Thorson, not a runner? Do you remember his first game? He pretty much beat Stanford bu running and it was a pretty big run he got injured on in the bowl game. He could definitely run when it was appropriate. Lausch had zero help. The OL was crap, there was NO running game to support him. Sullivan never really a starter and he got hurt a lot so he never really got a chance to show what he could do Marty never really even made it on the field and HJ never really showed any running.
Decommits and Recruiting
- Thread starter AdamOnFirst
- Start date
Thorson, not a runner? Do you remember his first game? He scored teh only TD on a 42 yd run. He pretty much beat Stanford by running and it was a pretty big run he got injured on in the bowl game. He could definitely run when it was appropriate. Lausch had zero help. The OL was crap, there was NO running game to support him. Sullivan never really a starter and he got hurt a lot so he never really got a chance to show what he could do Marty never really even made it on the field and HJ never really showed any running.
I would say from the Fitz era to the present (so post-Basanez), the clear "runners" at QB are:
- Alviti (5.0 ypc)
- Colter (2180 career rushing yards, 28 TDs)
- Freeman (3.7 ypc)
- Kafka (887 career rushing yards, 11 TDs)
- Lausch (290 career rushing yards, 3 TDs)
- Marty (317 career rushing yards, 5 TDs)
- Persa (716 career rushing yards, 10 TDs)
- Sullivan (257 career rushing yards, 3 TDs)
- Wright (4.7 ypc)
- Bryant (-33 career rushing yards)
- Green (the lowest number of rushing attempts of anyone on this list)
- Hilinski (an astounding negative 73 yards rushing)
- Johnson (42 career rushing yards)
- Oliver (-2 career rushing yards)
- Siemian (-23 rushing yards, but he did have a lot of victory formation...)
- Stone (20 career rushing yards)
- Watkins (63 career rushing yards)
- Bacher (More carries than all but four guys on this list, but only 1.3 ypc)
- Ramsey (Tied for sixth in yards per carry, but only 84 career runs)
- Smith (Tied for sixth in yards per carry, but only 72 career runs)
- Thorson (27 rushing TDs, but the 6th lowest yards per carry of the 21 QBs on this list)
I'd otherwise only just add that "dual threat" implies a player that is a legitimate threat both running AND passing. Many QBs are not dual threats because they don't run well enough to challenge a defense in that way. But 4 passing TDs on the season for Gronowski doesn't scream someone who is a true problem for defenses in more than a singular way, either.
I'm not gonna lie, I don't know how anybody with a brain could watch modern college football and say "QB with legs as a tool, nah, don't want it!" Sometimes I think some of you people don't watch any games but our own.
As for Gronowski, not that he'd necessarily be a dramatic difference from Stone (Iowa's PPG are HEAVILY HEAVILY influenced by their many defensive and special teams scores plus MANY MANY very short fields from the same two phases), but the legs are a plus and 4 INTs compared to double digits is significant. And anyway, CoralSprings was largely talking about last year, when he WOULD have made a difference, so it's a bit silly.
I also think some of you need to remember when you actually watched the game rather than misusing old counting statistics. Thorson not a runner because of a low YPC average? You don't think that was highly influenced by horrific offensive lines (and a pretty badly designed offense) over that period and the many, many sacks he took as a result? Thorson was fleet of foot in the open field and we'd even send him out wide downfield for big plays on wrinkle looks. He wasn't really a vision and cut guy in the box like a Kain Colter who we were calling read options with all day, but the guy's legs were dangerous and needed to be accounted for by the defense.
Anyway, overly focusing on Mark Gronowski, of all people, whoin Iowa's hyper conservative offense adds a bruising fullback running style along with game manager passing is distracting from the larger point, which is our HS recruiting SUCKS right now.
As for Gronowski, not that he'd necessarily be a dramatic difference from Stone (Iowa's PPG are HEAVILY HEAVILY influenced by their many defensive and special teams scores plus MANY MANY very short fields from the same two phases), but the legs are a plus and 4 INTs compared to double digits is significant. And anyway, CoralSprings was largely talking about last year, when he WOULD have made a difference, so it's a bit silly.
I also think some of you need to remember when you actually watched the game rather than misusing old counting statistics. Thorson not a runner because of a low YPC average? You don't think that was highly influenced by horrific offensive lines (and a pretty badly designed offense) over that period and the many, many sacks he took as a result? Thorson was fleet of foot in the open field and we'd even send him out wide downfield for big plays on wrinkle looks. He wasn't really a vision and cut guy in the box like a Kain Colter who we were calling read options with all day, but the guy's legs were dangerous and needed to be accounted for by the defense.
Anyway, overly focusing on Mark Gronowski, of all people, whoin Iowa's hyper conservative offense adds a bruising fullback running style along with game manager passing is distracting from the larger point, which is our HS recruiting SUCKS right now.
Thorson also had a low YPC because we successfully used a now defunct play called the QB sneak.
That's not the argument though.
The argument is about how much to weight that particular skill in evaluating a quarterback.
When the debate is something like Tom Brady versus Justin Fields, it's easy, you take the "passing" quarterback. When the debate is something like Lamar Jackson versus Kyle Orton, it's easy, you take "running quarterback." But when you move to less extreme examples on the spectrum the degree to which running ability should excuse deficiency in throwing the ball -- from a position on the field where throwing the ball is the primary responsibility -- is far more of a case-by-case situation.
We really don't need to go down the "anybody with a brain" route just because you apparently disagree.
I do think your point about CoralSprings talking about last year is a good one. I read that initially as suggesting we'd be better with Gronowski this year by virtue of an extra year of development with him -- which I don't violently disagree with necessarily, but also don't fully buy either. But I would agree that Gronowski would have likely been a clear upgrade on Wright/Lausch and positioned us better going into 2025 in that sense.
I didn't even argue myself that Thorson wasn't a "runner," I just said it was a fair debate and summarized the reasons (the 27 TDs and the yards per carry). Yeesh.
I would agree Thorson played behind some bad offensive lines, but it's hard for me to believe they would have been that differentiably worse than the lines some of the other NU QBs who didn't average 1.1ypc played behind. Wright had 4.7 ypc in limited time behind last year's terrible line, and even if you (fairly) dismiss that as small sample size, Lausch had 2.4ypc. You want to call Thorson a runner, I don't object, but merely citing statistics that run counter to that narrative is not a misuse of them.
I can agree with this too, but the thread goes where it goes, and to me, if you want Northwestern to fix its failings to recruit and develop a high school QB, trying to have a modern offense and not a Ferentz-lite offense to attract skill position talent is part of that story...
Many on the list were pretty limited in time on field. Alviti might have been pretty good but injury sidelined him at the wrong time and he never really had a chance to play as Thorson got the opportunity and never gave it up. . Freeman? Don't really even remember him Wright? Out after only a couple games. Marty showed some signs but generally behind others, Ramsey had 83 carries at NU for 263 so would have to list him as a runner. I would suggest Thorson as well. Even Bryant was not as much of a statue as you suggest, Just that that OL was pretty bad giving up 51 sacks (he got sacked 26 times (Sullivan was sacked another 24) . He did not run as much but still.. Just saying mobility helped
If you take QBs that are equal in throwing the ball but one is more able to run when appropriate, you take the runner. You have to overcome the sacks before you get to positive yds Thorson ran for 397 positive yds as a Frosh. Then he was throwing more and they worked on limiting his running, Finally, his stats are affected a lot by his senior year when he was coming back from significant injury and actually had negative yds running. He was a run when appropriate QB.
Right now we Stone is not really a runner whether it is appropriate or not. He has not been sacked a lot (10 times for -69 yds ) and has only run 25 other times so really not a runner. He is throwing the ball a lot more than Grownowski and has a #1 target in Wilde that Grownowski just doesn't have. Even with that he has only completed 58% of his passes vs 65 for Grownowski. If Growski ahd been here last year, it is likely he would have been an upgrade this year from Stone. And he would have given us the added dimension of being able to run when appropriate.
At this point the portal is necessary because as you say our current HS recruiting is poor.
I agree with this it's just apparent to me from our conversation that you consider Gronowski and Stone equal as passers so as to have the tie go to the runner, and I don't. Chalk it up to difference of opinion I guess.
My point is YPC is a nearly irrelevant statistic to evaluate if a QB was a runner. Between sneaks, sacks, scrambles vs called runs etc there is like three times more noise than signal. You can throw it in the garbage. Meanwhile, anybody who rememberes Thornton knows his legs were a weapon of note, at least until his injury.
I mean, I definitely think Gronowski is a better passer than Stone. Stine is very mistake prone. I ALSO think Stone is mobile enough that they should run with him a little more often. He ran that zone read perfectly well for the Td in whichever game that was, we should be calling that basic concept a few times a game, he’s certainly good enough to pull it 1-2 times a game and scamper for a couple. He’s also got some decent mobility in the pocket, he’s far more mobile than Touchdown Trevor types
In my book, two guys have been true runners, Colter and Kustok - the offense was designed with their running skills in mind and they both did it very well. With the offense designed around it, they won a lot of games. My recollection is that for Thorson's first year, the team was hopeful that he might be in that mold, and he did have that one really good game on the ground. But by his second year, his runs were mostly to keep the defense honest from time to time, or because the protection broke down, which for the next three years happened a lot. But even leaving out the Sr year, designed runs were not a significant part of his game and his pocked presence seemed about average but not a particular asset. I would say that unless the QB is a runner of at least the Colter/Kustok quality, what's needed is ability to move a little in the pocket to get the pass off. But expecting to get a lot of yards (and wins) from the guys like Marty, Lausch, HJ, Wright, hasn't worked and won't unless they are a really good passer.
Oh boy. Persa was not a runner? Just because he was also a great passer does not mean we should forget how mobile he was. Persa is right up there with any NU QB in terms of running ability. I agree that Colter sits on top by himself. No other QB at NU had his level of athelticism, instincts, vision and lateral mobility.
He ran for 397 yds net his Frosh season. Part of that was because he was pressed into starting and was more inexperienced as a passer so he would bring down the ball and run (he threw for only 1500 yds that first year. . As time went on he was putting up over 3K yds passing and they used the threat of his running to keep Ds honest
Persa was also a solid dual threat
But that doesn't mean that Persa, Kafka and Thorson were not very capable runners