College QB Analysis: Passing vs Rushing Yards

[Mikie2times]

Based on the Lamar Jackson thread I decided to look at every 1st and 2nd round QB taken since 2000. First thing I was looking at was % of total yards in college attributed to rushing. After that study I also found some meaningful trends in career passing yards. 

 

This list omits a couple of players without college data on College Football Reference such as Joe Flacco.

 

Criteria: I judged successful/unsuccessful/unsure in large part based on subjective criteria.  I did not take draft position into account. If I would be ok with that player being my starter as either the franchise guy or a future guy he made it. Longevity in the league also played a role.     

 

Successful QB's- 21 Players

Philip Rivers, Derek Carr, Jared Goff, Carson Palmer, Drew Brees, Chad Pennington, Marcus Mariota, Andy Dalton, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Teddy Bridgewater, Andrew Luck, Matt Ryan, Jay Cutler, Jameis Winston, Matthew Stafford, Aaron Rodgers, Alex Smith, Carson Wentz, Michael Vick, Cam Newton

 

Unsuccessful QB's-39 Players

Kevin Kolb, Byron Leftwich, Brady Quinn, Geno Smith, John Beck, Brian Brohm, Matt Leinart, Robert Griffin, Colin Kaepernick, Chad Henne, Tim Tebow, Brandon Weeden, Patrick Ramsey, Rex Grossman, Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, Josh Freeman, Kyle Boller, Johnny Manziel, EJ Manuel, Jake Locker, Kellen Clemens, David Carr, Jason Cambell, Joey Harrington, Christian Ponder,  Blaine Gabbert, JP Losman, JaMarcus Russell, Drew Stanton, Quincy Carter, Vince Young, Marques Tuiasosopo, Ryan Tannehill,  Brock Osweiler, Mark Sanchez, Christian Hackenberg, Paxton Lynch

 

Early/Not Sure- 4 Players

Mitch Trubisky, Blake Bortles (If he wins a Super Bowl?), Deshaun Watson, Patrick Mahomes

 

Hit %= 21/60= 35%

 

Let's look at the running QB's. Only 8 out of 60 players had 20% or more of total yards attributed to rushing. Tyrod Taylor would have made this list (23.8%), Russell Wilson would not (10.8%). Neither of them are on it because they didn't get picked in the first 2 rounds.

 

Out of the 8 Players who did, Cam Newton and Michael Vick are the only ones in the Successful department. 

 

The over 20% list includes in order:

1. Cam Newton

2. Vince Young

3. Colin Kaepernick

4. Michael Vick

5. Tim Tebow

6. Johnny Manziel

7. Jake Locker

8. Marques Tuiasosopo

  

Lamar Jackson at 31.4% would be the 3rd highest total out of any QB drafted since 2000 in the first 2 rounds. Only Newton and Young had more yards attributed to running. After Tuiasosopo is Drew Stanton, Robert Griffin, then Mariota who came in at 17.2%.  

 

It gets interesting when you sort the list by career passing yards. 

Above 9,300: 13 of 23 successful (Mayfield, Rosen, Rudolph, Jackson)

In Between: 3 of 29 successfull (Darnold)

Below 5,500 : 5 of 8 successful (Allen)

 

In the below 5,500 class, you can see some very high picks. Only Osweiler and Rodgers were taken outside the top 10.  This group also has the only successful 20%+ rushers in Newton and Vick both being #1 OVR selections. Looking at last year Watson would have been above 9,300 yards with 16% of his yards from rushing. Nearly identical to Mariota.  Mahomes would have been north of 9,300 with Trubisky falling in the below 5,500 category.  So all three fit into the "successful" group. Under 5,500 success rate seems to be a reflection of top talent/coming out early.

 

Obviously this analysis is boxed off into 1st and 2nd round picks, looking at this stat across all picks wouldn't be as valuable. By getting into the 1st or 2nd round you need NFL skills, so maybe it's better to say NFL skills plus production in the air does seem to matter.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2018 by KzooMike

[Mikie2times]

Thought this would be relevant to add regarding the incoming class. Since the 2000 draft only 4 picks amassed over 12,000 passing yards and got selected in the 1st or 2nd round. It looks like Rudolph and Baker will both fit that criteria. If that plays out this is how the list would look sorted by most passing yards in college in order.

 

1. Baker Mayfield

2. Mason Rudolph

3. Phillip Rivers*

4. Kevin Kolb

5. Derek Carr*

6. Jared Goff*

 

Edited January 22, 2018 by KzooMike

[Mango]

6 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

Thought this would be relevant to add regarding the incoming class. Since the 2000 draft only 4 picks amassed over 12,000 passing yards and got selected in the 1st or 2nd round. It looks like Rudolph and Baker will both fit that criteria. If that plays out this is how the list would look sorted by most passing yards in college in order.

 

1. Baker Mayfield

2. Mason Rudolph

3. Phillip Rivers*

4. Kevin Kolb

5. Derek Carr*

6. Jared Goff*

 

 

Mayfield- hasn’t taken a snap.

Rudolph- hasn’t taken a snap

Phillip Rivers- Borderline line HoF material. 

Kolb- Meh Kolb 

Carr- one very good season. Then a few not good seasons for all sorts of reasons. Needs to prove sustainability of high level play.

Godf-Needs to prove sustainability of high level play. 

[DCOrange]

Just nitpicking, but I feel like Kaepernick, Bradford, Tannehill, and possibly RG3 were more successful than Bridgewater to this point. Kaepernick for sure IMO. Perhaps this moreso means that I don’t think Teddy should be considered successful rather than saying the other 3 should be. 

Edited January 22, 2018 by DCOrange

[Mikie2times]

If that’s your thoughts I would probably put Teddy in the no pile than the yes side. He could also fall into not sure pretty easily. 

Edited January 22, 2018 by KzooMike

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

If that’s your thoughts I would probably put Teddy in the no pile than move those 4 to the yes side. 

It’s tricky. Kaep led his team to a Super Bowl. Bradford holds the single season completion percentage record. Tannehill has been adequate (at least as good as Cutler). Has Hacekenberg even taken a snap? Why doesn’t he go to the “too eary to tell group? It’s one of those things that’s subjective. I’m not trying to nitpick because the data is interesting. It would just be more interesting if the end result wasn’t a subjective “I think he is good and he is bad.” A winning percentage for each would be really interesting.

[Mikie2times]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s tricky. Kaep led his team to a Super Bowl. Bradford holds the single season completion percentage record. Tannehill has been adequate (at least as good as Cutler). Has Hacekenberg even taken a snap? Why doesn’t he go to the “too eary to tell group? It’s one of those things that’s subjective. I’m not trying to nitpick because the data is interesting. It would just be more interesting if the end result wasn’t a subjective “I think he is good and he is bad.” A winning percentage for each would be really interesting.

I think it has to be subjective to account for the Tyrod effect on stats. Win % would be nice, just a lot of work.

 

I’m asking myself would I be happy with a 1st or 2nd spent on any of the guys you mention? I wouldn’t. Hackenbergerdgdhd, could shift into unsure, but he needs to get on the field.

 

He’s in the middle category in case you wondered. 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, KzooMike said:

I think it has to be subjective to account for the Tyrod effect on stats. Win % would be nice, just a lot of work.

 

I’m asking myself would I be happy with a 1st or 2nd spent on any of the guys you mention? I wouldn’t. Hackenbergerdgdhd, could shift into unsure, but he needs to get on the field.

 

He’s in the middle category in case you wondered. 

I like Hackenberg less than anyone on this board. Ha ha, in no way do I think that he will ever be anywhere but awful. I was just saying that it’s tough to be bad if you haven’t played.

 

I’m also not asking you to do the win percentage work. No one wants to spend 2 hours to make a post. It would be interesting to see though. How do these guys do in the NFL? There are a zillion ways to slice the data though. 

 

The moral of the story is that you are more likely than not to get a guy that isn’t good (even in the 1st 2 rounds). If you pulled out guys taken in the top 4 watch how few are successful. You’d be pulling out Wentz, Mariota, Jameis, Goff, Stafford, Cam, Carson Palmer, Ryan, Eli, Luck, Vick and Alex Smith from the good pile. You need to scout well but more importantly develop guys when you get them.

[Mikie2times]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I like Hackenberg less than anyone on this board. Ha ha, in no way do I think that he will ever be anywhere but awful. I was just saying that it’s tough to be bad if you haven’t played.

 

I’m also not asking you to do the win percentage work. No one wants to spend 2 hours to make a post. It would be interesting to see though. How do these guys do in the NFL? There are a zillion ways to slice the data though. 

 

The moral of the story is that you are more likely than not to get a guy that isn’t good (even in the 1st 2 rounds). If you pulled out guys taken in the top 4 watch how few are successful. You’d be pulling out Wentz, Mariota, Jameis, Goff, Stafford, Cam, Carson Palmer, Ryan, Eli, Luck, Vick and Alex Smith from the good pile. You need to scout well but more importantly develop guys when you get them.

Just to look at the same list excluding top 10 picks

 

9,300+: 6 of 15 

In Between: 1 of 20 (Cutler)

5,500 or less: 1 of 2 (Rodgers)

 

Certainly not the end all, but the in between group has a startling bust rate. Even disagreement on which QB's qualify as good really doesn't change that. I think it's possible you can see a larger trends at work within this data. To surpass 9,300 yards you most likely started as a Freshman or you had massive production for a minimum of two seasons. At 5,500 or less you don't have a large body of work so if you are getting drafted in the top 2 rounds its off talent. In between seems to strike a perfect balance between those two descriptions. You have talent and enough production to start at least two years, but you haven't shown a highly productive career profile. Why that is should concern scouts.      

Edited January 22, 2018 by KzooMike

[DCOrange]

3 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

Just to look at the same list excluding top 10 picks

 

9,300+: 6 of 15 

In Between: 1 of 20 (Cutler)

5,500 or less: 1 of 2 (Rodgers)

 

Certainly not the end all, but the in between group has a startling bust rate. Even disagreement on which QB's qualify as good really doesn't change that. I think it's possible you can see a larger trends at work within this data. To surpass 9,300 yards you most likely started as a Freshman or you had massive production for a minimum of two seasons. At 5,500 or less you don't have a large body of work so if you are getting drafted in the top 2 rounds its off talent. In between seems to strike a perfect balance between those two descriptions. You have talent and enough production to start at least two years, but you haven't shown a highly productive career profile. Why that is should concern scouts.      

 

Obviously every draft is different (ex: a guy like Locker goes top 10 one year but had he been in this year's draft, I'm not sure he even gets considered in the 1st round due to how many 1st round prospects there are this year), but 1/20 is seriously pretty insane.

[Mikie2times]

Extremes regarding total % of yards attributed to the ground are not favorable in either direction.

 

At 1/2% or less of total yards attributed to rushing= 3 of 14 success rate, with 11 of the 14 having negative career rushing values. This could speak to a weakness in pocket awareness.

 

17.5% or higher= 2 of 10 success rate

 

So if you narrowed this down to QB's outside of the extremes in rushing yards the breakout on passing production would be as follows. 

 

9,300+ Success Rate: 10 of 14 

In Between: 3 of 16

5,500 or less: 3 of 6

 

QB's in the next draft class with over 9,300 yards in passing who aren't extreme on rushing % include only Baker Mayfield. Last year only Watson and Mahomes fit that profile. 

 

Edited January 22, 2018 by KzooMike