Chip Scoggins: Gophers have a quarterback quandary


It's tough to say a game with multiple end over end passes can be seen as anything but sub mediocre.

Can we please cut the hyperbole?

Leidner doesn't throw a pretty ball. But making your point even more absurd doesn't help your argument.
 

Let's chart completions vs pass distance. Compare vs average QB. If he can make completions despite an ugly ball then so be it.

Part of the reason for our QB completion percentage issues, IMHO are the proportion of passes beyond 10 yards. With receivers that havent been very good, eg Donovahn Jones, the already low success rate with these passes looks worse.

Im optimistic this group of receivers, combined with the playcalling helping out Mitch, will raise his percentage this year. Provided the tackle situation is resolved.
 

I think people are getting way too caught up in defending their positions on Mitch in this thread. Re-watch Thursday's game - Mitch was awful. How can anyone not have seen that? His two longest completions were to May on a ball that was horribly underthrown, and a short out to Wolitarsky that DW ran 15-20 yards after the catch.

Yes, 19-35, but as Spoofin pointed out probably 16 of those weren't in the air more than 10 yards. One could say he kept us in the game against the number 2 team in the country. My take is that if he was functional, we win the game.

And seeing Boykin throw, compared to Leidner, there is no comparison - yeah, Boykin missed two open TDs, but every other ball was on a line, and on the money. He's a spectacular QB.

What was alarming to me was a) not just the misses, but how badly the misses were - ridiculous for a two-year BigTen starter, and b) his lack of sense. Yes, the O-Line was a shambles, but he showed so little pocket-sense...

Now, I'm saying this today, and Mitch will probably go 14 of 22 for 220 yards and 2 TDs at CSU, and we'll be saying the same thing most have said for the last year, "this is what Mitch is - awful one day, decent the next".

And again, like it or not, I'm sure he is our best option right now. However, if they (gopher coaches) like the recruit from MI as much as Burns and recruiting analysts say they do, then my vote would be to forget the redshirt for Croft and give him five plays a game.

Ok, you and others have finally convinced me. Mitcheroo is awful. Simply terrible. And he's obviously reached his ceiling. He's clearly a seasoned veteran. Just to refresh my memory I checked to see that he's a paltry 184 for 350 over his 23 game career for an anemic completion rate of 52.6%. Only 15 touchdown passes and a whopping 9 interceptions. Now I know some might argue that had he only completed 1-3 more passes per game, he's at a slightly more respectable completion rate of 60-73%. Some might even say that those 1-3 passes could have come from receivers just holding onto the ball that was right in their hands. Well, I guess we all know that's a foolish argument, since receivers cannot be expected to catch balls which invariably come at them end over end rather than in a nice tight spiral. Now that I think of it, how in the world did receivers ever manage to catch the few balls they did? I'll have to go back and check, but I've got to assum a lot of those guys are in the NFL now. Anyway, let's get those new kids in there ASAP.
 

Okay, old goph, Minnesota, others, you all have convinced ME! Mitch is fantastic, 53%is fantastic, its the oline's fault, it's the receivers' fault, whoever's... Mitch is great. He played great Thursday.

And forget what I said about him going 14-22 for 220 and two TDs this Saturday. He'll go 17 of 33 for 116 , 0 TDs, 0 interceptions, and it will be amazing. Because that is amazing.
 


Okay, old goph, Minnesota, others, you all have convinced ME! Mitch is fantastic, 53%is fantastic, its the oline's fault, it's the receivers' fault, whoever's... Mitch is great. He played great Thursday.

And forget what I said about him going 14-22 for 220 and two TDs this Saturday. He'll go 17 of 33 for 116 , 0 TDs, 0 interceptions, and it will be amazing. Because that is amazing.

Oh no you don't. You should quit while you're ahead. The argument wasn't awful/terrible vs fantastic/amazing.
 


Wait, who said this?



Or this?



Or this?



Or this?

To quote my own post just a few above yours:

"Can we please cut the hyperbole?...making your point even more absurd doesn't help your argument."

Haven't you figured out yet that if you don't think Leidner is awful, then you think he is great? There is no middle ground.

Seriously, I have yet to see anyone post that Leidner is a great QB.
 

Nothing so far on page 7 of this thread concerns me too much, or at least not yet. The only thing that presently bothers me about Mitch are the occasional fumbles. Not all the fumbles are his fault (i.e., blindside hits). However, he seems to give away one fumble a game as a result of poor ball security while scrambling or on draw plays. If Mitch is going to be the QB who doesn't lose games and does just enough to win, ball security is going to be key especially as we wait for our young RB's and WR's come into their own.
 



So what are you all saying? The same thing I am, with the exception that I thought he was awful Thursday (and I don't think that was hyperbole - you, Stoa, don't agree that he was awful, thus you think it's hyperbole), vs. you all think he wasn't awful - okay, great! We agree to disagree.

What I've also said - he's sometimes awful, sometimes functional - is that fair? He's their best option right now. He'll probably throw for 220 and two TDs Saturday (and I was serious about that).

I'll also say that in BigTen play, he's had a fantastic game (Nebraska), and a couple of very good games (Iowa and Michigan). He's had a number of awful games too (WI, Ohio State, Illinois).

Again, I think he was awful Thursday. I was there. I watched the replay. I have a relative who was a very successful head college football coach and got his opinion (he agrees). I still feel that way.

Many of you don't think he was awful. Nobody has said he was good either.

Okay, I'm ready to move on. I'm letting this annoy me too much today.
 

So what are you all saying? The same thing I am, with the exception that I thought he was awful Thursday (and I don't think that was hyperbole - you, Stoa, don't agree that he was awful, thus you think it's hyperbole)

What the hell are you talking about? You honestly think that this wasn't hyperbole:

Okay, old goph, Minnesota, others, you all have convinced ME! Mitch is fantastic, 53%is fantastic, its the oline's fault, it's the receivers' fault, whoever's... Mitch is great. He played great Thursday.

Seriously?

Many of you don't think he was awful. Nobody has said he was good either.

So now you admit that your previous post was hyperbole? Or don't you? Honestly, it's hard to keep up with your changing opinion.
 

So what are you all saying? The same thing I am, with the exception that I thought he was awful Thursday (and I don't think that was hyperbole - you, Stoa, don't agree that he was awful, thus you think it's hyperbole), vs. you all think he wasn't awful - okay, great! We agree to disagree.

What I've also said - he's sometimes awful, sometimes functional - is that fair? He's their best option right now. He'll probably throw for 220 and two TDs Saturday (and I was serious about that).

I'll also say that in BigTen play, he's had a fantastic game (Nebraska), and a couple of very good games (Iowa and Michigan). He's had a number of awful games too (WI, Ohio State, Illinois).

Again, I think he was awful Thursday. I was there. I watched the replay. I have a relative who <b>was </b>a very successful head college football coach and got his opinion (he agrees). I still feel that way.

Many of you don't think he was awful. Nobody has said he was good either.

Okay, I'm ready to move on. I'm letting this annoy me too much today.

Yep.
 




What the hell are you talking about? You honestly think that this wasn't hyperbole:



Seriously?



So now you admit that your previous post was hyperbole? Or don't you? Honestly, it's hard to keep up with your changing opinion.
Yes, that post was totally hyperbole. I was referring to my original post in which I said he was awful Thursday.
 

Nothing so far on page 7 of this thread concerns me too much, or at least not yet. The only thing that presently bothers me about Mitch are the occasional fumbles. Not all the fumbles are his fault (i.e., blindside hits). However, he seems to give away one fumble a game as a result of poor ball security while scrambling or on draw plays. If Mitch is going to be the QB who doesn't lose games and does just enough to win, ball security is going to be key especially as we wait for our young RB's and WR's come into their own.
I'll have to look it up, but pretty sure Mitch did not "give away one fumble a game..." Does he need to do a better job of protecting the ball? YES! So do all the guys who touch the ball. Ball Security=Job Security.
 

I tend to agree with TCF=UnitedWeStand about Mitch's game on Thursday. I also realize that like TCF said, Mitch could turn it around and be good against CSU. The passing bothered me on Thursday, but I've come to expect that from Mitch. So, when I see him struggle like that I realize that kinda is who he is. Anyway, what really bothered me on Thursday about Mitch was he seemed to lack huddle presence at times. There were a few times were we were forced to take a timeout due to the play clock running out. There was also an instance where half the offense didn't seem to know what play was called and he ran off guard for a 1 yard gain (I think that was the second or third series of the game). In my opinion a redshirt junior QB who has as much experience as Mitch shouldn't make mistakes like that, especially at home when he doesn't have to deal with crowd noise. As others have mentioned Mitch padded his stats on the last TD drive when TCU seemed to go into the prevent defense mode. Hopefully Mitch was able to gain confidence during that TD and bring it into next game.
 



I tend to agree with TCF=UnitedWeStand about Mitch's game on Thursday. I also realize that like TCF said, Mitch could turn it around and be good against CSU. The passing bothered me on Thursday, but I've come to expect that from Mitch. So, when I see him struggle like that I realize that kinda is who he is. Anyway, what really bothered me on Thursday about Mitch was he seemed to lack huddle presence at times. There were a few times were we were forced to take a timeout due to the play clock running out. There was also an instance where half the offense didn't seem to know what play was called and he ran off guard for a 1 yard gain (I think that was the second or third series of the game). .

I think you're talking about the audible to option where Pirsig missed the call.

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

Fair enough. It was tough to tell what had happened at the stadium. It looked like half the offense ran one play and the other half ran another. If Pirsig missed a call, then it's not fair to put that on Mitch. The lack of play clock awareness still bothers me though. Thanks for posting the information.
 




Speaking of end-over-end passes - Joe Kapp with the Vikings used to throw some of the worst ducks you ever saw. He also tied an NFL record with 7 TD passes in one game. Pretty spirals are nice for style points, but a pass doesn't have to be a perfect spiral to be catchable.

Yes, Leidner needs to play better in certain areas. But, if I was to rank the key issues on this team, O-Line would be #1 without question.
 

Earlier tonight I was watching some college football highlights from the weekend. During the Florida State - Texas State segment, I saw Seminole quarterback Everett Golson throw one of the most wobbly, knuckleball kind of passes I've ever seen. You know how the anchor described it? "And Golson, right on target for the touchdown!"

Leidner is fine, and will be fine. People obsess over every imperfection and ignore the good stuff.
 

Dang, this thread is up to 8 pages now. What a waste. Mitcheroo didn't have that bad of a game. His receivers dropped 3-4 passes that hit them in the hands, a couple on 3rd downs that would have been 1st downs and he had zero time in the pocket because our Oline was horrible. What we need is an 8 page thread on how to fix the Oline. Fix that and we win a lot of games this year with Mitchy as the QB.
 

agreed. JK and Staff coach teams that win with and without great qb play.
 

Speaking of end-over-end passes - Joe Kapp with the Vikings used to throw some of the worst ducks you ever saw. He also tied an NFL record with 7 TD passes in one game. Pretty spirals are nice for style points, but a pass doesn't have to be a perfect spiral to be catchable.

Yes, Leidner needs to play better in certain areas. But, if I was to rank the key issues on this team, O-Line would be #1 without question.

Yeah, it's interesting to analyze the "wobbly vs. accurate" thing. One of his least aerodynamic passes was a pretty darn accurate throw to Maye for the late TD. Watching that in slow motion was painful, sans the TD part of it.

Not trolling, but I honestly wonder if he would have fewer critics if he had identical stats, but threw 100% spirals. I think there is some bias against him because of the wounded ducks. You just don't see that too much in D1 and NFL. In fairness to his critics, I am sure that some of his throws are off-the-mark because of the wobble index.
 

36 of 115 is above average in any math class.....someone needs "help" with math class? Or is it just makin' crap up you prefer, suggesting I said it was average?

36 of 115 is in the second quartile if you look at the rankings raw. It probably won't change much if you filter the data more, but the third quartile would start around whomever is ranked 28/29. 36 is above the mean.
 

Dang, this thread is up to 8 pages now. What a waste. Mitcheroo didn't have that bad of a game. His receivers dropped 3-4 passes that hit them in the hands, a couple on 3rd downs that would have been 1st downs and he had zero time in the pocket because our Oline was horrible. What we need is an 8 page thread on how to fix the Oline. Fix that and we win a lot of games this year with Mitchy as the QB.

Exactly.
Honestly I wonder what the Leidner critics would have said if Roderick doesn't fumble there. We win 24-23 and Leidner has the same exact game.
He played well enough to win, it wasn't impressive and the defense carried the team, but you can't pin the L on Mitch unless you expected him to suddenly be a game changer passing QB overnight. He'll never be that, and doesn't have to be.
With this D all we need is 24-27 points and i think we win 11 more games(w/bowl).
 




Top Bottom