciplined, high-character student athletes. You think character doesn't matter to the Browns after they drafted Johnny Manziel? In contrast, look at how many Stanford players are in the Super Bowl each year.

Oh, and that doesn't even touch upon the extraordinary opportunity of being student there. 

So no, I don't worry whether top student athletes lose any career prospects by choosing Stanford.

[Snorlax94]

Back to the original question, has Mills done enough to impress the NFL. I'm not a QB expert, or even an armchair QB expert. However, I have to look at the track record of QBs recently at Stanford and their success at the next level. Not very impressive at all. If Mills has a shot, it will be with a team that can afford time to develop him, doubtful he'll be ready to step in as Burrows, Herbert, and Tua have done. . . .

So using this logic, any NFL team would have been a fool to draft Patrick Mahomes II because he is the only QB from Texas Tech in the NFL at this time.

If you look at the NFL draft, teams will take a player out of anywhere, because it's based on the player. True, a program's reputation, competition, and character can help (or hurt) players get drafted generally. And from my perspective, Stanford football players do better in the NFL draft. 

Stanford runs a pro-style scheme; it is not a gimmicky system. The spread and air raid don't translate to the NFL as well (how did Chip Kelly do?) in part because most *college* defenses can't field 5 high-quality defensive backs, and 11 defensive players who can make an athletic solo tackle. In the NFL, you can't throw a bubble screen to a tiny WR who will then juke one defender, outrun another defender who takes a poor angle, then run free 80 yards free for a touchdown. College football also has unique rules like how wide apart the hash marks are that make gimmicky college systems not translate into the next level. 

Second, Stanford has a great reputation in the NFL. A lot of NFL coaches know Coach Shaw and trust his advice and recommendations, and know that he recruits well and develops well. Look at how many Stanford players Coach Carroll drafted to Seattle. Coaches who played against Stanford respect Stanford players. And former Pac 12 coaches go everywhere, winning championships as a coordinator at Alabama, winning a championship at LSU, winning a Super Bowl in Seattle. By playing in the Pac 12, players are going up against some of the best college football coaching minds anywhere.

And most importantly to me, Stanford has a reputation for developing smart, disciplined, high-character student athletes. You think character doesn't matter to the Browns after they drafted Johnny Manziel? In contrast, look at how many Stanford players are in the Super Bowl each year.

Oh, and that doesn't even touch upon the extraordinary opportunity of being student there. 

So no, I don't worry whether top student athletes lose any career prospects by choosing Stanford.

[OutsiderFan]

If you can't see Davis Mills is a legit NFL QB I can't ever convince you.

Take out the Colorado game which was his first of the season after not practicing for a week. And Mills has the following stats:

71% completions
8.2 YPA
3 TD 0 INT

This includes facing the two best defenses in the Pac-12 in Cal and Washington.

I made another post in this thread pointing out how quick his feet are. Mills made a play by avoiding a blitz on 3rd down against Oregon State today that allowed Stanford to win the game. He glides out there on the field and does everything under control. 

It's really too bad he got the incorrect Covid test. Stanford would likely be playing USC in the Pac-12 Championship Game if that didn't happen.

[OutsiderFan]

If you can't see Davis Mills is a legit NFL QB I can't ever convince you.

Take out the Colorado game which was his first of the season after not practicing for a week. And Mills has the following stats:

71% completions
8.2 YPA
3 TD 0 INT

This includes facing the two best defenses in the Pac-12 in Cal and Washington.

I made another post in this thread pointing out how quick his feet are. Mills made a play by avoiding a blitz on 3rd down against Oregon State today that allowed Stanford to win the game. He glides out there on the field and does everything under control. 

It's really too bad he got the incorrect Covid test. Stanford would likely be playing USC in the Pac-12 Championship Game if that didn't happen.

[BostonCard]

I'm not sure there is any metric in which Cal and UW are the top two defenses in the Pac-12.

BC

[BostonCard]

I'm not sure there is any metric in which Cal and UW are the top two defenses in the Pac-12.

BC

[Phogge]

There are a bunch of QB’s ahead of Mills, some capable of playing as rookies. He would be thought of as a project so it makes some sense if he went somewhere to sit for a bit. If he gets a good prediction from the NFL he should go. But I guess third round.

[Phogge]

There are a bunch of QB’s ahead of Mills, some capable of playing as rookies. He would be thought of as a project so it makes some sense if he went somewhere to sit for a bit. If he gets a good prediction from the NFL he should go. But I guess third round.

[cardcrimson]

Mills currently 22nd with ESPN's QBR and 63rd in overall Rating. Most of the draft boards don't have him listed at all, however one has him listed as a six rounder, while another actually has him in the 3rd just ahead of Adebo.

Not a lot of "experts" on the Mills bandwagon at this point. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Mills currently 22nd with ESPN's QBR and 63rd in overall Rating. Most of the draft boards don't have him listed at all, however one has him listed as a six rounder, while another actually has him in the 3rd just ahead of Adebo.

Not a lot of "experts" on the Mills bandwagon at this point. . . .

[lex24]

If you can't see Davis Mills is a legit NFL QB I can't ever convince you.

Take out the Colorado game which was his first of the season after not practicing for a week. And Mills has the following stats:

71% completions
8.2 YPA
3 TD 0 INT

This includes facing the two best defenses in the Pac-12 in Cal and Washington.

I made another post in this thread pointing out how quick his feet are. Mills made a play by avoiding a blitz on 3rd down against Oregon State today that allowed Stanford to win the game. He glides out there on the field and does everything under control. 

It's really too bad he got the incorrect Covid test. Stanford would likely be playing USC in the Pac-12 Championship Game if that didn't happen.

Agree with you OF. Completely. He will play in NFL.  If he stays healthy.  I have to think the injury factor is a bit of a scare.  Arm skills are high end. Great release. Good feet.  And he’s showing more and more his pocket presence.  Talented guy.  Shows you why KJ left. No comparison. Hope Mills sticks around.  If not, hope the Niners draft him in late rounds.  Shanahan’s offense a great fit.  And the Niners need at least 2 new QBs.

[lex24]

If you can't see Davis Mills is a legit NFL QB I can't ever convince you.

Take out the Colorado game which was his first of the season after not practicing for a week. And Mills has the following stats:

71% completions
8.2 YPA
3 TD 0 INT

This includes facing the two best defenses in the Pac-12 in Cal and Washington.

I made another post in this thread pointing out how quick his feet are. Mills made a play by avoiding a blitz on 3rd down against Oregon State today that allowed Stanford to win the game. He glides out there on the field and does everything under control. 

It's really too bad he got the incorrect Covid test. Stanford would likely be playing USC in the Pac-12 Championship Game if that didn't happen.

Agree with you OF. Completely. He will play in NFL.  If he stays healthy.  I have to think the injury factor is a bit of a scare.  Arm skills are high end. Great release. Good feet.  And he’s showing more and more his pocket presence.  Talented guy.  Shows you why KJ left. No comparison. Hope Mills sticks around.  If not, hope the Niners draft him in late rounds.  Shanahan’s offense a great fit.  And the Niners need at least 2 new QBs.

[Phogge]

I’m hearing more and more from the inside that they want Stafford. The Lions will have a new coach and presumably will be able to draft one of the five or so legit guys in the draft. The Niners could shop Jimmy G or trade him back to New England for a pick or sweeten a deal for Gilmore.

The Lions need help everywhere so maybe SF can deal some guys with loaded salaries. I don’t think Lynch wants to give up any high picks. Anyway it’s fun to speculate.

[Phogge]

I’m hearing more and more from the inside that they want Stafford. The Lions will have a new coach and presumably will be able to draft one of the five or so legit guys in the draft. The Niners could shop Jimmy G or trade him back to New England for a pick or sweeten a deal for Gilmore.

The Lions need help everywhere so maybe SF can deal some guys with loaded salaries. I don’t think Lynch wants to give up any high picks. Anyway it’s fun to speculate.

[winflop]

If you can't see Davis Mills is a legit NFL QB I can't ever convince you.

Take out the Colorado game which was his first of the season after not practicing for a week. And Mills has the following stats:

71% completions
8.2 YPA
3 TD 0 INT

This includes facing the two best defenses in the Pac-12 in Cal and Washington.

I made another post in this thread pointing out how quick his feet are. Mills made a play by avoiding a blitz on 3rd down against Oregon State today that allowed Stanford to win the game. He glides out there on the field and does everything under control. 

It's really too bad he got the incorrect Covid test. Stanford would likely be playing USC in the Pac-12 Championship Game if that didn't happen.

Agree with you OF. Completely. He will play in NFL.  If he stays healthy.  I have to think the injury factor is a bit of a scare.  Arm skills are high end. Great release.  Good feet.  And he’s showing more and more his pocket presence.  Talented guy.  Shows you why KJ left.  No comparison.  Hope Mills sticks around.  If not, hope the Niners draft him in late rounds.  Shanahan’s offense a great fit.  And the Niners need at least 2 new QBs.

If he goes I doubt he slips past the third round and more likely second round. Too many teams NEED at least one QB and this draft is pretty thin on quality QBs.

Not sure exactly how the roster looks next season but I'm not sure they are going to be materially different, which would indicate he should go if he's projected second round or better.

[winflop]

If you can't see Davis Mills is a legit NFL QB I can't ever convince you.

Take out the Colorado game which was his first of the season after not practicing for a week. And Mills has the following stats:

71% completions
8.2 YPA
3 TD 0 INT

This includes facing the two best defenses in the Pac-12 in Cal and Washington.

I made another post in this thread pointing out how quick his feet are. Mills made a play by avoiding a blitz on 3rd down against Oregon State today that allowed Stanford to win the game. He glides out there on the field and does everything under control. 

It's really too bad he got the incorrect Covid test. Stanford would likely be playing USC in the Pac-12 Championship Game if that didn't happen.

Agree with you OF. Completely. He will play in NFL.  If he stays healthy.  I have to think the injury factor is a bit of a scare.  Arm skills are high end. Great release.  Good feet.  And he’s showing more and more his pocket presence.  Talented guy.  Shows you why KJ left.  No comparison.  Hope Mills sticks around.  If not, hope the Niners draft him in late rounds.  Shanahan’s offense a great fit.  And the Niners need at least 2 new QBs.

If he goes I doubt he slips past the third round and more likely second round. Too many teams NEED at least one QB and this draft is pretty thin on quality QBs.

Not sure exactly how the roster looks next season but I'm not sure they are going to be materially different, which would indicate he should go if he's projected second round or better.

[lex24]

I’m hearing more and more from the inside that they want Stafford. The Lions will have a new coach and presumably will be able to draft one of the five or so legit guys in the draft. The Niners could shop Jimmy G or trade him back to New England for a pick or sweeten a deal for Gilmore.

The Lions need help everywhere so maybe SF can deal some guys with loaded salaries. I don’t think Lynch wants to give up any high picks. Anyway it’s fun to speculate.

Stafford would be interesting.  Mills could back up and be brought along slowly.

[lex24]

I’m hearing more and more from the inside that they want Stafford. The Lions will have a new coach and presumably will be able to draft one of the five or so legit guys in the draft. The Niners could shop Jimmy G or trade him back to New England for a pick or sweeten a deal for Gilmore.

The Lions need help everywhere so maybe SF can deal some guys with loaded salaries. I don’t think Lynch wants to give up any high picks. Anyway it’s fun to speculate.

Stafford would be interesting.  Mills could back up and be brought along slowly.

[winflop]

The Niners could shop Jimmy G or trade him back to New England for a pick or sweeten a deal for Gilmore.

Rod Gilmore is coming out of retirement?

[winflop]

The Niners could shop Jimmy G or trade him back to New England for a pick or sweeten a deal for Gilmore.

Rod Gilmore is coming out of retirement?

[OutsiderFan]

I'm not sure there is any metric in which Cal and UW are the top two defenses in the Pac-12.

BC

Other than the one that indicates Washington is #1 in fewest pass yards allowed per game and Cal is #2?

Washington is also #1 in fewest yards allowed per game. Cal is #3. I've seen them both play and my eyeballs tell me they are the two best defenses as well.

[OutsiderFan]

I'm not sure there is any metric in which Cal and UW are the top two defenses in the Pac-12.

BC

Other than the one that indicates Washington is #1 in fewest pass yards allowed per game and Cal is #2?

Washington is also #1 in fewest yards allowed per game. Cal is #3. I've seen them both play and my eyeballs tell me they are the two best defenses as well.

[BostonCard]

Per game metrics are silly because they depend so much on pace of play.  Pass yards per game is even more skewed by the opponent's run/pass mix,  You'll remember that in the Stanford/Washington game, Stanford had 8 possessions in the entire game because both teams were chewing up clock.  The better metrics are per possession or per play.

Cal's defense allows 2.3 points per opponents drive, 61st in the nation.
Washington's defense allows 2.0 ppd, 43rd in the country
USC AT 1.62 PPD, UCLA at 1.89 are better than both in the PAC-12

If you are interested in pass defense, look at yards per pass attempt, where Colorado leads the Pac-12 at 5.5 ypa.  Washington is tied for second with USC at 6.3 ypa, while Cal is 9th at 7.5 ypa (Stanford is dead last in the Pac-12).  Or you can look at opponents QBR, which takes into account both yards per attempt as well as TDs given up and interceptions. Here, Washington is 6th in the Pac-12 (125.4) and Cal is 9th (141.2); by comparison Colorado is tops in the league at 105.0, Stanford is 11th (148.6) and WSU is at the bottom (169.2!).

In yards per play given up, Washington is 5th (5.35 ypp) and Cal is 7th (5.69 ypp); UCLA leads the conference (5.1), Stanford is 10th (6.65) and Arizona is dead last at 6.74 ypp.

BC

[BostonCard]

Per game metrics are silly because they depend so much on pace of play.  Pass yards per game is even more skewed by the opponent's run/pass mix,  You'll remember that in the Stanford/Washington game, Stanford had 8 possessions in the entire game because both teams were chewing up clock.  The better metrics are per possession or per play.

Cal's defense allows 2.3 points per opponents drive, 61st in the nation.
Washington's defense allows 2.0 ppd, 43rd in the country
USC AT 1.62 PPD, UCLA at 1.89 are better than both in the PAC-12

If you are interested in pass defense, look at yards per pass attempt, where Colorado leads the Pac-12 at 5.5 ypa.  Washington is tied for second with USC at 6.3 ypa, while Cal is 9th at 7.5 ypa (Stanford is dead last in the Pac-12).  Or you can look at opponents QBR, which takes into account both yards per attempt as well as TDs given up and interceptions. Here, Washington is 6th in the Pac-12 (125.4) and Cal is 9th (141.2); by comparison Colorado is tops in the league at 105.0, Stanford is 11th (148.6) and WSU is at the bottom (169.2!).

In yards per play given up, Washington is 5th (5.35 ypp) and Cal is 7th (5.69 ypp); UCLA leads the conference (5.1), Stanford is 10th (6.65) and Arizona is dead last at 6.74 ypp.

BC

[cardcrimson]

I'm not sure there is any metric in which Cal and UW are the top two defenses in the Pac-12.

BC

Other than the one that indicates Washington is #1 in fewest pass yards allowed per game and Cal is #2?

Washington is also #1 in fewest yards allowed per game. Cal is #3. I've seen them both play and my eyeballs tell me they are the two best defenses as well.

Well, they both played Stanford, and that has to help their numbers, doesn't it.

So glad we have your eyeballs so you can share your expertise with the rest of us plebs. . . .

[cardcrimson]

I'm not sure there is any metric in which Cal and UW are the top two defenses in the Pac-12.

BC

Other than the one that indicates Washington is #1 in fewest pass yards allowed per game and Cal is #2?

Washington is also #1 in fewest yards allowed per game. Cal is #3. I've seen them both play and my eyeballs tell me they are the two best defenses as well.

Well, they both played Stanford, and that has to help their numbers, doesn't it.

So glad we have your eyeballs so you can share your expertise with the rest of us plebs. . . .

[lex24]

If you still wonder, I give you the 49er-Washington game. Which may have been the worst quarterbacking I’ve seen in NFL football game. Mullens is beyond awful. To think that Beathard can’t beat him out is, well I’ll say interesting. He must be putrid.

I have never seen an NFL quarterback miss as many easy throws as Mullens did today. Furthermore every time he threw over the middle, almost without exception he was high. He’s going to get one of his receivers killed. 

Then there is the fumble where he’s holding ball loose in traffic and the pick 6. 14 points.


 If I’m the 49ers I’m letting go of both of those guys next year. I’m drafting at least one quarterback maybe two. What they do with JG is another question.   As he’s got a big contract unless they exercise one of their outs – which will still be a cap hit as I understand it. If they can pick up an FA, and dump JG I’d do that is well. Clean out the group. While they are at it, they should send McGlinchey packing.

[lex24]

If you still wonder, I give you the 49er-Washington game. Which may have been the worst quarterbacking I’ve seen in NFL football game. Mullens is beyond awful. To think that Beathard can’t beat him out is, well I’ll say interesting. He must be putrid.

I have never seen an NFL quarterback miss as many easy throws as Mullens did today. Furthermore every time he threw over the middle, almost without exception he was high. He’s going to get one of his receivers killed. 

Then there is the fumble where he’s holding ball loose in traffic and the pick 6. 14 points.


 If I’m the 49ers I’m letting go of both of those guys next year. I’m drafting at least one quarterback maybe two. What they do with JG is another question.   As he’s got a big contract unless they exercise one of their outs – which will still be a cap hit as I understand it. If they can pick up an FA, and dump JG I’d do that is well. Clean out the group. While they are at it, they should send McGlinchey packing.