How did Allen not dominate in college?

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

1 - seriously? Obviously the talent level he played with is different in Buffalo but the defensive talent level he plays against is better too. As someone who was skeptical of the pick, the idea that the guy who wasn’t that good in the MWC becoming a better player in the nfl melted my brain.

 

2 - can you think of a player that improved this much from college to the nfl? Brady seems obvious but he actually was better in college than people remember. 
 

 

 

Going back to draft night, there were things I kept pointing out to those freaking about Josh from that moment on and yelling "wrong Josh"..."why wasn't he good in college"...etc etc.

1. Coaching...he never received high level coaching at any level of his football experience before the NFL.
   1. Allen was a multi-sport athlete in HS.  He wasn't hyper focused on football yet.  And he played In a small town where coaching wasn't a high level.
   2. That led to a JUCO stint...again, still not exposed to high level coaching.  
   3. That led to Wyoming...again, still not getting top notch coaching and development.
2. Raw - Without high level development, he relied purely on athletic gifts and not mechanics or fundamentals.  
3. Talent around him was weak everywhere he played.  He didn't have future college stars with him in HS, he didn't have talent around in at the JUCO, and his best players around him at Wyoming left the year before to the NFL and his last season there he really had no one any good around him.
4. Between his last day at Wyoming and the combine, Josh worked on mechanics with Palmer and suddenly there was already a dramatic improvement.  So much so, Allen came in and crushed the combine and started turning heads and changing minds.  You could see right then what his potential was and how he was responding to real coaching on his mechanics.  
   1. In fact, this is what started to change my mind on Allen, his incredible improvement at the combine.  Prior to that, I had not even considered him an option to be drafted by us.  On draft night, Allen was my guy.  I had Baker as the top prospect still, and once word got out he was the one going #1 overall, Allen was then my hope.  And if not Allen, then I was hoping for Lamar.  I hated Rosen and prayed we wouldn't draft him and Darnold I was fine taking, but I watched so many bad decisions when he was here at USC that I had real doubts about him.  

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

 

No he did not. Please show me any statistic that indicated Josh Allen, as an individual, was not going to be a successful NFL QB. 

Josh had a 56% completion percentage in college, the largest outlier for improving completion percentage, before Josh, was Kyle Boller, who went from 47.8% (lol) to 56.7% in the NFL. Overall Josh has improved from 56.2% to 62.2% and that's including his rookie year. If you just use Josh's years as a fulltime starter he's completing 64.4% of his passes which is an 8.2% improvement over his college stats. That, by definition, makes him a statistical outlier. 

[ChasBB]

2 hours ago, WhoTom said:

It takes two people to complete a pass. Maybe his receivers sucked.

 

Correction - it takes 11 players, doing their job, to complete a pass.

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

13 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I read three scouting reports on Allen from actual NFL teams shortly after the 2018 draft and they all suggested he was a can’t miss pro QB prospect. I suspect that was also the opinion of the majority of teams as well. 

If the majority of the teams felt that way he would've never made it to 7 as the 3rd QB selected. Josh is a product of a GREAT job of scouting and getting to know the player by the Bills, and more importantly, a dude who refuses to be second best. 

[Simon Says]

Because....he played 3 sports and didnt really focus on football, go to football camps or have good coaching.

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

I do find it funny that dratfniks are now actively looking for the "next Josh Allen" which is why people are mocking Will Levis in the top 5.

[Motorin']

11 minutes ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

Josh had a 56% completion percentage in college, the largest outlier for improving completion percentage, before Josh, was Kyle Boller, who went from 47.8% (lol) to 56.7% in the NFL. Overall Josh has improved from 56.2% to 62.2% and that's including his rookie year. If you just use Josh's years as a fulltime starter he's completing 64.4% of his passes which is an 8.2% improvement over his college stats. That, by definition, makes him a statistical outlier. 

 

Is this the "you're only allowed to look at stats I say" argument so players like Troy Aikman and Terry Bradshaw don't count? 

[billsfan1959]

1 minute ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

Josh had a 56% completion percentage in college, the largest outlier for improving completion percentage, before Josh, was Kyle Boller, who went from 47.8% (lol) to 56.7% in the NFL. Overall Josh has improved from 56.2% to 62.2% and that's including his rookie year. If you just use Josh's years as a fulltime starter he's completing 64.4% of his passes which is an 8.2% improvement over his college stats. That, by definition, makes him a statistical outlier. 

 

Saying that most QBs with a sub 60 completion % in college don't make it in the NFL is a group statistic based on an incredibly small data pool. Again it says nothing about the individual. It's like actuarial data used by insurance companies. Group data may indicate that the average age of death for men in the US is 72; however, all of the data they base it on says nothing about how long you, as an individual, will live.

 

By that same argument, you could say every QB that became a successful NFL QB "defied statistics" because the vast majority of QBs drafted, even in the 1st round, end up average or below at the NFL level.

 

Again, group statistics have no predictive ability at the individual level and there is absolutely no statistical data that could predict whether Allen was going to be successful or not.

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

Just now, Motorin' said:

 

Is this the "you're only allowed to look at stats I say" argument so players like Troy Aikman and Terry Bradshaw don't count? 

 

Uh what? Aikman had a 63% completion percentage in college. I was asked for a statistical example of Josh Allen being an outlier, and provided one. 

[DCOrange]

I watched a lot of him in college he was the guy I wanted the year before he ultimately entered the draft. He was one of those nonsensical ones where he was considering entering the 2017 draft and was being talked about as a 3rd-4th round prospect, but the day he decided to stay at Wyoming, he was instantly talked about as a contender for the #1 pick despite it being a stronger QB class.

 

He's certainly improved as a passer the last couple years, but he was always a better passer than given credit for. He was pretty great his sophomore season when the surrounding pieces were better; he had a good RB, Tanner Gentry (who was a great college WR), and a pretty good O-Line. His junior year, all of that disappeared and he was left running for his life nearly every play and his WRs were laughably bad. He just didn't really stand a chance. And even then, they went 8-3 with him as the starter (with the 3 losses being against Iowa, Oregon, and Boise State) and 0-2 without him, losing to Fresno State and San Jose State and putting up a total of 24 points in those two games.

 

I understood the skepticism around him, but the physical tools were obviously off the charts, and he was one of the few QBs that was actually making full field reads in college (granted he was too slow at it at the time). But he was pretty much the ultimate home run swing, and knowing his personality the way we now do, it's not surprising to me that he's turned into an MVP level QB.

[K-9]

6 minutes ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

If the majority of the teams felt that way he would've never made it to 7 as the 3rd QB selected. Josh is a product of a GREAT job of scouting and getting to know the player by the Bills, and more importantly, a dude who refuses to be second best. 

The majority of teams also had Mayfield, Darnold, and Rosen as can’t miss prospects as well. Can’t miss doesn’t necessarily mean top ranked at a position or even a top 10 pick in the draft. It just means a player is a can’t miss prospect. Nothing more. 
 

My point is that scouts who actually work in the league, who commit thousands of man hours to their profession, are able to add information and context to prospects that talking head pundits crunching “stats” as meaningful predictors of future success or failure just aren’t privy to. Josh was never an outlier in the scouting community. Not for a second.

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

9 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Saying that most QBs with a sub 60 completion % in college don't make it in the NFL is a group statistic based on an incredibly small data pool. Again it says nothing about the individual. It's like actuarial data used by insurance companies. Group data may indicate that the average age of death for men in the US is 72; however, all of the data they base it on says nothing about how long you, as an individual, will live.

 

By that same argument, you could say every QB that became a successful NFL QB "defied statistics" because the vast majority of QBs drafted, even in the 1st round, end up average or below at the NFL level.

 

Again, group statistics have no predictive ability at the individual level and there is absolutely no statistical data that could predict whether Allen was going to be successful or not.

 

I've stated multiple times why I feel Josh has defied past statistical markers. If you don't think teams look at historical data to project a player's future, I don't know what to tell you, but I can also tell you the draft nerds on the internet that only box score scout, could never have predicted this outcome for him, because all they do is use stats to predict future results. That is also why many of these same internet "scouts" refuse to admit they were completely wrong.

 

The reason the Bills hit a homerun by picking him and completely altering the trajectory of the franchise is because the FO got to know Josh Allen as a person and competitor, which can't be measured. You combine his clear desire to improve with a freaky tool box of physical gifts and you get the odds on favorite for MVP in 2022.

Edited October 20, 2022 by SACTOBILLSFAN

[gonzo1105]

Could be a lot of different things. Lets start in high school. He played a bad level of football in California with coaches who probably weren't the best at what they do. 

 

He then went to a local CC that hasn't had a ton of success and probably didn't have a lot of resources around him again. 

 

He goes to Wyoming based on raw physical attributes and carries and really bad roster in particular his senior season to a bowl game after he had a couple legit NFL guys his sophmore year in Tanner Gentry and Hollister etc.

 

Gets out of school and gets around the perfect resources, spends more time at his craft, and the physical tools fully blossom after a couple of years in the NFL. 

[Bob in STL]

2 hours ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

He had accuracy issues.

 

Please don't underestimate the importance of completion percentage at all levels. 

 

It matters.  It goes with you wherever you go.

 

A permanent football scar whose shame never washes off or changes.

 

 

 

 

 

His accuracy issues of the past stem from never being taught proper technique and always carrying the load on lesser teams with lesser talent around him.    Not from lack of talent or ability. 

 

He was never working with top college coaching and got into bad habits.  He went nowhere out of High School as some of the best college recruiters in California (a bigtime football state) missed the boat on him.   He ended up in a Junior College, as a JC transfer that begged to get a shot at D1.  

 

I guess he proves that accuracy can be taught and improved upon after all.  

 

 

35 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I read three scouting reports on Allen from actual NFL teams shortly after the 2018 draft and they all suggested he was a can’t miss pro QB prospect. I suspect that was also the opinion of the majority of teams as well. 

Probably was much better liked by Pro Scouts that really know something than from the media types that blather away on the airwaves and in social media.  

 

Mel Kiper was high on him though.  

[Pokebball]

2 hours ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

He had accuracy issues.

 

Please don't underestimate the importance of completion percentage at all levels. 

 

It matters.  It goes with you wherever you go.

 

A permanent football scar whose shame never washes off or changes.

 

 

 

 

It was a combination of a number of things. Mostly, his Oline sucked (similar to his Oline in Buffalo his first year or two). His RS soph yr in Laramie he had the best talent around him in his college career and Wyo played in the conf championship game (that was Gentry's and Hollister's senior seasons). Honestly, I think his completion percentage was largely impacted by the amount of scrambling he had to do. I saw Allen do things in Laramie that I had never, ever, seen a QB do (that includes Alex Smith, Jim Mcmahon, Steve Young, Marc Wilson, Dan McGuire, Randall Cunningham, Derrick and David Carr and others). Wyoming is what it is. The real whiff if there was one was missing his value out of HS. He lived in Fresno State's back yard and grew up as a huge Fresno State fan. They passed on him.

[Bob in STL]

21 minutes ago, Herb Nightly said:

Because....he played 3 sports and didnt really focus on football, go to football camps or have good coaching.

 

...  and he lived in the middle of nowhere were there was much less visibility to him. 

 

He worked on the family farm when others like Darnold and Rosen were going to the best football camps.  

[Brand J]

41 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

He actually didn't defy any statistics. (1) The pool of comparable players is so small that any data drawn is relatively useless, (2)  Any statistics that do exist are group statistics and have pretty much no predictive utility on an individual level, and (3) There simply isn't any data encompassing all the individual variables that go into determining who will or will not become a franchis QB - or even a successful NFL QB.

 

The argument that he "defied" statistics is tantamount to saying "nobody saw this coming," both of which seem to be uttered by people who were wrong about him.

Yeah, we had this discussion before, remember? No statistic anyone presents can be an absolute predictor of success or failure, but it does give a comparison relative to that player’s peers; those who fit within that specific group.
 

If we had a stat that said “every collegiate basketball player who shot 45% from the 3 point line in college, would go on to shoot at least 38% in the pros, but no player who shot less than 35% in college would go on to shoot better than 40% in the pros,” that would be a group statistic and anyone who shot less than 35% in college and became a career 40+% shooter in the pros, would then be an outlier. Allen’s stats in college presented him as an outlier relative to his peers. It wasn’t to say he’d be a guaranteed bust (as many claimed), but it was to say the chances of him being a franchise QB were much less likely based on this data. 

[Motorin']

25 minutes ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

Josh had a 56% completion percentage in college, the largest outlier for improving completion percentage, before Josh, was Kyle Boller, who went from 47.8% (lol) to 56.7% in the NFL. Overall Josh has improved from 56.2% to 62.2% and that's including his rookie year. If you just use Josh's years as a fulltime starter he's completing 64.4% of his passes which is an 8.2% improvement over his college stats. That, by definition, makes him a statistical outlier. 

 

Again, this is horse manure. JA threw the highest level of difficulty passes at WY over any QB drafted in his class. Garbage analysis then, garbage analysis now. If WY called the number of simple screens that Baker ran, his number would be inflated by 6-8%. 

 

Without context stats are relatively meaningless.

 

Aiken's first NFL season he was 52%, by his fifth year he was 69%.

 

Bradshaw's rookie season he was 38%. He saw a 16% improvement from year 1 to year 2 to 54%.

 

Ascribing failure to Josh at the NFL level bc he was 4% short of the mythical 60% in college, without looking the kinds of passes he was throwing, is the reason why everyone trying to predict the future based one statistical set looked so stupid... Tell me more about Rosen!

 

 

 

 

[billsfan1959]

1 minute ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

 

I've stated multiple times why I feel Josh has defied past statistical markers. If you don't think teams look at historical data to project a player's future, I don't know what to tell you, but I can also tell you the draft nerds on the internet that only box score scout, could never have predicted this outcome for him, because all they do is use stats to predict future results. That is also why many of these same internet refuse to admit they were completely wrong.

 

The reason the Bills hit a homerun by picking him and completely altered the trajectory of the franchise is because the FO got to know Josh Allen as a person and competitor, which can't be measured. You combine his clear desire to improve with a freaky tool box of physical gifts and you get the odds on favorite for MVP in 2022.

 

No, I don't believe Beane hesitated at all with Allen because of historical data on QBs who had less than a sub 60% completion rate in college: (1) Because he is smart enough to know it has no bearing on Allen as an individual and (2) He and his staff went through all of the data specific to Allen at Wyoming and understood that a low completion % does not equal innacuracy.

 

Meeting with Allen is one of the ways in which they gathered data specific to him and is the core of my argument. It is the individual traits and characteristics (both physical and mental), along with environmental variables, that ultimately determine whether or not a QB is successful - not group statistics.

 

That was my entire point. Group statistics are not very meaningful at predicting individuual results.

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

Just now, Motorin' said:

 

Again, this is horse manure. JA threw the highest level of difficulty passes at WY over any QB drafted in his class. Garbage analysis then, garbage analysis now. If WY called the number of simple screens that Baker ran, his number would be inflated by 6-8%. 

 

Without context stats are relatively meaningless.

 

Aiken's first NFL season he was 52%, by his fifth year he was 69%.

 

Bradshaw's rookie season he was 38%. He saw a 16% improvement from year 1 to year 2 to 54%.

 

Ascribing failure to Josh at the NFL level bc he was 4% short of the mythical 60% in college, without looking the kinds of passes he was throwing, is the reason why everyone trying to predict the future based one statistical set looked so stupid... Tell me more about Rosen!

 

 

 

 

 

Aikman had a 63% completion percentage in college, and it was a completely different sport when he played, let alone when Terry Bradshaw played. Those two examples have absolutely no statistical value to scouting QBs today but it's an excellent try. 

[K-9]

11 minutes ago, Bob in STL said:

Probably was much better liked by Pro Scouts that really know something than from the media types that blather away on the airwaves and in social media.  

 

Mel Kiper was high on him though.  

Media types simply can’t and don’t put in the work. They tend to watch videos, look at stats, and make proclamations. 
 

I’m not surprised that Kiper liked him. He probably has the best connections to the pro scouting community, either directly or indirectly, of any draft pundit out there.  

[billsfan1959]

10 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

Yeah, we had this discussion before, remember? No statistic anyone presents can be an absolute predictor of success or failure, but it does give a comparison relative to that player’s peers; those who fit within that specific group.
 

If we had a stat that said “every collegiate basketball player who shot 45% from the 3 point line in college, would go on to shoot at least 38% in the pros, but no player who shot less than 35% in college would go on to shoot better than 40% in the pros,” that would be a group statistic and anyone who shot less than 35% in college and became a career 40+% shooter in the pros, would then be an outlier. Allen’s stats in college presented him as an outlier relative to his peers. It wasn’t to say he’d be a guaranteed bust (as many claimed), but it was to say the chances of him being a franchise QB were much less likely based on this data. 

 

I had this argument over and over with people back in 2018. The fact is that Allen's completion % in college said nothing about him being less likely or more likely to be successful. The reason for that is there so many variables, specific to each individual QB, that go into completion %, that placing them in groups soley based on completion % and using that placement as being predictive of success or failure is idiotic - and certainly not statistically sound.

 

Again, group statistics may tell you that 80% of QBs in a specific group are likely not to be successful. However, they cannot tell you which QBs in that group will be in the 80% group that will be unsuccessful - or the 20% group that will be successful. That is where specific variables unique to each individual comes into play.

 

Edited October 20, 2022 by billsfan1959

[dollars 2 donuts]

22 minutes ago, Bob in STL said:

 

His accuracy issues of the past stem from never being taught proper technique and always carrying the load on lesser teams with lesser talent around him.    Not from lack of talent or ability. 

 

He was never working with top college coaching and got into bad habits.  He went nowhere out of High School as some of the best college recruiters in California (a bigtime football state) missed the boat on him.   He ended up in a Junior College, as a JC transfer that begged to get a shot at D1.  

 

I guess he proves that accuracy can be taught and improved upon after all.  

 

 

Probably was much better liked by Pro Scouts that really know something than from the media types that blather away on the airwaves and in social media.  

 

Mel Kiper was high on him though.  

 

 

My sarcasm above aside, Bob, this is just so ridiculous now...meaning, I've watched a number of videos of him from his high school days and even his JC days...it is truly baffling why not one of these colleges or universities, besides Wyoming, wouldn't at least take a flyer on the kid.  

 

No one...No one out there said to themselves, "Yeah, he's raw, but he is good.  He has the tools and some fight in his belly.  let's see."?!

 

 

Edited October 20, 2022 by dollars 2 donuts

[Motorin']

7 minutes ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

 

Aikman had a 63% completion percentage in college, and it was a completely different sport when he played, let alone when Terry Bradshaw played. Those two examples have absolutely no statistical value to scouting QBs today but it's an excellent try. 

 

Right, it's the 'bc you say so argument."

 

If anything, qb's from that area should have a more difficult time improving their completion percentage bc of what defenders were allowed to do to them...

 

Unless you're claiming that the mechanics of throwing the football has fundamentally changed? Did they have to use their feet to complete passes in the olden days?

[K-9]

9 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

Again, this is horse manure. JA threw the highest level of difficulty passes at WY over any QB drafted in his class. Garbage analysis then, garbage analysis now. If WY called the number of simple screens that Baker ran, his number would be inflated by 6-8%. 

 

Without context stats are relatively meaningless.

 

Aiken's first NFL season he was 52%, by his fifth year he was 69%.

 

Bradshaw's rookie season he was 38%. He saw a 16% improvement from year 1 to year 2 to 54%.

 

Ascribing failure to Josh at the NFL level bc he was 4% short of the mythical 60% in college, without looking the kinds of passes he was throwing, is the reason why everyone trying to predict the future based one statistical set looked so stupid... Tell me more about Rosen!

Took Elway 10 years to reach the mythical and arbitrary 60% level. 
 

Cue up the “it wasn’t a passing league back then” responses. 

[dollars 2 donuts]

Master of the obvious:  the absolutely best thing that happened to the Buffalo Bills was Josh coming back for what many deemed an unimpressive senior year.

 

A number of sites had him as the number 1 overall pick before his senior season.  

 

Thank you football gods and thank you Josh.  

 

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

 

No, I don't believe Beane hesitated at all with Allen because of historical data on QBs who had less than a sub 60% completion rate in college: (1) Because he is smart enough to know it has no bearing on Allen as an individual and (2) He and his staff went through all of the data specific to Allen at Wyoming and understood that a low completion % does not equal innacuracy.

 

Meeting with Allen is one of the ways in which they gathered data specific to him and is the core of my argument. It is the individual traits and characteristics (both physical and mental), along with environmental variables, that ultimately determine whether or not a QB is successful - not group statistics.

 

That was my entire point. Group statistics are not very meaningful at predicting individuual results.

 

And my entire point was that Josh Allen defied those statistics, making him a statistical outlier and a total unicorn in my opinion. But, throwing out historical data, especially as the college game and NFL game get more and more alike, is foolish and no NFL scouting department would do that. 

1 minute ago, Motorin' said:

 

Right, it's the 'bc you say so argument."

 

If anything, qb's from that area should have a more difficult time improving their completion percentage bc of what defenders were allowed to do to them...

 

Unless you're claiming that the mechanics of throwing the football has fundamentally changed? Did they have to use their feet to complete passes in the olden days?

Literally everything about the QB position and the sport of football has changed since Troy Aikman or Terry Bradshaw played. 

[K-9]

Just now, dollars 2 donuts said:

Master of the obvious:  the absolutely best thing that happened to the Buffalo Bills was Josh coming back for what many deemed an unimpressive senior year.

 

A number of sites had him as the number 1 overall pick before his senior season.  

 

Thank you football gods and thank you Josh.  

 

Yep. Lotta hype after his 2016 college season. Glad he chose to stay in school.

[Motorin']

Just now, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

 

And my entire point was that Josh Allen defied those statistics, making him a statistical outlier and a total unicorn in my opinion. But, throwing out historical data, especially as the college game and NFL game get more and more alike, is foolish and no NFL scouting department would do that. 

 

So the Bills should have taken Rosen to have avoided looking foolish. Got it. 

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

2 minutes ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

Master of the obvious:  the absolutely best thing that happened to the Buffalo Bills was Josh coming back for what many deemed an unimpressive senior year.

 

A number of sites had him as the number 1 overall pick before his senior season.  

 

Thank you football gods and thank you Josh.  

 

This is so so true. 

Just now, Motorin' said:

 

So the Bills should have taken Rosen to have avoided looking foolish. Got it. 

You realize you're not making any sense, correct? Either that, or you have severe reading comprehension problems. 

[Motorin']

3 minutes ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

 

And my entire point was that Josh Allen defied those statistics, making him a statistical outlier and a total unicorn in my opinion. But, throwing out historical data, especially as the college game and NFL game get more and more alike, is foolish and no NFL scouting department would do that. 

Literally everything about the QB position and the sport of football has changed since Troy Aikman or Terry Bradshaw played. 

 

Except the way you throw a football... But you probably never watched Elway or Aikman play?

 

Do you have any idea how much easier it was to complete a catch when they were paying? 

 

Other things, like roughing the passer are drastically different. But all you needed was 2 feet down and possession of the ball for a micro second and it was a competed pass.

 

Edited October 20, 2022 by Motorin'

[HappyDays]

His trajectory as an athlete is unprecedented. He's talked about how in high school his coach made fun of his speed calling him "tortuga." He went from normal high school athlete to world class athlete in his early 20s. That kind of jump is unheard of. And his athleticism is what makes him special now. That jump combined with his insane desire to be great and natural football intelligence created the perfect QB specimen. We might not a see a similar trajectory for another century, it's that rare.

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

1 hour ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

Josh was incredibly inaccurate in college

 

That's just a ignorant statement based on a number that has many factors that go into it besides true accuracy.  Did he have mechanical flaws - yes, did he miss throws - sure; but let's not act like he couldn't hit the broad side of barn.   Both Jordan Palmer and Trent Dilfer both alluded to there are numerous factors that go into completion % and that completion % is not a true measure of accuracy, but just a data point.  His highlight tape speaks for itself and refutes your incredibly inaccurate adjective.  

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

Just now, Motorin' said:

 

Except the way you throw a football... But you probably never watched Elway or Aikman play?

 

Do you have any idea how much easier it was to complete a catch when they were paying? 

 

Other things, like roughing the passer are drastically different. But all you needed was 2 feet down and possession of the ball for a micro second and it was a competes pass.

 

Yeah this argument is going nowhere because you're not making any sense. The entire sport, on both sides of the ball is a completely different game. Also, because you're just throwing out random strawman arguments, Josh Rosen had accuracy issues in college too, and was a turnover machine. 

[Motorin']

2 minutes ago, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

This is so so true. 

You realize you're not making any sense, correct? Either that, or you have severe reading comprehension problems. 

 

Or you don't understand deductive reasoning. You just said any team ignoring statistical history is foolish, in the context of arguing that Josh Allen is the only player in NFL history to defy historical stats. So the Bills should have selected the Right Josh with a proven statistical history in order to avoid looking like fools. 

 

That's called deduction. 

 

Just now, SACTOBILLSFAN said:

Yeah this argument is going nowhere because you're not making any sense. The entire sport, on both sides of the ball is a completely different game. Also, because you're just throwing out random strawman arguments, Josh Rosen had accuracy issues in college too, and was a turnover machine. 

 

Bye Felicia

[NoSaint]

3 hours ago, PetermansRedemption said:

That Wyoming team was awful. The team was Josh Allen. He was under immediate pressure nearly all the time. If he played for Alabama, it would have been a different story. He was the team in Wyoming. 

 

im still surprised he wasn’t trucking and hurdling guys from “southwest northeastern central square state university”

 

think cam newton when he was in juco for instance 

[Brand J]

7 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I had this argument over and over with people back in 2018. The fact is that Allen's completion % in college said nothing about him being less likely or more likely to be successful. The reason for that is there so many variables, specific to each individual QB, that go into completion %, that placing them in groups soley based on completion % and using that placement as being predictive of success or failure is idiotic - and certainly not statistically sound.

 

Again, group statistics may tell you that 80% of QBs in a specific group are likely not to be successful. However, they cannot tell you which QBs in that group will be in the 80% group that will be unsuccessful - or the 20% group that will be successful. That is where specific variables unique to each individual comes into play.

 

As I said before, I don’t disagree about Allen’s completion percentage, or with your thoughts in general, stats can never be an absolute predictor… but they do provide historical significance.

Those who didn’t believe in Allen didn’t only use his low completion percentage, they used his paltry numbers against Power 5 teams, his limited number of 300 yard games, and his low number of total TDs. It wasn’t just one stat that said Allen isn’t likely to be successful, it was many. To that end, because no one from his background has gone on to do the things he does in the NFL, he became an outlier for those predictive stats. You can disagree with that notion, but the evidence is there. All those asking “can [insert name here] be the next Josh Allen?” Well, only if the situations are comparable (which most likely they’re not) and chances of being the next Josh Allen are incredibly small. 

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

Just now, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

 

That's just a ignorant statement based on a number that has many factors that go into it besides true accuracy.  Did he have mechanical flaws - yes, did he miss throws - sure; but let's not act like he couldn't hit the broad side of barn.   Both Jordan Palmer and Trent Dilfer both alluded to there are numerous factors that go into completion % and that completion % is not a true measure of accuracy, but just a data point.  His highlight tape speaks for itself and refutes your incredibly inaccurate adjective.  

 

Lol ok. The entire point of the argument was why Josh didn't dominate in college, and I would argue he was easily the most talented player in the Mountain West his JR and SR year and clearly stood out when you actually watched his game. He didn't dominate statistically for a litany of reasons, but he was inaccurate, and a lot of that was because he lacked touch, and, as others have mentioned, never had high level coaching. 

 

Of course, Comp% isn't a be all end all statistic when it comes to accuracy, I haven't argued that, but when it comes to "dominating in college" his touch and mechanics are why, which lead to lower completion rates than one would expect of a future NFL star. The fact the Bills deduced that his inaccuracy came from reasons that weren't just from "this guy can't throw the ball where he wants" is why we get to watch a future NFL MVP on our favorite football team.

[GoBills808]

Needed more reps

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

6 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

Or you don't understand deductive reasoning. You just said any team ignoring statistical history is foolish, in the context of arguing that Josh Allen is the only player in NFL history to defy historical stats. So the Bills should have selected the Right Josh with a proven statistical history in order to avoid looking like fools. 

 

That's called deduction. 

 

 

Bye Felicia

 

Yeah I never said any of that or even alluded to any of that. So, save your "deduction" lessons for after you learn to read and understand what you're reading.