KB21 said:
You like LeFors but you don't like Chang? They are essentially the same quarterback. Both are system made quarterbacks who don't have the size nor the arms to play in the NFL.
You know, every day I make a pledge to put my sportsbook confrontational mode aside when I login to finheaven. We argue like hell in the sportsbooks, with huge amounts of real cash at stake based on which teams/over-unders we decide to back. I'd like a breather when I get home late at night and settle in front of this compubox.
Then I read world class idiocy like Stephan LeFors and Timmy Chang are essentially the same QB, and my pledge vaults out the window pronto.
Those QBs could not be more diverse. Have you ever watched one play of either one? Seriously.
LeFors is a quick-footed marvel with great field awareness and every type of arch and loft. Tremendous improvisation. He throws a soft and very catchable ball. That is his preferred pass. When he is forced to put zip on a pass it is adequate. I'm not claiming it is great.
Chang throws almost nothing but line drives, despite a mediocre arm. He locks in on a receiver and forces one throw after another. He doesn't pretend to hurt you with his feet and that's appropos because he doesn't have anything close to LeFors' nimbleness or speed. Chang was benched late as a junior and might have remained there as a senior if the kid who beat him out had another year of eligibility.
The systems aren't remotely similar, either. Louisville can kill you above or via land. They have one of the most unpredictable offenses I've ever seen. June Jones just wings it for 60 minutes, no apologies.
The only thing they basically share is height. If you look at NFL stats, passes batted down are amazingly low. There is almost zero correleation between QB height and how many passes they have batted down. I'm not saying QB height is irrelevant, but it's not nearly as vital as accuracy or smarts or anything that allows the critical 7+ yards per pass attempt.
I vote yes on Stephan LeFors and that handicap will be proven correct.