Follow us:

Husky Football Blog

The latest news and analysis on the Montlake Dawgs.

February 21, 2011 at 9:09 PM

Breaking down UW QB’s passing efficiency ratings, and a couple othere notes

A (I hope) faithful reader e-mailed to say he was getting a little tired of all of the debate over Jake Locker, of all the analyzing of his past and his future.

But in doing so, the reader also passed along a graphic that seemed too good not to pass along to everyone else, as well (especially in the dead of February).

What the reader did was compare the significant UW quarterbacks since Don Heinrich by the college passing efficiency rating, thinking that such a list could at least add some clarity to the argument.

So here it is:

uwqbsstats.jpg

The reader (who said he didn’t want to be identified) also noted that Locker’s four passing efficiency ratings were 105.0 and 103.6 (as a freshmen and sophomore) and then 130.1 and 127.4 as a junior and senior.

As he further noted, Locker’s numbers were as good or better than some UW alums who had long NFL careers, not as good as others that didn’t. And obviously, no two situations are the same (which has also been debated here and elsewhere endlessly) so exact comparisons are tricky at best. Ultimately, his numbers and the fact that he did, ultimately, lead UW back to winning after years of losing, put Locker among the best QBs in UW history. To one reader, anyway, that’s enough for now.

And if nothing else, UW fans should enjoy seeing how all of the QBs compared through the years.

IN OTHER NEWS. …

— Speaking of Locker, he will attend the NFL Combine later this week, and Peter Schrager of FoxSports.com has a good breakdown of what to watch there, while reiterating his faith that Locker will be a first-round pick.

— CollegeFootballNews.com includes a few Pac-10 coaches in its list of “Coaches Who Need a Big Spring.”

— One of those is UCLA’s Rick Neuheisel, subject of this story today from SI.com’s Stewart Mandel.

All for now.

Comments

COMMENTS

No personal attacks or insults, no hate speech, no profanity. Please keep the conversation civil and help us moderate this thread by reporting any abuse. See our Commenting FAQ.



The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only, and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times.


The Seattle Times

The door is closed, but it's not locked.

Take a minute to subscribe and continue to enjoy The Seattle Times for as little as 99 cents a week.

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited seattletimes.com content access is included with most subscriptions.

Subscriber login ►
The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription upgrade.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. For unlimited seattletimes.com access, please upgrade your digital subscription.

Call customer service at 1.800.542.0820 for assistance with your upgrade or questions about your subscriber status.

The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. Subscribe now for unlimited access!

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited seattletimes.com content access is included with most subscriptions.

Activate Subscriber Account ►