Rudock

hailtoyourvictor wrote:

wshoes wrote:

hailtoyourvictor wrote:

wshoes wrote:

Post from mlive this AM:

QB perspective

whiteshoes
25m
Through 3 games this season QB ratings: Cardale Jones 119.0, JT Barrett 116.6, Jake Rudock 118.4.

Oh, and Christian Hackenburg 92.3

QB Perspective:
Jake Ruddock is 92nd in the country in QB rating. (118.4).


Not good.

What is Hackenburg ranked? How about Barrett/Jones?

I never said it was good, just that we should have some perspective, 3 games in.

Picking and choosing other QBs who have played bad does not excuse Ruddock for playing bad.

Ruddock is 92nd in the country in QB rating.
Ruddock is 10th in the Big Ten in passer rating behind guys like Wes Lunt.

That should be enough perspective.

Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired. I said 3 games in, we should keep this in perspective instead of tarring and feathering the guy. Going into the season MOST (I'm sure you'll say you weren't one of them), fans and pundits thought the best QBs in the Big Ten were the combo at OSU, Hackenberg, and Cook. Except for Cook he is performing as well as 2 of the other 3 and better than the 4th. Is it objectively good? No, we need better play out of the position (and so do OSU and PSU).

As for staring down receivers the majority of college QBs do that the majority of the time, Jon Navarre the all time Mich passing leader when he left did it for four straight years. Watch NFL games on Sunday and you'll see some guys doing it even there. Not everyone can be Tom Brady. Rudock actually does it less than many. He does go through progressions.

sandyeggo_blue wrote:

hailtoyourvictor wrote:

I'd expect that kind of inefficiency from a first or second year player, or a dual-threat QB. A 5th year pocket passer should not be this inefficient.

question for you hail.... I'm curious to hear if you give Rudock a bit of leniency for this being his first year with this team. new teammates, play book, rhythm and timing, etc. not saying give him a pass, but a bit of leniency is all. how much of that carries weight?

I don't think it's a situation like russell wilson going to Wisconsin for his 5th year because they had a dominant O line, running game and a very proven receiver. russell was put into the perfect situation and I never expected anything like that for Rudock. I will definitely say that the TOs do bother me but his efficiency rating or his personal stats don't because I think he's definitely an upgrade from anything we've had in years in terms of managing the games.

I'm on record as saying that I put the Utah loss squarely on him. But I also have to put the Or St and UNLV wins  directly on him  also (even with good rushing performances by the backs) and that has to count for something.

he may be near the bottom of all stats at this point but no need to worry at this point.

Speaking of Wilson, how did Danny O'Brien the Maryland 5th year transfer work out for Wisconsin? It's a crap shoot.

yep fish. that was part of my point but i completely forgot to add it in my post.

sandyeggo_blue wrote:

hailtoyourvictor wrote:

I'd expect that kind of inefficiency from a first or second year player, or a dual-threat QB. A 5th year pocket passer should not be this inefficient.

question for you hail.... I'm curious to hear if you give Rudock a bit of leniency for this being his first year with this team. new teammates, play book, rhythm and timing, etc. not saying give him a pass, but a bit of leniency is all. how much of that carries weight?

I don't think it's a situation like russell wilson going to Wisconsin for his 5th year because they had a dominant O line, running game and a very proven receiver. russell was put into the perfect situation and I never expected anything like that for Rudock. I will definitely say that the TOs do bother me but his efficiency rating or his personal stats don't because I think he's definitely an upgrade from anything we've had in years in terms of managing the games.

I'm on record as saying that I put the Utah loss squarely on him. But I also have to put the Or St and UNLV wins  directly on him  also (even with good rushing performances by the backs) and that has to count for something.

he may be near the bottom of all stats at this point but no need to worry at this point.

I mean, I'm not mad at the guy and I support him as a Michigan player. I just expect a 5th year senior to be able to look off safeties, check off to hot reads, etc. Ruddock plays QB the way I play Madden. I decide what route I like when I pick a play and then throw it to that WR regardless of coverage. It isn't successful in Madden and isn't successful at the NCAA level.

And BOLEACH, I fully support the staff. If they say Ruddock is our best shot to win, then I believe he is our best shot to win. Like someone else said- that doesn't mean I can't be frustrated by his play.

BOLEACH7 wrote:

Said it before Sandy ... best QB managing a game since Henne ... loved watching Shoelace live but he was an athlete playing the QB position ... great comparison about Wilson ... look at the mess that was the Oline , RBs and WRs that we presented Rudock with ... all those factors have to be taken into account ... and yes Rudock has to take a lot of responsibility for his poor reads and mistakes

IMO, a good game manager QB has to be able to take care of the ball.

wshoes wrote:

Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired. I said 3 games in, we should keep this in perspective instead of tarring and feathering the guy. Going into the season MOST (I'm sure you'll say you weren't one of them), fans and pundits thought the best QBs in the Big Ten were the combo at OSU, Hackenberg, and Cook. Except for Cook he is performing as well as 2 of the other 3 and better than the 4th. Is it objectively good? No, we need better play out of the position (and so do OSU and PSU).

As for staring down receivers the majority of college QBs do that the majority of the time, Jon Navarre the all time Mich passing leader when he left did it for four straight years. Watch NFL games on Sunday and you'll see some guys doing it even there. Not everyone can be Tom Brady. Rudock actually does it less than many. He does go through progressions.

If Ruddock was so good at going through his progressions he wouldn't lock on to WRs and force throws into coverage so often.

...for a 5th year and play QB. Stop crying...

You keep saying that you expect better from a 5yth year QB but did you ever consider that he hasn't been working with these players for more than 6 weeks? How about Grant Perry only being on campus for 6 weeks total? Since you love statistics so much there is a 100% chance that you are bitching just because you can.

Admit it, you're upset that Hoke is gone and you no longer have access to the team like you once did. This isn't the NFL, it's not like Coach Harbaugh can just go out and sign a proven QB.

+5, Order.

TheNewBlueOrder wrote:

...for a 5th year and play QB.  Stop crying...

You keep saying that you expect better from a 5yth year QB but did you ever consider that he hasn't been working with these players for more than 6 weeks?  How about Grant Perry only being on campus for 6 weeks total?  Since you love statistics so much there is a 100% chance that you are bitching just because you can.

Admit it, you're upset that Hoke is gone and you no longer have access to the team like you once did.  This isn't the NFL, it's not like Coach Harbaugh can just go out and sign a proven QB.

Is this really called for? Other people complain about players more often than I do, but the minute I do you get personal? I mean, seriously, what does me having access to the team have to do with my opinion on Jake Ruddock's QB play?

This forum was never the busiest, but it was a great place to share opinions on Michigan football. Apparently not anymore. You folks have fun.

Your choice Hail, but for someone who seems to need to have the last word in every argument, you're pretty thin-skinned.

I don't see how Harbaugh doesn't take a little blame here. People keep saying he has no other options. He has plenty, and more than most. If Rudock is the best they have, then that is one pathetic stable of QB's.

I would rather see Harbaugh swing for the fences with one of the kids, then play it safe with a 5th year senior.

BOLEACH7 wrote:

Blame Hoke for our QB situation .... Harbaugh didn't have much to work with .... Rudock has been far from perfect but he is steady and has control of the situations presented each play ... enough with the Morris not playing ... it is apparent that he was far behind Rudock ... no one wants to win at Meechigan more than Jim .... if he thought for a moment that Morris was the answer he would be playing ... end of story

Hoke didn't have much to work with either Blame Rodriquez , Actually Blame DB or even his predecessor, Once they decided to change offenses and go spread, the whole roster suffered. I THINK HOKE did well in getting Wilton and Shane here . He just didn't coach then well and got the no help , because he was locked in on Denard and Devon.

Wilton was a 3 star without a whole lot of buzz who Borges liked. Morris was a 5 star to one of the rating services only and that was as a junior. By the time of his mono-plagued senior season I THINK he lost the one 5 star he had. H was always more about looking good in shorts and drills than during actual game competition including high school. He had a 50 percent completion rate when HS pro type QBs are routinely putting up 65 percent figures. I think it is fair to say that Hoke recruited the position poorly. Remember when they moved to Devin to WR in 2012? That was supposedly because Ron Bellomy was looking so good and was a fully competent back-up.

RR's QBs at Arizona have done great.

RichRod's offense can make lots of QBs look great, IMO, because it is a scoring machine. My ONLY bitch with him, and this was probably the fault of a stingy assistants budget, was that his defenses were flat out awful.

dwoody wrote:

RichRod's offense can make lots of QBs look great, IMO, because it is a scoring machine. My ONLY bitch with him, and this was probably the fault of a stingy assistants budget, was that his defenses were flat out awful.

Absolutely true on your second point and you first point is a fair one. He is very good at the design of an offense so as to get receivers wide open.

wshoes wrote:

I think it is fair to say that Hoke recruited the position poorly.

I think you can say this about all positions. There seems to be a theory on Twitter that Hoke blindly followed recruiting tating instead of his own assessment. I tend to agree with this theory. Our o-line should be lethal. I think they have come a long way but for all of the HS studs we have they should be killing opposing d-lines. Also look at Green.

That said I pull for Morris. The kid would give his life for Michigan. He recruited hard for us.

MgoBlue wrote:

...I think you can say this about all positions.  There seems to be a theory on Twitter that Hoke blindly followed recruiting tating instead of his own assessment.  I tend to agree with this theory.  Our o-line should be lethal.  I think they have come a long way but for all of the HS studs we have they should be killing opposing d-lines.  Also look at Green.

That said I pull for Morris.  The kid would give his life for Michigan.  He recruited hard for us...

ok I gotta put my thoughts in on this one because I do feel that Hoke recruited very well and not just from a star rating point of view. the problem is clearly that he didn't develop them well enough.

Like you said, this O line is getting better and better. Look, UM is in the top 5 (I believe) in sacks allowed and tackles for loss in the nation. Those stats are DIRECTLY contributed to the O line. Sure the offensive efficiency may be terrible but a lot of that is on the QB at this point.  

Wormley is one of the top guys in the nation for TFL and the UM D as a whole is currently ranked a top 30 overall in efficiency and they are #7 in overall D.

We have  a stable of RBs that can all break out at any time, 2 already have, although some would argue that Green is not one I still think there is hope for him.

I think recruited DBs very well and I think he was well above average at the LB spot.

I agree that in hindsight Hoke did not recruit as well at QB as he did in other areas but overall I liked Hoke's recruiting strategies. IMO it's the thing is did best while head coach.

Good points Sandy. The o-line has done well particularly in pass protect. Would like to see run blocking improve. I also want to wait until we play MSU. That will be a true test. I believe Utah was a good test and I would give us a C for that game.

Hoke is to blame cause he recruited them .... just as Lloyd and RR were responsible for what they left ... Speight and Malzone are not big time prospects , Smith has no vision or speed and apart from Ross none of our LBs would start for top ten teams , and lets not even discuss the OLine

That's a different way to look at it Bo. I could see Peppers, Wormley and Butt, O'neil and Mason Cole starting for OSU. Maybe Jordan Lewis. That's it.

Great view MgoBlue ... I might add Ross and Henry but they have been too inconsistent and would be second testers at best ... recruiting is a crap shoot at best ... hopefully with the quality of coaches we have now with NFL experience they will see that little bit extra in recruits that will translate into quality players in college

A little perspective on what Rudock is dealing with :

http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2015/09/jake_rudock_discusses_growth_i.html

not that I'm defending the guy, just some info for us all.

Hey, wasn't I saying something very similar to that?