Roy CO HSKR
Five-Star Recruit
From rojo:
For the twelve Big 12 teams....
Look at the rankings of the seven returning starting Quarterbacks and the five back-up quarterbacks who are probable starters for ’06.
Returning starters:
1) Taylor, NU (Sr): 310 Big 12 pass attempts in ’05
2) Meyer, ISU (Jr): 244
3) Bomar, OU (So): 231
4) Bell, BU (Sr): 224
5) Young, UT (Sr): 208
6) Evridge, KSU (So): 203
7) Pena, OSU (Jr): 179
And #2 Quarterbacks who are likely starters:
8) McGee, TAM (So): 50 Big 12 pass attempts in ’05
9) Daniel, MU (So): 46
10) Cox, CU (Sr): 21
11) Barrman, KU (Sr): 18
12) Harrell, TT (So): 11
.
I. Percentage of Completions: (Big 12 games only)
1) Young, UT: 62%
2-4) Taylor, NU: 59%
2-4) Meyer, ISU: 59%
2-4) Bell, BU: 59%
5) Bomar, OU: 53%
6) Pena, OSU: 50%
7) Evridge, KSU: 48%
_ _ _ _ _
--Daniel, MU: 31-46: 67%
--Barrman, KU: 11-18: 61%
--Harrell, TT: 6-11: 55%
--Cox, CU: 9-21: 43%
--McGee, TAM: 21-50: 42%
.
II. Interception Rate: (Big 12 games only.)
1) Bell, BU: 1 interception/every 112 attempts
2) Meyer, ISU: 1/49
3) Taylor, NU: 1/44
4) Young, UT: 1/42
5) Bomar, OU: 1/33
6) Evridge, KSU: 1/29
7) Pena, OSU: 1/14
_ _ _ _ _
--Cox, CU: None in 21 attempts
--Harrell, TT: None/11
--Barrman, KU: None/18
--McGee, TAM: 1/50
--Daniel, MU: 1/46
.
III. Pass Efficiency Rating: (Big 12 games only.) [Note: This is a weighted index measuring passing yards, number of passing TD’s, attempts, completions and interceptions]
1) Young, UT: 168
2) Meyer, ISU: 141
3) Taylor, NU: 127
4) Bell, BU: 122
5) Bomar, OU: 114
6) Evridge, KSU: 103
7) Pena, OSU: 102
_ _ _ _ _
--Harrell, TT: 123
--Daniel, MU: 123
--Barmann, KU: 90
--McGee, TAM: 89
--Cox, CU: 61
.
IV. Zac Taylor’s improvement through the year:
Season averages can’t show growth within a season. And Zac Taylor grew a lot during his first tour through Division I-A ball.
A) Taylor’s first three games (Maine, Wake, Pitt):
--Completion rate: 44% (39-89-3)
--Pass Efficiency: 78
--Interception Rate: 1 interception every 30 passes.
B) Taylor’s last two games (Kansas State, Colorado):
--Completion rate: 65% (48-74-0)
--Pass Efficiency: 152
--Interception Rate: No interceptions in 74 passes.
Graphlines are seldom smooth. Taylor’s had a significant dip against Kansas: 14-26-1; 54%; Pass Efficiency= 97.
.
The Bottom Line:
Stats don’t measure leadership, poise, ability to avoid the sack, confidence, rushing ability, etc., etc. Still…. based on all that we see above, we can make a couple of predictions:
1) Bret Meyer or Zac Taylor versus Vince Young---at the 2006 Big 12 Championship game in Kansas City.
2) October 7, 2006: Nebraska at Iowa State. The winner gets the possible tiebreaker for the North title.
Of course Harrison Beck and Josh Freeman enter the mix for '06. In the meantime…. we'll watch the Alamo Bowl to learn more about the development of Taylor and our offense.
Just some things to think about…
For the twelve Big 12 teams....
Look at the rankings of the seven returning starting Quarterbacks and the five back-up quarterbacks who are probable starters for ’06.
Returning starters:
1) Taylor, NU (Sr): 310 Big 12 pass attempts in ’05
2) Meyer, ISU (Jr): 244
3) Bomar, OU (So): 231
4) Bell, BU (Sr): 224
5) Young, UT (Sr): 208
6) Evridge, KSU (So): 203
7) Pena, OSU (Jr): 179
And #2 Quarterbacks who are likely starters:
8) McGee, TAM (So): 50 Big 12 pass attempts in ’05
9) Daniel, MU (So): 46
10) Cox, CU (Sr): 21
11) Barrman, KU (Sr): 18
12) Harrell, TT (So): 11
.
I. Percentage of Completions: (Big 12 games only)
1) Young, UT: 62%
2-4) Taylor, NU: 59%
2-4) Meyer, ISU: 59%
2-4) Bell, BU: 59%
5) Bomar, OU: 53%
6) Pena, OSU: 50%
7) Evridge, KSU: 48%
_ _ _ _ _
--Daniel, MU: 31-46: 67%
--Barrman, KU: 11-18: 61%
--Harrell, TT: 6-11: 55%
--Cox, CU: 9-21: 43%
--McGee, TAM: 21-50: 42%
.
II. Interception Rate: (Big 12 games only.)
1) Bell, BU: 1 interception/every 112 attempts
2) Meyer, ISU: 1/49
3) Taylor, NU: 1/44
4) Young, UT: 1/42
5) Bomar, OU: 1/33
6) Evridge, KSU: 1/29
7) Pena, OSU: 1/14
_ _ _ _ _
--Cox, CU: None in 21 attempts
--Harrell, TT: None/11
--Barrman, KU: None/18
--McGee, TAM: 1/50
--Daniel, MU: 1/46
.
III. Pass Efficiency Rating: (Big 12 games only.) [Note: This is a weighted index measuring passing yards, number of passing TD’s, attempts, completions and interceptions]
1) Young, UT: 168
2) Meyer, ISU: 141
3) Taylor, NU: 127
4) Bell, BU: 122
5) Bomar, OU: 114
6) Evridge, KSU: 103
7) Pena, OSU: 102
_ _ _ _ _
--Harrell, TT: 123
--Daniel, MU: 123
--Barmann, KU: 90
--McGee, TAM: 89
--Cox, CU: 61
.
IV. Zac Taylor’s improvement through the year:
Season averages can’t show growth within a season. And Zac Taylor grew a lot during his first tour through Division I-A ball.
A) Taylor’s first three games (Maine, Wake, Pitt):
--Completion rate: 44% (39-89-3)
--Pass Efficiency: 78
--Interception Rate: 1 interception every 30 passes.
B) Taylor’s last two games (Kansas State, Colorado):
--Completion rate: 65% (48-74-0)
--Pass Efficiency: 152
--Interception Rate: No interceptions in 74 passes.
Graphlines are seldom smooth. Taylor’s had a significant dip against Kansas: 14-26-1; 54%; Pass Efficiency= 97.
.
The Bottom Line:
Stats don’t measure leadership, poise, ability to avoid the sack, confidence, rushing ability, etc., etc. Still…. based on all that we see above, we can make a couple of predictions:
1) Bret Meyer or Zac Taylor versus Vince Young---at the 2006 Big 12 Championship game in Kansas City.
2) October 7, 2006: Nebraska at Iowa State. The winner gets the possible tiebreaker for the North title.
Of course Harrison Beck and Josh Freeman enter the mix for '06. In the meantime…. we'll watch the Alamo Bowl to learn more about the development of Taylor and our offense.
Just some things to think about…