Comparative Passing Stats

[Eriul]

Kem is just trolling. His arguments and sentences have no sustenance. He's actually been doing it for a while.

Wow. Reread the entire thread, slowly. Then come back here and say Kem is being a troll. A casual observer might suggest that it is you, that is the troll. Well, you and your new internet besty.

Done. He's still trolling and making shit up so...

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Let's play that game! Using those numbers, Chalich would have 71 TD passes if he had thrown as many balls as BG. Yeah, I'd take those numbers....

I agree. However, I think it is much more likely that Chalich would get sacks 3 times per game than it he would get 7 TD's (or more) per game. Same with more likely that he would throw a pick or two, than get 71 TD's if he had thrown as much as BG. Or, do you think 71 TD's is more likely?

Can I play. However, I think it is much more likely that Chalich rushes for more first downs and touchdowns than does BG. And it won't even be close. See, people can throw around all the assumptions and opinions they want, and most, including ones presented by you, don't really mean shit.

Whatever, but those points were not the stats being discussed. If Chalich doesn't get on the field, then your guesses are not going to be accurate. Again, note that Chalich didn't pick up any first downs rushing/running on 3d down on Saturday. In fact, he was 0-2 (I won't include the goal line sneak on 3d down).

You sure are stuck on the 3rd down deal.

 

[UMGriz75]

Kem is just trolling. His arguments and sentences have no sustenance. He's actually been doing it for a while.

Wow. Reread the entire thread, slowly. Then come back here and say Kem is being a troll. A casual observer might suggest that it is you, that is the troll. Well, you and your new internet besty.

Done. He's still trolling and making shit up so...

Irony alert!

 

[Member Berries]

Gustafson 244 for 365, 7 ints, 66.8%, 2593 yards, 24 TDs, passing efficiency 144.4, 7.1 yards per attempt, one TD per 15.2 attempts, -3 yards rushing

Chalich 34 for 46, 2 ints, 73.9%, 584 yards, 9 TDs, passing efficiency 236.4, 12.7 yards per attempt, one TD per 5.1 attempts, 61 yards rushing

So by your logic, Chalich is a better quarterback than Dickenson because he threw more touchdown passes in a single game... Sorry, just doesnt work that way.

 

[G-BEARS]

Gustafson 244 for 365, 7 ints, 66.8%, 2593 yards, 24 TDs, passing efficiency 144.4, 7.1 yards per attempt, one TD per 15.2 attempts, -3 yards rushing

Chalich 34 for 46, 2 ints, 73.9%, 584 yards, 9 TDs, passing efficiency 236.4, 12.7 yards per attempt, one TD per 5.1 attempts, 61 yards rushing

So by your logic, Chalich is a better quarterback than Dickenson because he threw more touchdown passes in a single game... Sorry, just doesnt work that way.

Where in the f**k did he say that or that it's his logic? What is going on with some people on here right now making shit up...

 

[grizindabox]

Gustafson 244 for 365, 7 ints, 66.8%, 2593 yards, 24 TDs, passing efficiency 144.4, 7.1 yards per attempt, one TD per 15.2 attempts, -3 yards rushing

Chalich 34 for 46, 2 ints, 73.9%, 584 yards, 9 TDs, passing efficiency 236.4, 12.7 yards per attempt, one TD per 5.1 attempts, 61 yards rushing

So by your logic, Chalich is a better quarterback than Dickenson because he threw more touchdown passes in a single game... Sorry, just doesnt work that way.

....all he did was post stats.....I see nothing about whom.....he thinks is the better QB.......or any personal opinion........

 

[PlayerRep]

I agree. However, I think it is much more likely that Chalich would get sacks 3 times per game than it he would get 7 TD's (or more) per game. Same with more likely that he would throw a pick or two, than get 71 TD's if he had thrown as much as BG. Or, do you think 71 TD's is more likely?

Can I play. However, I think it is much more likely that Chalich rushes for more first downs and touchdowns than does BG. And it won't even be close. See, people can throw around all the assumptions and opinions they want, and most, including ones presented by you, don't really mean shit.

Whatever, but those points were not the stats being discussed. If Chalich doesn't get on the field, then your guesses are not going to be accurate. Again, note that Chalich didn't pick up any first downs rushing/running on 3d down on Saturday. In fact, he was 0-2 (I won't include the goal line sneak on 3d down).

You sure are stuck on the 3rd down deal.

The topic that I had been addressing, on Sunday/Monday, is whether and how much Chalich "extended drives" by running/being mobile, as well as stats relevant to qb play. Would you not agree that picking up 3d downs and not having to punt is important in terms of extending drives?

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Can I play. However, I think it is much more likely that Chalich rushes for more first downs and touchdowns than does BG. And it won't even be close. See, people can throw around all the assumptions and opinions they want, and most, including ones presented by you, don't really mean shit.

Whatever, but those points were not the stats being discussed. If Chalich doesn't get on the field, then your guesses are not going to be accurate. Again, note that Chalich didn't pick up any first downs rushing/running on 3d down on Saturday. In fact, he was 0-2 (I won't include the goal line sneak on 3d down).

You sure are stuck on the 3rd down deal.

The topic that I had been addressing, on Sunday/Monday, is whether and how much Chalich "extended drives" by running/being mobile, as well as stats relevant to qb play. Would you not agree that picking up 3d downs and not having to punt is important in terms of extending drives?

That is great, but you do realize that a drive is extended every time you pick up a first down, which he did on multiple runs. It isn't limited to 3rd down.

 

[PlayerRep]

Whatever, but those points were not the stats being discussed. If Chalich doesn't get on the field, then your guesses are not going to be accurate. Again, note that Chalich didn't pick up any first downs rushing/running on 3d down on Saturday. In fact, he was 0-2 (I won't include the goal line sneak on 3d down).

You sure are stuck on the 3rd down deal.

The topic that I had been addressing, on Sunday/Monday, is whether and how much Chalich "extended drives" by running/being mobile, as well as stats relevant to qb play. Would you not agree that picking up 3d downs and not having to punt is important in terms of extending drives?

That is great, but you do realize that a drive is extended every time you pick up a first down, which he did on multiple runs. It isn't limited to 3rd down.

He did scramble for a first down on several scrambles on 1st or 2d down. Was O-2 on scrambling for first down on 3d down. On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs? While Chalich scrambled fairly well, the evidence doesn't show that he extended drives with his running. Small sample of data. That was my only point, and it was responding to someone else's assertion.I wouldn't have otherwise brought it up.

Having a qb that can run, and scrambling, seem to be rising to the status of the tight end fetish that some UM fans developed years ago, during the Hauck years.

 

[PlayerRep]

Gustafson 244 for 365, 7 ints, 66.8%, 2593 yards, 24 TDs, passing efficiency 144.4, 7.1 yards per attempt, one TD per 15.2 attempts, -3 yards rushing

Chalich 34 for 46, 2 ints, 73.9%, 584 yards, 9 TDs, passing efficiency 236.4, 12.7 yards per attempt, one TD per 5.1 attempts, 61 yards rushing

So by your logic, Chalich is a better quarterback than Dickenson because he threw more touchdown passes in a single game... Sorry, just doesnt work that way.

....all he did was post stats.....I see nothing about whom.....he thinks is the better QB.......or any personal opinion........

This makes me chuckle. It happens to me all the time. I provide some stats or a neutral comment that makes zero argument or assertion. Then immediatley, posters, including some of you now supporting Kem, start fighting me on all kinds of things I didn't say and often didn't even think. Also note that I didn't jump on Kem for those stats. I just provided some additional ones, with no editorial comment or assertion. Kem seemed to get a bit defensive with me.

Welcome to my world, Kem. By the way, I still don't understand what you meant by the useage of the term "overall" in that sentence/paragraph. Not saying that how you meant it doesn't support the point you were making.

 

[UMGriz75]

So by your logic, Chalich is a better quarterback than Dickenson because he threw more touchdown passes in a single game... Sorry, just doesnt work that way.

"So by your logic" you said all sorts of things you actually didn't say, but because it is easier to deal with things you didn't say -- straw men, red herrings and the like -- I am going make up some things you didn't say, just so I can, you know, have something to say about what you didn't say .... :roll:

 

[AZGrizFan]

He did scramble for a first down on several scrambles on 1st or 2d down. Was O-2 on scrambling for first down on 3d down. On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs? While Chalich scrambled fairly well, the evidence doesn't show that he extended drives with his running. Small sample of data. That was my only point, and it was responding to someone else's assertion.I wouldn't have otherwise brought it up.

Small sample set, yes, but 52 yards running the ball (which is more than BG has all YEAR) certainly is telling....

 

[PlayerRep]

He did scramble for a first down on several scrambles on 1st or 2d down. Was O-2 on scrambling for first down on 3d down. On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs? While Chalich scrambled fairly well, the evidence doesn't show that he extended drives with his running. Small sample of data. That was my only point, and it was responding to someone else's assertion.I wouldn't have otherwise brought it up.

Small sample set, yes, but 52 yards running the ball (which is more than BG has all YEAR) certainly is telling....

So what does that tell you? That he averaged almost 14 yards per carry on 3 runs, and 1 yard per carry on 11 runs? See below. Of the 41 times he was planning to pass, he scrambled 14 of those times? He averaged 14.4 yards per passing attempt, and 18.5 per completion. Backing out the 3 sacks, he passed up 11 passing attempts, which on average netted 14.4 yards, so 158.4 yards of passing based on the average, to run for 52 yards? Yes, I understand there would have been some throwaways in there, and some incompletions. I was just using averages.

And digging deeper, Chalich had scrambles for 13, 8 and 20 on 1st or 2d down. So, of his 52 yards in 14 runs (3.7 per carry), he got 41 of those yards. Otherwise, he got 11 yards in 11 runs (including 3 sacks).

BG ran 17 times in the first 2 games, and has run only 18 times since (including sacks).

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs?

Nothing, but you are wanting to talk in "what ifs" instead of "what happened". If you want to use "what ifs" maybe we could add BG throwing a pick or BG getting sacked and fumbling. The point being made is that the mobility shown by Chalich adds a dimension to the offense that BG does not offer. Many people feel that this is a positive.

 

[bgbigdog]

On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs?

Nothing, but you are wanting to talk in "what ifs" instead of "what happened". If you want to use "what ifs" maybe we could add BG throwing a pick or BG getting sacked and fumbling. The point being made is that the mobility shown by Chalich adds a dimension to the offense that BG does not offer. Many people feel that this is a positive.

You forgot sailing a pass over everyone's head and eventually having to punt.

Chalich choses to run because he didn't see another valid option. For example, the long pass to Curran down the sidelines was a result of the line and two skill players not being able to hold off three rushers, while eight UISU defenders covered the remaining three receivers. Scrambling to his left, Chalich bought a little time for Curran to drift farther up the sideline and to make a great catch. That drive ends in a touchdown, not a punt.

His ability to extend the play was the difference in winning and losing this game given the defensive meltdown. And don't think Stitt didn't clearly recognize that when he watched the film Sunday.

 

[PlayerRep]

On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs?

Nothing, but you are wanting to talk in "what ifs" instead of "what happened". If you want to use "what ifs" maybe we could add BG throwing a pick or BG getting sacked and fumbling. The point being made is that the mobility shown by Chalich adds a dimension to the offense that BG does not offer. Many people feel that this is a positive.

No, initially, there were no what-if's. I said there was little or no evidence, in my view, that Chalich extended drives by running. Yes, mobility does add another dimension. However, as pointed out, there was not one called run play for the qb. All scrambles. More sacks of our qb than in any game so far this season, and with fewer passes. Chalich played terrific overall, and I hope he can keep up that pace, but I doubt it. With Chalich, his mobility is a plus, but I think he flushes too soon (he certainly did last year, and that was a big rap on him), and as such (or if still true) he gives up too many passing opportunities. He also doesn't seem to have BG's arm strength for long passes or for long outs. He also didn't throw the swing passes as well as BG does--judging only by the one game. I am still doubtful that he truly knows the offense and has the same decision-making as BG does, but if he does, great. I'm glad he got his chance, and took nice advantage of him. It doesn't matter to me who Stitt plays at qb at this point.

 

[PlayerRep]

On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs?

Nothing, but you are wanting to talk in "what ifs" instead of "what happened". If you want to use "what ifs" maybe we could add BG throwing a pick or BG getting sacked and fumbling. The point being made is that the mobility shown by Chalich adds a dimension to the offense that BG does not offer. Many people feel that this is a positive.

You forgot sailing a pass over everyone's head and eventually having to punt.

Chalich choses to run because he didn't see another valid option. For example, the long pass to Curran down the sidelines was a result of the line and two skill players not being able to hold off three rushers, while eight UISU defenders covered the remaining three receivers. Scrambling to his left, Chalich bought a little time for Curran to drift farther up the sideline and to make a great catch.

His ability to extend the play was the difference in winning and losing this game given the defensive meltdown. And don't think Stitt didn't clearly recognize that when he watched the film Sunday.

The scramble to the left and nice throw and catch was very nice. However, I think UM would have won the game with a healthy BG too. To me, there is no evidence that we wouldn't have.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs?

Nothing, but you are wanting to talk in "what ifs" instead of "what happened". If you want to use "what ifs" maybe we could add BG throwing a pick or BG getting sacked and fumbling. The point being made is that the mobility shown by Chalich adds a dimension to the offense that BG does not offer. Many people feel that this is a positive.

No, initially, there were no what-if's. I said there was little or no evidence, in my view, that Chalich extended drives by running. Yes, mobility does add another dimension. However, as pointed out, there was not one called run play for the qb. All scrambles. More sacks of our qb than in any game so far this season, and with fewer passes. Chalich played terrific overall, and I hope he can keep up that pace, but I doubt it. With Chalich, his mobility is a plus, but I think he flushes too soon (he certainly did last year, and that was a big rap on him), and as such (or if still true) he gives up too many passing opportunities. He also doesn't seem to have BG's arm strength for long passes or for long outs. He also didn't throw the swing passes as well as BG does--judging only by the one game. I am still doubtful that he truly knows the offense and has the same decision-making as BG does, but if he does, great. I'm glad he got his chance, and took nice advantage of him. It doesn't matter to me who Stitt plays at qb at this point.

But there is evidence that Chalich extended drives by running, I believe on 3 separate runs he picked up a 1st down to extend a drive. And whether it is a scramble or called run means zero. I also will stand by the fact that Chalich does know the offense, but the 2 QB's are very different and hence the offense is not identical for both. I also laugh every time people throw around the term "decision-making" when describing BG, because on many occasions his decision-making has been less than stellar.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

On those several scrambles for first down, what's to say he wouldn't have picked up first down on the series by throwing or handing off to a running back, or that BG wouldn't have also gotten first downs?

Nothing, but you are wanting to talk in "what ifs" instead of "what happened". If you want to use "what ifs" maybe we could add BG throwing a pick or BG getting sacked and fumbling. The point being made is that the mobility shown by Chalich adds a dimension to the offense that BG does not offer. Many people feel that this is a positive.

You forgot sailing a pass over everyone's head and eventually having to punt.

Chalich choses to run because he didn't see another valid option. For example, the long pass to Curran down the sidelines was a result of the line and two skill players not being able to hold off three rushers, while eight UISU defenders covered the remaining three receivers. Scrambling to his left, Chalich bought a little time for Curran to drift farther up the sideline and to make a great catch.

His ability to extend the play was the difference in winning and losing this game given the defensive meltdown. And don't think Stitt didn't clearly recognize that when he watched the film Sunday.

The scramble to the left and nice throw and catch was very nice. However, I think UM would have won the game with a healthy BG too. To me, there is no evidence that we wouldn't have.

And I am not so certain they would have won with a healthy BG. To me, there is no evidence that we would have.

 

[Ursa Major]

Gustafson 244 for 365, 7 ints, 66.8%, 2593 yards, 24 TDs, passing efficiency 144.4, 7.1 yards per attempt, one TD per 15.2 attempts, -3 yards rushing

Chalich 34 for 46, 2 ints, 73.9%, 584 yards, 9 TDs, passing efficiency 236.4, 12.7 yards per attempt, one TD per 5.1 attempts, 61 yards rushing

So by your logic, Chalich is a better quarterback than Dickenson because he threw more touchdown passes in a single game... Sorry, just doesnt work that way.

Where in the f**k did he say that or that it's his logic? What is going on with some people on here right now making shit up...

+1 This thread seems to be a good litmus test for the overzealous posters that are agenda driven. Kem was educated as a scientist and tends to post as one. Others, seem better equipped as fiction writers or attorneys that spin nonobjective and biased tales.