• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Clemson Game Review / Duke Game Week Thread

liveanddiedeac said:
Excellent work as always. I bolded Clawson's statement regarding the QB's. The problem I have with that is yeah, I'm sure Wolford knows the X's and O's of the offense better and yeah he's a more accurate passer than Hinton at this point, but no matter how well he understands the offense or accurate he throws the ball, it doesn't matter when he constantly on his ass. The offense has moved the ball better and scored more points when Hinton has been the QB, I think the stats bare that out, so to me that's way more important than how well a guys understands the offense or how accurately they throw.
Click to expand...

Good post live. Dave seems to be trying to keep Wolford happy. Surely he sees that Hinton has an 'x-factor' that John doesn't have. Hinton definitely reminds me of a young Tyrod Taylor at Vtech. AIR, Taylor was just an average passer but a shifty runner who thrived on the scramble. He often wasn't pretty at QB but produced offense and points. That's where I think Hinton is headed for us.
 
HONDO2 said:
Good post live. Dave seems to be trying to keep Wolford happy. Surely he sees that Hinton has an 'x-factor' that John doesn't have. Hinton definitely reminds me of a young Tyrod Taylor at Vtech. AIR, Taylor was just an average passer but a shifty runner who thrived on the scramble. He often wasn't pretty at QB but produced offense and points. That's where I think Hinton is headed for us.
Click to expand...

That's actually a very fair comparison. I think Hinton definitely needs to start.
 
94 -

It would go down to 88 if Bryant Gross-Armiento does not return,
Click to expand...

Think you missed the brief note on him somehow re-injuring his leg to the extent that his career is now over.
 
HONDO2 said:
94 -



Think you missed the brief note on him somehow re-injuring his leg to the extent that his career is now over.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I am wondering if I missed something. The last thing that I heard was that he suffered another tear in the same ligament that he tore over the winter, that he was understandably discouraged, and that the staff was giving him space to decide whether he wanted to try to come back from it. I hadn't heard that a decision had been made to not return (although it sure sounded like it was headed that way). Who put out the note about the final decision?
 
Buttermaker said:
Why would llewinson not return? Desire to move on with career or transfer?
Click to expand...

The most likely scenario is that the staff simply needed his scholarship for the 2016 recruiting class. The scholarship situation appears to be very tight right now. I think we knew that the size of the 2016 class was going to force the staff to make some very tough decisions on the fifth year players.

It is also possible that he was ready to move on with life after football.
 
HONDO2 said:
Good post live. Dave seems to be trying to keep Wolford happy. Surely he sees that Hinton has an 'x-factor' that John doesn't have. Hinton definitely reminds me of a young Tyrod Taylor at Vtech. AIR, Taylor was just an average passer but a shifty runner who thrived on the scramble. He often wasn't pretty at QB but produced offense and points. That's where I think Hinton is headed for us.
Click to expand...

Hinton is similar to USF Sophomore QB Quinton Flowers. He's a dynamic athlete who has developed into a heady player. He's played a big role in USF going 6-1 in their last seven possibly saving Willie Taggart's job.

Last year, Flowers played sparingly behind a true sophomore starter, Mike White. White committed to USF the day Taggart took the job. White started as the last half of his true freshman season. Flowers won the job in Spring practice and White transferred. Taggart had the balls to hand the reins over to the less experienced QB with a higher ceiling over his first recruit.
 
Last edited:
I decided to look into some passing stats to aid the Wolford versus Hinton discussion. I pulled together their stats for the last 8 games. I did this both to eliminate lower quality competition (Elon, Syracuse and Army) and to look at more recent performances. The added benefit is that they have had roughly the same amount of playing time during in that span. Here are the stats:

Wolford: 66 for 120, 741 yards passing, 3 TDs, 5 INTs and 9 pass plays of 20 yards or more
Hinton: 69 for 139, 705 yards passing, 4 TDs, 3 INTs and 8 pass plays of 20 yards or more

Completion percentages: Wolford 55%, Hinton 50%. In a game with 25 pass attempts that is one additional completion for Wolford.

Yards per completion: Wolford 11.2, Hinton 10.2. In an average game that might work out to 25-30 additional passing yards for Wolford.

TD/INT Ratio: Wolford is 3 TD/ 5 INT. Hinton is 4 TD/ 3 INT. So advantage Hinton there.

Bottom line: I don’t think Hinton is very far behind Wolford as a pure passer.
 
Deac94 said:
I decided to look into some passing stats to aid the Wolford versus Hinton discussion. I pulled together their stats for the last 8 games. I did this both to eliminate lower quality competition (Elon, Syracuse and Army) and to look at more recent performances. The added benefit is that they have had roughly the same amount of playing time during in that span. Here are the stats:

Wolford: 66 for 120, 741 yards passing, 3 TDs, 5 INTs and 9 pass plays of 20 yards or more
Hinton: 69 for 139, 705 yards passing, 4 TDs, 3 INTs and 8 pass plays of 20 yards or more

Completion percentages: Wolford 55%, Hinton 50%. In a game with 25 pass attempts that is one additional completion for Wolford.

Yards per completion: Wolford 11.2, Hinton 10.2. In an average game that might work out to 25-30 additional passing yards for Wolford.

TD/INT Ratio: Wolford is 3 TD/ 5 INT. Hinton is 4 TD/ 3 INT. So advantage Hinton there.

Bottom line: I don’t think Hinton is very far behind Wolford as a pure passer.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I wonder what the stats would look like if you could figure in yds lost to sacks?
 
It's baked into the net rushing yardage.
 
And it is. It's broken into Gain, Loss, and Net. It includes losses on designed runs and gains on scrambles but it does the job.
 
Just great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top