12-17-2013, 01:01 PM
(12-17-2013, 11:56 AM)Spartandawg link Wrote:[quote author=terry link=topic=9160.msg78603#msg78603 date=1387303239]
[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=9160.msg78594#msg78594 date=1387300229]
* by the way! MSU fans? Still reading the board? A number of you seem to believe Hogan's not a mobile quarterback. . . .
Is that really what MSU fans are saying? I guess they don't know much about our team.
Hogan clearly is more mobile than the MSU quarterback, Connor Cook:
Hogan - 76 rushing attempts, 314 yards, 4.1 yards/attempt (includes 15 sacks)
Cook - 63 rushing attempts, 91 yards, 1.4 yards/attempt (includes 12 sacks)
Cook gained all of his net rushing yardage against the 4 weakest opponents on the MSU schedule -- Western Michigan, South Florida, Youngstown State, and Purdue. In those games, Cook ran 21 times for 97 yards. In the 9 games against tougher opponents, Cook ran 42 times for -6 yards.
Hogan is pretty much the opposite. Hogan did not run much against the weakest opponents on Stanford's schedule (9 carries for 31 yards against Army, San Jose State, and Ca'l). Hogan had his biggest rushing games against some of the toughest teams on the schedule. He ran 28 times for 159 yards (5.7 yds/att) in the games against Oregon, Arizona State, and UCLA.
[/quote]
And so begins the debate on whether a mobile QB is an asset or a liability. My only disappointment with Cook's rushing numbers is that his attempts are too high. That's what running backs are for.
[/quote]
Debate over.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8PWDnBLNg0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ5apNjFfFs
Audaces fortuna iuvat
