ESPN blog ranks the SEC QB's..
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
That **** is almost laughable. Although, I do agree that Manziel is easily #1, there's no frickin way that Driskel and Wallace are ahead of Tyler Russell. I think Shaw and Russell are pretty close, but I would go with the former because he is a better runner. Tyler is the best passer out of Driskel, Wallace, and Shaw.
Wallace had an AC separation...same injury as Bradford for Oklahoma a few years back. Definitely not as devastating as a rotator cuff. A rotator cuff injury for an overhead athlete is about as bad an injury as you can have. Even with modern techniques the return to previous level of play rates are in the 60 percent range at best. He should be able to come back from a functional standpoint...it will be interesting to see how he responds to being driven into the turf on that shoulder though!
Your post makes sense in a world of disbelief. Luckily, this reply is based on nothing more than statistical evidence. Ole Miss was 4th in the SEC in 2012 in 3rd down conversation behind A&M, Alabama & UGA. State was 11th. If OM had Kentucky rather than UGA and a non-conference cream-puff over Texas, we'd have the same record.
Can't we let Bo have his Junior season before you compare the 2? This ain't no skills competition where the winner is the guy who can throw the ball through a tire the most times in a row. The goal is to be productive in the toughest conference in football. This is the 1st post I've read where Bo is, in fact, penalized as a QB by being a "better athlete" and mobile. At the end of their careers, we'll see who was more productive and won more games. Now if you had said that Russell is the better "pocket passer with no mobility", there would be no argument
First of all, No, we can't "let Bo have his Junior year before comparing". Because this article is about what we know right now.
And secondly, NO, it's not about "being productive in the SEC"....it's called "ranking the QB's". "Productivity" is based on an entire offense, not just a QB. In other words, Tyler Russell would be a much better QB than Bo Wallace in Alabama's offense. Whereas, Wallace would be better than Russell in a Mullen or Freeze offense that needs a mobile QB. Does that make Russell a worse QB? No. Based on Accuracy, arm strength, experience, and maturity, Russell is currently a better "QB" than Wallace. Wallace is a far better all around "athlete".
So if you want to turn the article in to something it's not about, you may have a point. But in the article this thread is pertaining too, you're wrong on pretty much every account.
I don't take that Ole Miss spin bait like some of our idiot fans, so steer clear of me when trying to completely flip the meaning of an article.
Last edited:
I was responding to you, not the article. I don't have any reason to respond to the article. Unless I missed something, the article states that whoever wrote it thinks that Bo is better than Tyler. I don't give two craps about a quarterback's arm strength, accuracy, etc. Productivity is the ultimate gauge of a QB, period. Russell's not a bad QB and I'm sure he'll have a great Sr yr. He should. He's a 5th yr Sr with an experienced O-line and a 1,000 yd back behind him. If we're going to take "systems" out of the equation, then we might as well have a skills competition. You can have an extremely strong arm with fantastic accuracy, and still be a shitastic SEC QB
I don't think wallace will play 12 games. He will get hurt. They had no injuries on the O-Line and that helped a bunch. I don't think they will be that lucky again. I don't think Wallace is a smart QB. Too many bad decisions and he could make up for it with his legs but this time around I think the SEC defenses will have his number and they will have Ole Miss number. They have a very thin roster and could be playing a lot of true Freshmen when these guys start to get hurt.
