The amount of irony in this post could fill a small stadium...
For what it's worth, Josh Allen stole the show at the Senior Bowl
- Thread starter jim1
- Start date
The amount of irony in this post could fill a small stadium...
Pachyderm_Wave
Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2008
- Messages
- 15,323
- Reaction score
- 13,905
QB-A
62.5% -- 7.2 YPA -- 59 TD's -- 23 INT's
QB-B
59.6% -- 7.1 YPA -- 27 TD's -- 24 INT's
If you're evaluating college stats, which one is clearly going to be the better pro?
QB-A
59.9% -- 6.9 YPA -- 56 TD's -- 37 INT's
QB-B
70.4% -- 9.0 YPA -- 131 TD's -- 42 INT's
QB-C
65.7% -- 9.2 YPA -- 65 TD's -- 22 INT's
One quarterback clearly doesn't belong with the other two based on college stats.
QB-A
67.1% -- 8.7 YPA -- 78 TD's -- 17 INT's
QB-B
57.2% -- 8.1 YPA -- 44 TD's -- 20 INT's
Which one are you eliminating based on college completion percentage and stats?
It should be pretty easy to determine which QB's are going to be better based on the college stats. You can do this stuff all day...
That game was prototype Josh Allen. He looked scared in the first half and dominant in the second half.
He's going to thrill and frustrate whatever fan base ends up with him, and often on consecutive possessions.
The touch is definitely improving on midrange throws, especially compared to what he was capable of during 2016. Give Allen a one-on-one downfield situation and he can vary the pace wonderfully. He still struggles with ideal variance in traffic.
***
Low completion percentage is a massive indicator. Far more often than not. It's silly to pretend otherwise. There have been countless related studies and always with the same conclusion. I've seen it dating 20 years or more. I've seen Football Outsiders do it, some college professor do it, and so forth. Earlier I remember I used to reference the criteria on that KDWN radio program in Las Vegas. It was easy to reject certain guys who were simply inaccurate.
Eventually the Parcells type formula came along and tried to combine multiple factors, including games started and winning percentage. I like the basic concept but it was obvious from the outset that it was trying to catch everybody. Juggle the criteria to get rid of a few annoying back fitted failures. I know how that works because I've done it with wagering formulas. Eventually you are throwing in things that aren't relevant or predictive, but it simply feels better because once you've screwed the new variable in place suddenly your connect percentage vaults 10% or more. The election guy Allan Lichtman does the same thing. Then he juggles from cycle to cycle, always rationalizing that the electoral result was the proper evaluation of his formula in one instance, but the popular vote the proper measure in another cycle. Comical.
The problem with player evaluation is nobody likes to be wrong, especially in a high profile situation. I am not happy that Sons of Shula was banned. I didn't agree with him often, other than politics, but he is a sharp guy. I don't know what happened here. But I do remember when he tried to taunt me with my support of Johnny Manziel. Long after the fact. I thought it was hilarious when he tried to mock a sports bettor for being wrong about something, when being wrong 40% of the time is a huge win in that arena. I was wrong then and I'll be wrong many times in this draft and subsequently.
That being said, I love the numerical helpers that aid in being correct more often than not, and certainly benefit me when I no longer chose to spend much time on evaluation. Here's another very recent study on the significance of completion percentage toward NFL success:
If I had to make a quick summary of that link, which points to 58.5% as the cutoff point, I'd say it's a waste of time to look at lesser prospects who fail to meet the standard.
Now, with highly rated guys then it's more of a sticky situation. Not many are statistical rejects. Obviously there is a conflict between raw ability level and the stats, if a player is rated that high.
I'll default to my original comparison of Josh Allen as a much bigger and stronger armed Jake Plummer. That was the first thing that jumped out at me when I watched him against Boise State and San Diego State within 2016. Allen is surprisingly smooth and agile for a quarterback of that size. He can run to buy time in the pocket and also to gain ground. He seems like a smart guy out there. But for whatever reason the totality is that mid 50s completion percentage, which is the same range that Jake Plummer always had, in each of his four seasons at Arizona State.
BTW, I'm a USC guy but there's no comparison between Allen's arm and Darnold's, although Darnold is certainly strong enough.
* Also, when I pasted that link I didn't realize the entire article would show up. Sorry about that. I meant for it to be a click and view.
He's going to thrill and frustrate whatever fan base ends up with him, and often on consecutive possessions.
The touch is definitely improving on midrange throws, especially compared to what he was capable of during 2016. Give Allen a one-on-one downfield situation and he can vary the pace wonderfully. He still struggles with ideal variance in traffic.
***
Low completion percentage is a massive indicator. Far more often than not. It's silly to pretend otherwise. There have been countless related studies and always with the same conclusion. I've seen it dating 20 years or more. I've seen Football Outsiders do it, some college professor do it, and so forth. Earlier I remember I used to reference the criteria on that KDWN radio program in Las Vegas. It was easy to reject certain guys who were simply inaccurate.
Eventually the Parcells type formula came along and tried to combine multiple factors, including games started and winning percentage. I like the basic concept but it was obvious from the outset that it was trying to catch everybody. Juggle the criteria to get rid of a few annoying back fitted failures. I know how that works because I've done it with wagering formulas. Eventually you are throwing in things that aren't relevant or predictive, but it simply feels better because once you've screwed the new variable in place suddenly your connect percentage vaults 10% or more. The election guy Allan Lichtman does the same thing. Then he juggles from cycle to cycle, always rationalizing that the electoral result was the proper evaluation of his formula in one instance, but the popular vote the proper measure in another cycle. Comical.
The problem with player evaluation is nobody likes to be wrong, especially in a high profile situation. I am not happy that Sons of Shula was banned. I didn't agree with him often, other than politics, but he is a sharp guy. I don't know what happened here. But I do remember when he tried to taunt me with my support of Johnny Manziel. Long after the fact. I thought it was hilarious when he tried to mock a sports bettor for being wrong about something, when being wrong 40% of the time is a huge win in that arena. I was wrong then and I'll be wrong many times in this draft and subsequently.
That being said, I love the numerical helpers that aid in being correct more often than not, and certainly benefit me when I no longer chose to spend much time on evaluation. Here's another very recent study on the significance of completion percentage toward NFL success:
If I had to make a quick summary of that link, which points to 58.5% as the cutoff point, I'd say it's a waste of time to look at lesser prospects who fail to meet the standard.
Now, with highly rated guys then it's more of a sticky situation. Not many are statistical rejects. Obviously there is a conflict between raw ability level and the stats, if a player is rated that high.
I'll default to my original comparison of Josh Allen as a much bigger and stronger armed Jake Plummer. That was the first thing that jumped out at me when I watched him against Boise State and San Diego State within 2016. Allen is surprisingly smooth and agile for a quarterback of that size. He can run to buy time in the pocket and also to gain ground. He seems like a smart guy out there. But for whatever reason the totality is that mid 50s completion percentage, which is the same range that Jake Plummer always had, in each of his four seasons at Arizona State.
BTW, I'm a USC guy but there's no comparison between Allen's arm and Darnold's, although Darnold is certainly strong enough.
* Also, when I pasted that link I didn't realize the entire article would show up. Sorry about that. I meant for it to be a click and view.
That's what i meant by inconsistent. He looked like a completely different player from half to half.
Pachyderm_Wave
Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2008
- Messages
- 15,323
- Reaction score
- 13,905
I've been doing this for a long time too. If you choose to emphasize statistics, mainly completion percentage...and try to draw some sort of relevant conclusion from them (you can't) then you have to know enough to be aware of both sides of the coin...
The bigger red flag when evaluating quarterbacks and projecting them to the next level is an absurdly HIGH completion percentage. As opposed to one below 58.5%.
If a QB is completing 70% of their passes in college, it's more of a red flag than a completion percentage below 58.5%. The bust percentage is even more off the charts. Mainly due to the style of offense and difficulty of the throws.
A study like the one posted here can be good for big picture snapshot, but it's not what the draft is about. It attempts to provide some causation vs. correlation relationship, but fails.
The draft is about evaluating specific quarterbacks in a given class against their peers in that same class, choosing the right one for your team, and at a very specific price.
Conversely, wins are also an over emphasized aspect. Nobody won more in college than David Greene. He left Georgia the winningest quarterback in NCAA history. Was a 3rd round pick by Seattle and never started a game in the NFL.
The bottom line is evaluation is an art. You have to know what noise to block out and when it's appropriate to do so.
The bigger red flag when evaluating quarterbacks and projecting them to the next level is an absurdly HIGH completion percentage. As opposed to one below 58.5%.
If a QB is completing 70% of their passes in college, it's more of a red flag than a completion percentage below 58.5%. The bust percentage is even more off the charts. Mainly due to the style of offense and difficulty of the throws.
A study like the one posted here can be good for big picture snapshot, but it's not what the draft is about. It attempts to provide some causation vs. correlation relationship, but fails.
The draft is about evaluating specific quarterbacks in a given class against their peers in that same class, choosing the right one for your team, and at a very specific price.
Conversely, wins are also an over emphasized aspect. Nobody won more in college than David Greene. He left Georgia the winningest quarterback in NCAA history. Was a 3rd round pick by Seattle and never started a game in the NFL.
The bottom line is evaluation is an art. You have to know what noise to block out and when it's appropriate to do so.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2004
- Messages
- 1,170
- Reaction score
- 792
I watched all the Senior Bowl coverage and the game. When looking at the QBs, Josh Allen could do things that no other QB in this draft could do. I look at his completion percentage in his Junior and Senior years, 56%, and it just brings up questions.
I do think you have to look at the whole picture and not just his stats. I also wouldn't eliminate a QB based solely on mechanical quirks or flaws. Phillip Rivers always had an awkward delivery, but his ball placement and anticipation were good coming out of college. Tom Brady has made a number of mechanical adjustments since coming into the league. I think Allen's pro day will be telling. is there an improvement there that improves his consistency and thus accuracy? This isn't a Tebow rebuild job.
I do think you have to look at the whole picture and not just his stats. I also wouldn't eliminate a QB based solely on mechanical quirks or flaws. Phillip Rivers always had an awkward delivery, but his ball placement and anticipation were good coming out of college. Tom Brady has made a number of mechanical adjustments since coming into the league. I think Allen's pro day will be telling. is there an improvement there that improves his consistency and thus accuracy? This isn't a Tebow rebuild job.
The first time I saw Josh Allen was the game at Nebraska very early in the 2016 season. I saw ckparrothead post on the other forum that he got a jump on everybody because he watched Allen from November 2016. Well, I'm admittedly not scouting players but via wagering on so many games I naturally come across newcomer players and pay attention.
That early 2016 game interested me because a few years earlier Wyoming traveled to Nebraska and very nearly upset the Cornhuskers as 30 point underdog. I watched that game without a wager, while rooting for the Cowboys to pull it out on the final possession. Didn't happen. Now a few years later they are strangely making the same trip, probably for a payday. I had some system that triggered a bet on Nebraska -26. While watching the game it was immediately apparent that this Wyoming quarterback is far superior athletically to the journeyman type from the near upset several years earlier. But gad does he make plenty of big mistakes. Allen threw many interceptions that helped my cause. I covered the bet although it was not particularly satisfying because so much of the yardage was through the air and not on the ground. Nebraska should have been able to manhandle Wyoming physically.
Anyway, I took note of the new Wyoming quarterback. I really like that Mountain West conference, partially because of how smart Boise State is and recently how smart and well coached San Diego State is.
Later in the season I was shocked while watching Wyoming upset Boise State as 13.5 point home underdog. Then likewise a few weeks later hosting San Diego State as 9.5 point home underdog. Nobody beats both of those teams in the same season in that conference, let alone a pushover roster like Wyoming. By that point it was obvious Allen was a serious pro prospect. The announcers were touting it. He nearly upset San Diego State again in the conference championship game. Somewhere in those flock of games I realized that Allen reminded me of a bigger stronger Jake Plummer.
But there's always something frustrating about his game. The bowl game against BYU was in some type of weird weather. Maybe wind. I forget. Low scoring. Allen had a chance to pull out an improbable late upset other than an unbelievably stupid late interception deep in BYU territory that seemed like it was intended for the defender.
Sometimes I post comments on the Seahawks blog run by Rob Staton. Excellent draft guy. I agree with his perspective more often than not. Early in 2017 he was very down and dismissive of Josh Allen. He specifically focused on the Oregon game and how pathetic Allen was, saying Carson Wentz on a lesser team would look good in games at Iowa, etc. I replied that hey, Josh Allen lost his offensive playmates from 2016. Let's not overlook that. He's out there on a horrendous roster with newcomer skill position guys. Eventually Staton came around. Now he projects Allen first to Cleveland.
The stuff is well known. I guess that's what I'm saying. I'm not going to ignore the reasons to boost Allen's stock nor the reasons to doubt him. I've gone back and forth, somewhat like with Jared Goff a couple of years ago. Allen is significantly more athletic than Goff and with a superior throwing motion. At his best he also has better touch than Goff. But Jared Goff had the more ideal stepladder. Sorry I never set aside that type of thing in deference to pure tape stuff. I remember when USC tried to recruit Goff in the late going. He had a buzz throughout the Pac 12, although it didn't seem to spread nationally. Goff was strong enough at a major college to depart after three years. Meanwhile Josh Allen goes off to a junior college and then winds up at a college football wasteland completing 56%.
I would be betraying plenty of my base beliefs if I jumped in fully on Josh Allen.
However, if somehow he's still sitting there at #11 heck yes I'm rooting for that name.
That early 2016 game interested me because a few years earlier Wyoming traveled to Nebraska and very nearly upset the Cornhuskers as 30 point underdog. I watched that game without a wager, while rooting for the Cowboys to pull it out on the final possession. Didn't happen. Now a few years later they are strangely making the same trip, probably for a payday. I had some system that triggered a bet on Nebraska -26. While watching the game it was immediately apparent that this Wyoming quarterback is far superior athletically to the journeyman type from the near upset several years earlier. But gad does he make plenty of big mistakes. Allen threw many interceptions that helped my cause. I covered the bet although it was not particularly satisfying because so much of the yardage was through the air and not on the ground. Nebraska should have been able to manhandle Wyoming physically.
Anyway, I took note of the new Wyoming quarterback. I really like that Mountain West conference, partially because of how smart Boise State is and recently how smart and well coached San Diego State is.
Later in the season I was shocked while watching Wyoming upset Boise State as 13.5 point home underdog. Then likewise a few weeks later hosting San Diego State as 9.5 point home underdog. Nobody beats both of those teams in the same season in that conference, let alone a pushover roster like Wyoming. By that point it was obvious Allen was a serious pro prospect. The announcers were touting it. He nearly upset San Diego State again in the conference championship game. Somewhere in those flock of games I realized that Allen reminded me of a bigger stronger Jake Plummer.
But there's always something frustrating about his game. The bowl game against BYU was in some type of weird weather. Maybe wind. I forget. Low scoring. Allen had a chance to pull out an improbable late upset other than an unbelievably stupid late interception deep in BYU territory that seemed like it was intended for the defender.
Sometimes I post comments on the Seahawks blog run by Rob Staton. Excellent draft guy. I agree with his perspective more often than not. Early in 2017 he was very down and dismissive of Josh Allen. He specifically focused on the Oregon game and how pathetic Allen was, saying Carson Wentz on a lesser team would look good in games at Iowa, etc. I replied that hey, Josh Allen lost his offensive playmates from 2016. Let's not overlook that. He's out there on a horrendous roster with newcomer skill position guys. Eventually Staton came around. Now he projects Allen first to Cleveland.
The stuff is well known. I guess that's what I'm saying. I'm not going to ignore the reasons to boost Allen's stock nor the reasons to doubt him. I've gone back and forth, somewhat like with Jared Goff a couple of years ago. Allen is significantly more athletic than Goff and with a superior throwing motion. At his best he also has better touch than Goff. But Jared Goff had the more ideal stepladder. Sorry I never set aside that type of thing in deference to pure tape stuff. I remember when USC tried to recruit Goff in the late going. He had a buzz throughout the Pac 12, although it didn't seem to spread nationally. Goff was strong enough at a major college to depart after three years. Meanwhile Josh Allen goes off to a junior college and then winds up at a college football wasteland completing 56%.
I would be betraying plenty of my base beliefs if I jumped in fully on Josh Allen.
However, if somehow he's still sitting there at #11 heck yes I'm rooting for that name.
fininpsl
Active Roster
221 for 378, 58.5%, 2432 yards 6.4 ypa, 17 TDs, 23 INTs the QBs senior year. It looks like he's had an undraftable QBs senior season. Who is he??? Stats simply don't tell the whole story. I've not heard it mentioned, but Allen has impressed me in the few interviews I've seen of him. The kid has undeniable physical ability. IMHO with a kid that has this kind of God given talent, the evaluation of his character and intelligence is more important than over-analyzing his stats.
Last edited:
ckparrothead
Premium Member
That Nebraska game is the danger with Josh Allen, because it wasn't just the Nebraska game. It was also the Iowa game. You can look at the common underlying factors and say both were P5 teams, but I don't think that was it. I think it was the fact he was on the road in front of a crowd of 90,000 screaming Nebraska fans, and then on the road in front of a crowd of 65,000 Iowa fans. The kid from a farm twenty minutes outside Firebaugh, a town of like 20,000 people, who played in front of JUCO crowds, can't seem to handle the biggest stages. You pointed it out, he struggled in that BYU bowl game as well. Had a bad first half, then he started to get HIS thing going in the second half (in 2016 he was a comeback king), but like you said he throws the dumb pick to Kai Nacua, breaking out of the pocket and trying to do too much.
I thought it worked on a broader scale too. After the 2016 season, he was discovered. He begins talking to NFL teams, thinking about coming out early. The media catches on and he becomes a darling. He heads into the season bright eyed and bushy tailed, looking like a million bucks. Or thirty million bucks, if you will. So he's heading into a year that will involve major scrutiny, lots of interviews and television specials, etc...and he struggles pretty much the entire year. Trust me I know all the players he lost and just how awful his team was, no shortage of excuses for struggling. But *he* also struggled, not just his offense or his teammates. And by the end of the year the dude looks unkempt, like a college kid finishing three term papers and about to break. Now he's doing interviews where he sounds outright relieved if he doesn't have to start for NFL teams as a rookie, you know so that he can go house shopping, get his marketing agency set up, all the important stuff without having that pesky football thing to worry about.
The kid hasn't quite found the right head space to deal with external pressure and influences. And that's my biggest issue with him.
ckparrothead
Premium Member
As for the Oregon game, it's surprising a guy would isolate that one to torch him. I thought he actually played alright in that game. The stats were awful, for sure. The Wyoming offense itself was overwhelmed in that game, for sure. But he played within the structure of the offense, even made a few plays on his own. His receivers as I recall couldn't catch a cold, or get open. He had no ground game preventing him from constantly being in bad down and distance.
The Iowa game, to me, was much worse. He only lasted about one quarter of that game before seemingly throwing aside the entire structure of the offense and falling into some of his worst habits.
The Iowa game, to me, was much worse. He only lasted about one quarter of that game before seemingly throwing aside the entire structure of the offense and falling into some of his worst habits.
Lot of good info here. I like Josh Allen but accuracy does have to be taken into account. I do think he can succeed at the next level and worth a high pick.
My prediction, Baker Mayfield goes to Miami at #11.
Me, I mortgage the farm for Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold.
My prediction, Baker Mayfield goes to Miami at #11.
Me, I mortgage the farm for Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold.
where's th'fish
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2006
- Messages
- 2,741
- Reaction score
- 1,137
There's room for the art of drafting and there's room for strong statistical models. The models -I'm talking about Football Outsiders QBase, which is the one I know- can't tell Darnold apart from Rosen or Lamar Jackson. That's a great place to apply the art of drafting. But Allen?
Add the fact that many in the drafting community share the same unease about Allen and you can put money down on a flop without even watching a down of the guy and feel pretty good about it. Like Awsi says, even if you actually lose, it's a very strong bet.
Not that I'd take Allen off my board completely. At some point the risk-reward starts being worth it.
For the record:
Top QBASE Projections, 1997-2017
Philip Rivers 1964
Carson Palmer 1916
Donovan McNabb 1799
Baker Mayfield 1480
Russell Wilson 1288
Peyton Manning 1279
Marcus Mariota 1277
Byron Leftwich 1216
Aaron Rodgers 1216
Ben Roethlisberger 1211
Add the fact that many in the drafting community share the same unease about Allen and you can put money down on a flop without even watching a down of the guy and feel pretty good about it. Like Awsi says, even if you actually lose, it's a very strong bet.
Not that I'd take Allen off my board completely. At some point the risk-reward starts being worth it.
For the record:
Top QBASE Projections, 1997-2017
Philip Rivers 1964
Carson Palmer 1916
Donovan McNabb 1799
Baker Mayfield 1480
Russell Wilson 1288
Peyton Manning 1279
Marcus Mariota 1277
Byron Leftwich 1216
Aaron Rodgers 1216
Ben Roethlisberger 1211
ToddPhin
Practice Squad
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2015
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 13
If people are using "Completion Percentage" in and of itself as a barometer to measure both quarterback accuracy and future NFL success, and are omitting all shred of context in the process, then not only is it lazy but it also opens the door for serious error, and the error in this case could mean missing out on franchise QB.
What's that "CONTEXT" you may be asking? Well, the QB doesn't design the offense. He doesn't block for himself or throw to himself, nor is he responsible for the ground game that should be keeping him out of and endless stream of predictable passing situations. As such, poor statistical "Completion Percentage" can just as easily be a product of the entire passing offense and the situations its placed in rather than a sign of bad QB play. C'mon, there are systems and ideal situations that lead to heavily inflated QB production (see Colt Brennan, Graham Harrell). Therefore, it's patently disingenuous to accept the fact that great passing situations can lead to great stats, yet ignore the fact that poor passing situations can lead to poor stats.
I mean honestly, if we're highlighting Completion% by itself to measure NFL potential while ignoring any and all context.... then we need to be doing the same with the opposite end of the spectrum [high completion percentage]........ yet look at the top 25 statistical passers since 2000 (minimum 300 attempts).
1. Dan Persa ____________ 9. Chase Holbrook __.__ 17. Brandon Daughty
2. Colt Brennan ____.____ 10. Case Keenum ______ 18. Baker Mayfield
3. Colt McCoy _______.___ 11. Joe Southwick ______ 19. Teddy Bridgwater
4. Grant Hedrick _____.__ 12. Blake Kemp ____.__._ 20. Luke Falk
5. Graham Harrell ______ 13. Adam Kennedy ____. 21. Bruce Gradkowski
6. Kellen Moore ________ 14. Seth Doedge ___..___ 22. David Fales
7. Brandon Weeden _.__ 15. Brian Jones ________. 23. Scott Tolzien
8. Kain Colter ________.__ 16. Johnny Manziel _.__. 24. Chase Daniels
25. Taylor Tharp
What do we notice about this list?
1. Firstly, it sucks a big bag of dickled picks.
2. Where are all the NFL QB's if context has no bearing on completion percentage [as people intimate when knocking Allen]?
3. We've got 10 QB's from Hal Mumme/June Jone's tree........ 4 from Boise St....... 2 from Wyoming's spread under Tom Amstutz.... and 2 from Mick McCall's spread at Northwestern.
So, it's crystal clear that Passing Efficiency and Completion Percentage can be a product of the offensive system. Therefore, if the system can lead to 18 of the top 25 efficiency QBs coming from 4 sources, then the opposite is equally true, that the system can also lead to terribly poor statistical production..... unless someone would like to argue that Johnny Manziel is truly one of the most accurate passers of all time. Is Manziel a better passer than Josh Allen? I myself would NEVER draft Manziel's arm, not any aspect of it, over Josh Allen's.
All this in mind, let me pose a hypothetical to you.
What would you expect from a passing offense that has:
- 2 true freshman starting at O-line.
- 2 starting O-line notably hindered by injury.
- pair of 1st-yr-starting WR
- 1st-yr-starting TE (converted from QB)
- true freshman starting RB
- ground game ranking 110th or worst in every category (hence tons of 2nd/3rd & Long)
- antiquated prostyle offense that doesn't offer all the easy short completions.
- QB in just his 2nd year in a major program (let alone 2nd year in a prostyle system).
- QB pressured on 41% of his attempts.
I'm assuming you said yes. Now, that situation is exactly the one Josh Allen was in last year. Does anyone here honestly believe that his completion percentage would fall under scrutiny if he were in one of Hal Mumme/Mike Leach's systems ala Johnny Manziel?.... or the 6'4 242 pound Chase Holbrook at New Mexico St?
Does anyone honestly believe that if Josh Allen were in Oklahoma State's spread offense (replacing Brandon Weeden).... throwing from a clean pocket.... to talented receivers running wide open...... and the nation's 13th best rushing offense [5.3 YPA] keeping him out of predictable passing situations..... that he wouldn't have a completion percentage in the upper 60's at least?
Here, watch Brandon Weeden in that offense for yourself.
Look at his pocket. Look at all that WR separation. Then notice how starkly it differs from what Allen dealt with..... or just look at what happened to Tom Brady in 2013 when his trio of top targets [Gronk, Edelman, Amendola] was out for much of the year and his offensive line was struggling. Is Brady really the 21st most accurate passer in the league, as his 60.5% completions in 2013 would suggest?..... Is Tom actually less accurate than the guys ahead of him that year- Henne, Schaub, Ponder, Fitzpatrick, Cutler, and Newton?.... or was his weak completion% merely a product of circumstance that required a heavy does of context?
That’s a long rambling explaination tot hardly does anything to discredit the fact that one qb in 31 qualifying qbs did anything in the pros after having a less than 58 completionnpercentage their final year of college.