[Austroturf]

Yes, I have also been scratching my head about that.  Minshew did not arrive in Pullman until May, then won the starting job and, so far, has been executing the air raid offense as if he had spent all five years at Wazzu.  Contrast that with Stanford's QB development: Costello is now in his third full year with the program, and there is still talk about whether he has fully mastered the playbook and whether Shaw can fully entrust him with the keys to the offense.  I wonder what kind of numbers Costello would have been putting up in Leach's system.

And yet, Costello's pass efficiency rating (152) is basically the same as Minshew's (151), and behind only future NFL first rounder Justin Herbert's (161).  Minshew leads the league in yards per game, but that's because he throws 52 passes a game (compared to 30/game for Costello).

Costello's PER has improved 12 points from last year (152 vs. 140) and his completion percentage has improved by six percentage points (65% vs. 59%).  Both Hogan and Luck improved over the course of their careers, though Hogan had a bit more of an up and down career.  Still, generally speaking our QB's improve substantially between their (redshirt) freshman and senior years.

Luke Falk's PER was basically the same as a senior (137) as it was as a freshman (140), and his completion percentage improved marginally (64 to 67%).  Looking at other WSU QB's (Connor Halliday, Jeff Tuel) since Leech became coach show similar patterns; his QB's don't really improve with experience.

To me that suggests that if you have a fairly inexperienced QB, you are better off in Leech's system, but once a QB has been around for a couple years, they are better off in the Shaw/Harbaugh system.

BC

Yes, that's a fair conclusion.  I am just bemused to see how long it takes Stanford to get a QB ready for prime-time.  It means you only have a QB in his prime for maybe a 1 1/2 to 2 seasons, unless it's an Andrew Luck-type phenom who also decides to stick around for his senior year despite being the prospective #1 draft pick.  Hogan was also a bit of an exception, but experienced serious regression for the first three-quarters of the 2014 season (certainly partially due to poor O-line play).  Last year, Costello came on and looked excellent in his first two games (UCLA and ASU), but there was all this banter about how he didn't have a full grasp of the playbook and could only run an excerpted version.  I sometimes feel Stanford's system shackles a QB and doesn't let him show what he is capable of.  Too complex, even though much of the actual execution is a hand-off to a back running up the middle.

[Austroturf]

Yes, I have also been scratching my head about that.  Minshew did not arrive in Pullman until May, then won the starting job and, so far, has been executing the air raid offense as if he had spent all five years at Wazzu.  Contrast that with Stanford's QB development: Costello is now in his third full year with the program, and there is still talk about whether he has fully mastered the playbook and whether Shaw can fully entrust him with the keys to the offense.  I wonder what kind of numbers Costello would have been putting up in Leach's system.

And yet, Costello's pass efficiency rating (152) is basically the same as Minshew's (151), and behind only future NFL first rounder Justin Herbert's (161).  Minshew leads the league in yards per game, but that's because he throws 52 passes a game (compared to 30/game for Costello).

Costello's PER has improved 12 points from last year (152 vs. 140) and his completion percentage has improved by six percentage points (65% vs. 59%).  Both Hogan and Luck improved over the course of their careers, though Hogan had a bit more of an up and down career.  Still, generally speaking our QB's improve substantially between their (redshirt) freshman and senior years.

Luke Falk's PER was basically the same as a senior (137) as it was as a freshman (140), and his completion percentage improved marginally (64 to 67%).  Looking at other WSU QB's (Connor Halliday, Jeff Tuel) since Leech became coach show similar patterns; his QB's don't really improve with experience.

To me that suggests that if you have a fairly inexperienced QB, you are better off in Leech's system, but once a QB has been around for a couple years, they are better off in the Shaw/Harbaugh system.

BC

Yes, that's a fair conclusion.  I am just bemused to see how long it takes Stanford to get a QB ready for prime-time.  It means you only have a QB in his prime for maybe a 1 1/2 to 2 seasons, unless it's an Andrew Luck-type phenom who also decides to stick around for his senior year despite being the prospective #1 draft pick.  Hogan was also a bit of an exception, but experienced serious regression for the first three-quarters of the 2014 season (certainly partially due to poor O-line play).  Last year, Costello came on and looked excellent in his first two games (UCLA and ASU), but there was all this banter about how he didn't have a full grasp of the playbook and could only run an excerpted version.  I sometimes feel Stanford's system shackles a QB and doesn't let him show what he is capable of.  Too complex, even though much of the actual execution is a hand-off to a back running up the middle.