The Bobcat Nation

RobertoGato wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 12:12 pm

catatac wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:46 am

catsrback76 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:33 am

RobertoGato wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:05 am

Interestingly, Rovig's completion percentage this year (57%) is only 2 points better than Andersen's last year.

Without Andersen!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why go back?

If you want to compare apples and oranges...then go ahead, but IF you're really trying to say TA and TR are in fact the same beast undercenter...then you're just being argumentative for the sake of it!

TA ran the ball... safely 95% of the time, TR hands off 60%, passes 20% and is out 20%! Come on man, don't be naive.

Ya, not sure why this dead horse keeps getting beaten time after time after time after time after time after.....

Rovig is currently our best option at QB and it's not even that close any more, but Bauman is 2nd. Rovig running the O, TA playing LB gives us our best chance to win games from here on out, period. The coaches see it, most fans see it.

Rovig made some really, really good throws yesterday. Just needs to improve consistency on those shorter slants and swing passes, and receivers need to continue to get better at going up and coming down with those balls.

I can maybe clear that up for you.

This continues to be discussed because it's the issue most relevant to the Cats' success, because each week provides more data and hence more of a basis to judge predictions and assumptions, and because not everyone agrees on the same conclusion.

For instance, I think this season has more than demonstrated that a healthy Andersen is far and away the best option at QB on the roster.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. If TA at QB rather than LB gave us our best chance to win then that's where he's be playing... period. The coaches know WAY more about this situation then every poster on here combined. You know what they say, 2nd string QB is the most popular guy in town. Or in this case, 4th string QB I can also tell you TA did not tell the coaches that he wasn't playing QB.

catatac wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 2:27 pm

RobertoGato wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 12:12 pm

catatac wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:46 am

catsrback76 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:33 am

RobertoGato wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:05 am

Interestingly, Rovig's completion percentage this year (57%) is only 2 points better than Andersen's last year.

Without Andersen!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why go back?

If you want to compare apples and oranges...then go ahead, but IF you're really trying to say TA and TR are in fact the same beast undercenter...then you're just being argumentative for the sake of it!

TA ran the ball... safely 95% of the time, TR hands off 60%, passes 20% and is out 20%! Come on man, don't be naive.

Ya, not sure why this dead horse keeps getting beaten time after time after time after time after time after.....

Rovig is currently our best option at QB and it's not even that close any more, but Bauman is 2nd. Rovig running the O, TA playing LB gives us our best chance to win games from here on out, period. The coaches see it, most fans see it.

Rovig made some really, really good throws yesterday. Just needs to improve consistency on those shorter slants and swing passes, and receivers need to continue to get better at going up and coming down with those balls.

I can maybe clear that up for you.

This continues to be discussed because it's the issue most relevant to the Cats' success, because each week provides more data and hence more of a basis to judge predictions and assumptions, and because not everyone agrees on the same conclusion.

For instance, I think this season has more than demonstrated that a healthy Andersen is far and away the best option at QB on the roster.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. If TA at QB rather than LB gave us our best chance to win then that's where he's be playing... period. The coaches know WAY more about this situation then every poster on here combined. You know what they say, 2nd string QB is the most popular guy in town. Or in this case, 4th string QB I can also tell you TA did not tell the coaches that he wasn't playing QB.

I would argue that their penchant for using him more in tougher matchups demonstrates that the coaches do know that he gives them their best chance. And that we would have seen a good deal more of that if he hadn't been nursing an injury for most of the season. But sure, we can agree to disagree.

I think Rovig will be ok if he can improve 3rd down conversions whether its dropped passes or uncatchable passes we have to improve there. And if we can't, we need someone who can scramble on 3rd down and get it if no receivers are open. We need Troy on defense especially with the passing offenses we will see in our last two games.

I think we stay with Rovig but on 3rd and less than 10 we use Kassis, Jonson or Anderson. Possibly even shift from one to the other after we break the huddle.

Anderson is not a great scrambler. He gets his running yardage when he can see a hole and burst through it. He can't do a Chris Murray, but Kassis has that sudden change of direction and can be effective on short passes. So what I'm saying is that I think the coaches have the same idea except they don't use Kassis in that way.

Helcat72 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 4:01 pm

...we use Kassis, Jonson or Anderson. Possibly...

C’mon man! Spell his name right! It’s Kasssiss!

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Unless of course those 7 of 10 for 70 yds were on 3rd and 7-8 to go.

RickRund wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 6:24 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Unless of course those 7 of 10 for 70 yds were on 3rd and 7-8 to go.

That's what i say - its really only important to the extent that it helps move the chains.

The main point of this thread has nothing to do with Andersen or overthRovig. It’s about taking care of the ball. overthRovig has done ok for a first year starter. It’s been his WRs that have let him down and us fans. My point was that we tend to think of guys that connect 65% of the time as being really good. If WRs catch the balls that hit them in the hands, his numbers would be respectable.

RickRund wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 6:24 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Unless of course those 7 of 10 for 70 yds were on 3rd and 7-8 to go.

I said 7/10 for 50 yards, not 70. Fairly significant difference.

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 7:18 pm

RickRund wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 6:24 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Unless of course those 7 of 10 for 70 yds were on 3rd and 7-8 to go.

I said 7/10 for 50 yards, not 70. Fairly significant difference.

Yea, I wonder how many of his 200 yards this weekend were on 3rd down?

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 7:18 pm

RickRund wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 6:24 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Unless of course those 7 of 10 for 70 yds were on 3rd and 7-8 to go.

I said 7/10 for 50 yards, not 70. Fairly significant difference.

Then I will change that to 3rd and 4 or 5... I have NO IDEA where I got the 70 yds. I plead old age...

Helcat72 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:47 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 7:18 pm

RickRund wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 6:24 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Unless of course those 7 of 10 for 70 yds were on 3rd and 7-8 to go.

I said 7/10 for 50 yards, not 70. Fairly significant difference.

Yea, I wonder how many of his 200 yards this weekend were on 3rd down?

5 for 8, 84 yards.

Rovig’s two third down passes to McCutcheon were good plays.

It’s worth noting that during the short time the game was still in question. Say until 28-0, he was 7-10-0, 152 yards and two touchdowns, including a 6-7-0, 143, 2 touchdowns stretch. Had he put up those numbers during garbage time, then they wouldn’t mean much.

Pretty sure he hasn’t had a sustained run like that before.

TomCat88 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 2:17 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Then there’s going 17-21-1 in a half, but only gaining 120 yards and getting sacked 4 times for 30 yards. Oh, and having your interception lead to a TD.

I wonder if a team has ever had a quarterback complete 17 of 21 passes, yet be behind 42-0. When it was 28-0, he was 14 for 15.

Those are some crazy stats for SUU... With that kind of QB efficiency, they'll be better next year. Might be the team that makes a big jump in improvement that always seems to happen in the Big Sky...

FYI Rovig now sits 9th in QB Efficiency, above Jacob Knipp, Mason Petrino, and the QB of the best team in the conference, Jake Constantine.

grizzh8r wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:29 am

TomCat88 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 2:17 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Then there’s going 17-21-1 in a half, but only gaining 120 yards and getting sacked 4 times for 30 yards. Oh, and having your interception lead to a TD.

I wonder if a team has ever had a quarterback complete 17 of 21 passes, yet be behind 42-0. When it was 28-0, he was 14 for 15.

Those are some crazy stats for SUU... With that kind of QB efficiency, they'll be better next year. Might be the team that makes a big jump in improvement that always seems to happen in the Big Sky...

5.7 YPA isn't efficient at all.

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:41 am

grizzh8r wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:29 am

TomCat88 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 2:17 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Then there’s going 17-21-1 in a half, but only gaining 120 yards and getting sacked 4 times for 30 yards. Oh, and having your interception lead to a TD.

I wonder if a team has ever had a quarterback complete 17 of 21 passes, yet be behind 42-0. When it was 28-0, he was 14 for 15.

Those are some crazy stats for SUU... With that kind of QB efficiency, they'll be better next year. Might be the team that makes a big jump in improvement that always seems to happen in the Big Sky...

5.7 YPA isn't efficient at all.

That keeps you on schedule. I will take 2nd down and 4.3 yards to go all day long.

What does a Quarter backs 3rd down conversion rate have to do with wins and losses?

Cataholic wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:50 am

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:41 am

grizzh8r wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:29 am

TomCat88 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 2:17 pm

bobcat99 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:35 pm

So, some of these stats are misleading without context.

One might think that 70% completion rate is great. If you've completed, say, 7/10 passes for 50 yards, that's terrible.

YPA and YPC add much more value. It helps determine efficiency.

Then you also have to add in their running ability. A guy who has a sub 60% completion rate, with low YPA, better be a dang good runner.

Ideally with a pocket passer, you want a decent completion rate with mid to high YPA, and YPC. Running QB you can lower those a little.

Right now, Rovig is subpar in all areas. He has succeeded against bad teams, and been very bad against good teams. It's a real problem, but it's not going to change this year. Optimism, or pessimism, isn't going to change what Rovig is as a QB.

Then there’s going 17-21-1 in a half, but only gaining 120 yards and getting sacked 4 times for 30 yards. Oh, and having your interception lead to a TD.

I wonder if a team has ever had a quarterback complete 17 of 21 passes, yet be behind 42-0. When it was 28-0, he was 14 for 15.

Those are some crazy stats for SUU... With that kind of QB efficiency, they'll be better next year. Might be the team that makes a big jump in improvement that always seems to happen in the Big Sky...

5.7 YPA isn't efficient at all.

That keeps you on schedule. I will take 2nd down and 4.3 yards to go all day long.

It is a direct sign of being inefficient on offense.

Obviously, it's better than pretty much every teams rushing average. Which is, of course, why passing the ball is infinitely more valuable than running the ball. But if you have a YPA of <6, you had better hope you're hitting those passes often, and hitting good runs, often. It's a sign that you're not getting big plays. You're not getting chunk yards. You're not explosive. It makes it easier to fall behind, and it's easier for defenses to defend! Seriously, that doesn't put very much stress on a defense.

So, is it more valuable than running the ball in most cases? Yup! Sure is. Overall, is it a sign of sustainable success? Nope! Sure isn't.

Catastrophy11 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 1:23 pm

What does a Quarter backs 3rd down conversion rate have to do with wins and losses?

Wins and losses aren't a QB stat, so you're missing a lot here.

The info below is based only on stats for Big Sky Conference games to date.

MSU is last in Pass Efficiency at 112.1 on 70-137-3 (51%) for 831 yards and 6 TDs. YPC at 11.9 and YPA at 6.1. That performance may impact first downs. MSU is 12th with 99 or 20 per game. The other top teams are at 23 to 25. MSU has 56 rush and 35 pass first downs. The other top teams have over 50 rush and 50 to 60 pass first downs.

Weber is 12th in Pass Efficiency at 119.3 on 90-150-3 (60%) for 934 yards and 5 TDs. YPC at 10.4 and YPA at 6.2. Completion percentage does matter. Weber does have an experienced leader, but 51% to 60% is a wide gap. If the MSU pass offense had completed 56% that would have been about 7 more completions, 80 yards and some first downs.

You win football games with strong rushing offense and a stout rushing defense. The Weber lines have been clearly superior to their Big Sky opposition this year. A passable passing game with a 60% completion percentage make them a tough out for any FCS team. MSU can get there, but pass offense needs to improve.