Dylan Raiola

InOmaha said:
I don't hate him. He's not our QB. He won a little over half the games he started. You can't be a pure pocket passing QB and average throwing 210-220 yards/game and one TD. He had slighly better passing stats than Mark Gronowsky from Iowa this year.
Click to expand...

InOmaha said:
Gronowsky had 550 yards rushing to DRs -87. DR is a 220 ypg pocket passer. He needs to be closer to 320 ypg.

If we look at Bleacher reports top QBs, almost all the QBs below 3,000 yards passing had good rushing stats. Raolia probobly finishes 2025 at ~2600 yards if he stays healthy. About 1000 yards short of a passing QB with negative rushing yards.

The closest comparison to DR in stats on the list was Pitt's 3 star freshman who played 8 games. He's near the bottom. Iowa and NE QBs are both off the list. Which is fair. I'd put them in the 60s.

Click to expand...
course diss GIF
 
Husker_In_WI said:
Sure, but the assertion was specifically that Raiola had only slightly better passing stats than Gronowski. Whether Raiola was better than Gronowski as a QB overall is apples to oranges and there's much more evidence for Gronowski there. But you can't say things like this and not expect people to call you on it:
Click to expand...
I get it now. I thought it was the QB as a whole discussion.
 
Husker_In_WI said:
course diss GIF
Click to expand...

I don't consider DR a much better passer than Gronowsky. DR doesn't pass much and doesn't run.

No goalposts to move. DR passing stats and winning percentages are not good.

DR needed to throw 3200+ yards a year to make up for his inability to run. He should have been at around 2,800 when he got hurt. If he throws more and runs more next year then I'll agree it was coaching/game planning. If that's the case we need a kid that stops listing to the coaches and slings the ball/runs when needed.

I don't care about the completion percentage either. Only moving the ball downfield, TDs, and wins. If that means lower completion rate and more INTs while getting 2 TDs a game so be it. Production over potential. I'd take Gronowsky over Raiola. They are similar enough in production, might as well take the guy that wins more games.

But I'd rather our QB could get themselves in a top 50 list. Rather than go 4-3 against some of the worst teams in the BIG.
 
Last edited:
InOmaha said:
I don't consider DR a much better passer tha Gronowsky. He doesn't pass much and doesn't run.

No goalposts to move. DR passing stats and winning percentages are not good.

DR needed to throw 3200 yards a year to make up for his inability to run. If he throws more and runs more next year then I'll agree it was coaching/game planning. If that's the case we need a kid that stops listing to the coaches and slings the ball/runs when needed.

I don't care about the completion percentage either. Only moving the ball downfield, TDs, and wins. Production over potential. I'd take Gronowsky over Raiola. They are similar enough in production, might as well take the guy that wins more games.
Click to expand...

You can have that opinion, but when you're claiming he's not a much better passer using rushing stats and winning percentage, an arbitrary cutoff for how many yards you think a good passer needs to throw for, and the fact that you personally don't care about completion percentage it's a pretty wild opinion to have. I guess Raiola is no Tanner Lee, he got pretty close to 3200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top