How did Allen not dominate in college?

[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.