01-27-2016, 10:36 AM
“Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to Hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip." W. Churchill
Chryst "next big thing" per ESPN?
“Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to Hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip." W. Churchill
“Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to Hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip." W. Churchill
01-27-2016, 01:30 PM
A couple of odd things in that article.
"the 6-foot-5, 233-pound Chryst is already a better passer than Kevin Hogan was at this point in his career"
Really?
How do they know?
His throwing motion is better.
"Chryst was impressive during his limited time of subbing for Hogan last season"
That would seem to be mostly true with respect to laying a block. Otherwise there isn't a lot to go on.
His stats (all in garbage time as far as I remember):
Passing = 5-9 for 59 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER=147
Running = 6 carries, 10 net yards.
"the 6-foot-5, 233-pound Chryst is already a better passer than Kevin Hogan was at this point in his career"
Really?
How do they know?
His throwing motion is better.
"Chryst was impressive during his limited time of subbing for Hogan last season"
That would seem to be mostly true with respect to laying a block. Otherwise there isn't a lot to go on.
His stats (all in garbage time as far as I remember):
Passing = 5-9 for 59 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER=147
Running = 6 carries, 10 net yards.
A couple of odd things in that article.
"the 6-foot-5, 233-pound Chryst is already a better passer than Kevin Hogan was at this point in his career"
Really?
How do they know?
His throwing motion is better.
"Chryst was impressive during his limited time of subbing for Hogan last season"
That would seem to be mostly true with respect to laying a block. Otherwise there isn't a lot to go on.
His stats (all in garbage time as far as I remember):
Passing = 5-9 for 59 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER=147
Running = 6 carries, 10 net yards.
"the 6-foot-5, 233-pound Chryst is already a better passer than Kevin Hogan was at this point in his career"
Really?
How do they know?
His throwing motion is better.
"Chryst was impressive during his limited time of subbing for Hogan last season"
That would seem to be mostly true with respect to laying a block. Otherwise there isn't a lot to go on.
His stats (all in garbage time as far as I remember):
Passing = 5-9 for 59 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER=147
Running = 6 carries, 10 net yards.
01-27-2016, 01:52 PM
(01-27-2016, 01:48 PM)garvin link Wrote:Then there's the little matter of his actually winning the starting job, which is probably a prerequisite for being the next big thing.
As referenced in the article.
“Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to Hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip." W. Churchill
(01-27-2016, 01:48 PM)garvin link Wrote:Then there's the little matter of his actually winning the starting job, which is probably a prerequisite for being the next big thing.
As referenced in the article.
“Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to Hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip." W. Churchill
01-27-2016, 02:59 PM
Just a journalist desperate for something to write about.
Just a journalist desperate for something to write about.
01-27-2016, 03:50 PM
Interesting that there were two more Stanford connections in prior articles on that page--Mike Sanford and Carly Fiorina (in separate articles, just in case there was any doubt). :P
01-27-2016, 04:10 PM
(01-27-2016, 01:30 PM)CTcard link Wrote:A couple of odd things in that article.I was impressed with Chryst's running ability, featured by a 35 yard TD run vs CFU which was nullified by a penalty.
"the 6-foot-5, 233-pound Chryst is already a better passer than Kevin Hogan was at this point in his career"
Really?
How do they know?
His throwing motion is better.
"Chryst was impressive during his limited time of subbing for Hogan last season"
That would seem to be mostly true with respect to laying a block. Otherwise there isn't a lot to go on.
His stats (all in garbage time as far as I remember):
Passing = 5-9 for 59 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER=147
Running = 6 carries, 10 net yards.
(01-27-2016, 01:30 PM)CTcard link Wrote:A couple of odd things in that article.I was impressed with Chryst's running ability, featured by a 35 yard TD run vs CFU which was nullified by a penalty.
"the 6-foot-5, 233-pound Chryst is already a better passer than Kevin Hogan was at this point in his career"
Really?
How do they know?
His throwing motion is better.
"Chryst was impressive during his limited time of subbing for Hogan last season"
That would seem to be mostly true with respect to laying a block. Otherwise there isn't a lot to go on.
His stats (all in garbage time as far as I remember):
Passing = 5-9 for 59 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, PER=147
Running = 6 carries, 10 net yards.
01-27-2016, 04:37 PM
Shaw didn't say Chryst did anything to lose the #1 spot after being #2 in 2015. What he said was it's a clean slate in 2016 and the competition is re-set. I like the fact he isn't handing the job to Chryst after being the backup. Make him aware he has to work as hard to be #1 as he did to earn the #2 slot. But let's be honest. Burns is nowhere near Chryst as a QB prospect. It would be beyond shocking for Burns to beat Chryst out.Â
Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
Shaw didn't say Chryst did anything to lose the #1 spot after being #2 in 2015. What he said was it's a clean slate in 2016 and the competition is re-set. I like the fact he isn't handing the job to Chryst after being the backup. Make him aware he has to work as hard to be #1 as he did to earn the #2 slot. But let's be honest. Burns is nowhere near Chryst as a QB prospect. It would be beyond shocking for Burns to beat Chryst out.Â
Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
01-27-2016, 05:08 PM
(01-27-2016, 04:37 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
OK, I went back and looked. Nottingham was the #14 QB in 2011, a 4* recruit ranked 253 overall. That's good, but you are right, Chryst ranks higher: #5 QB, 4*, #95 overall. What's interesting is that even though we all seemed enamored by Nottingham at the time, there was no reason to be, based on his recruiting profile. Both Nunes: 4*, 19th ranked QB, #155 overall and Hogan, 4*, 13th ranked QB, #202 overall would have been considered better recruits, even though I don't remember thinking that at the time.
By the way, as a basis of comparison, Luck was 5*, 4th ranked QB, #47 overall, which makes Chryst our highest ranked QB recruit since Luck.
Costello is 4*, #91 overall, 6th ranked QB, so pretty comparable to Chryst in terms of rankings.
BC
(01-27-2016, 04:37 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
OK, I went back and looked. Nottingham was the #14 QB in 2011, a 4* recruit ranked 253 overall. That's good, but you are right, Chryst ranks higher: #5 QB, 4*, #95 overall. What's interesting is that even though we all seemed enamored by Nottingham at the time, there was no reason to be, based on his recruiting profile. Both Nunes: 4*, 19th ranked QB, #155 overall and Hogan, 4*, 13th ranked QB, #202 overall would have been considered better recruits, even though I don't remember thinking that at the time.
By the way, as a basis of comparison, Luck was 5*, 4th ranked QB, #47 overall, which makes Chryst our highest ranked QB recruit since Luck.
Costello is 4*, #91 overall, 6th ranked QB, so pretty comparable to Chryst in terms of rankings.
BC
01-27-2016, 06:52 PM
With Nottingham, I was enamored with the idea that he could pass in the general vicinity of the receiver's torso.
01-28-2016, 01:10 AM
(01-27-2016, 05:08 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=14488.msg154548#msg154548 date=1453937828]
Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
OK, I went back and looked. Nottingham was the #14 QB in 2011, a 4* recruit ranked 253 overall. That's good, but you are right, Chryst ranks higher: #5 QB, 4*, #95 overall. What's interesting is that even though we all seemed enamored by Nottingham at the time, there was no reason to be, based on his recruiting profile. Both Nunes: 4*, 19th ranked QB, #155 overall and Hogan, 4*, 13th ranked QB, #202 overall would have been considered better recruits, even though I don't remember thinking that at the time.
By the way, as a basis of comparison, Luck was 5*, 4th ranked QB, #47 overall, which makes Chryst our highest ranked QB recruit since Luck.
Costello is 4*, #91 overall, 6th ranked QB, so pretty comparable to Chryst in terms of rankings.
BC
[/quote]
It would be a little helpful if you could note what rankings you are using in such lists. It looks like you are using Scout, which is often quite out of step with the others.
Somebody suggested we use 247 composite, as it averages several services. From there:
Costello #3 pro-style QB; score 0.9746
Chryst #3; 0.9745
Burns #12; 0.9311
Hogan #8; 0.8765
Nottingham #7; 0.9177
Nunes  #9; 0.9278
Burns was characterized by significant differences of opinion:
ESPN #4 (pocket), Rivals #6 (pro), 247 #10 (pro), 247-composite #12 (pro), Scout #36 (all QB).
Hogan was the other guy with pretty high variation:
ESPN #51 (pocket), Rivals #15 (pro), 247 #28 (pro), 247-composite #8 (pro), Scout #13 (all QB).
[I don't understand how Hogan's composite score can be his highest by so much, but that's what it says.]
Overall, Chryst wasn't really ranked that much higher than Burns, though it was pretty clear that Burns was much more of a project with big physical tools - which is why opinions varied so much.
As for what they have done so far at Stanford, it seems clear that Chryst did win the backup spot (though Shaw made a point of never quite saying that), but neither played enough to really evaluate how far apart they might be. We saw the most of them at the spring game - a long time ago in a very artificial environment (remember it was a spring game that made everyone favour Nottingham over Nunes).
(01-27-2016, 05:08 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=14488.msg154548#msg154548 date=1453937828]
Anyone wanting to bring up Nottingham as an analog to Chryst has to realize Chryst's pedigree and physical attributes are far beyond what Nottingham brought to the position.
OK, I went back and looked. Nottingham was the #14 QB in 2011, a 4* recruit ranked 253 overall. That's good, but you are right, Chryst ranks higher: #5 QB, 4*, #95 overall. What's interesting is that even though we all seemed enamored by Nottingham at the time, there was no reason to be, based on his recruiting profile. Both Nunes: 4*, 19th ranked QB, #155 overall and Hogan, 4*, 13th ranked QB, #202 overall would have been considered better recruits, even though I don't remember thinking that at the time.
By the way, as a basis of comparison, Luck was 5*, 4th ranked QB, #47 overall, which makes Chryst our highest ranked QB recruit since Luck.
Costello is 4*, #91 overall, 6th ranked QB, so pretty comparable to Chryst in terms of rankings.
BC
[/quote]
It would be a little helpful if you could note what rankings you are using in such lists. It looks like you are using Scout, which is often quite out of step with the others.
Somebody suggested we use 247 composite, as it averages several services. From there:
Costello #3 pro-style QB; score 0.9746
Chryst #3; 0.9745
Burns #12; 0.9311
Hogan #8; 0.8765
Nottingham #7; 0.9177
Nunes  #9; 0.9278
Burns was characterized by significant differences of opinion:
ESPN #4 (pocket), Rivals #6 (pro), 247 #10 (pro), 247-composite #12 (pro), Scout #36 (all QB).
Hogan was the other guy with pretty high variation:
ESPN #51 (pocket), Rivals #15 (pro), 247 #28 (pro), 247-composite #8 (pro), Scout #13 (all QB).
[I don't understand how Hogan's composite score can be his highest by so much, but that's what it says.]
Overall, Chryst wasn't really ranked that much higher than Burns, though it was pretty clear that Burns was much more of a project with big physical tools - which is why opinions varied so much.
As for what they have done so far at Stanford, it seems clear that Chryst did win the backup spot (though Shaw made a point of never quite saying that), but neither played enough to really evaluate how far apart they might be. We saw the most of them at the spring game - a long time ago in a very artificial environment (remember it was a spring game that made everyone favour Nottingham over Nunes).
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »