Evaluation time. Exceeds, meets or failed to meet expectations

2,902 Views | 57 Replies | Last: 5 days ago by sycasey
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Overall, many posters, including me, had Cal going 7-5. Therefore, the Bears hit our predicted target. Based on how the 7-5 was achieved, it is still fair to go back and suggest it could have been better (or worse).

IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team.
On the plus side, despite experiencing a "regression to the mean" pertaining to turnovers, the D held up well, especially the LB corps.
Special teams were a bit shaky. Hopefully, next season, Cal can find another "Doug Brien" from the high school ranks to come in and deliver better than the 65% FG success rate we saw this season.

Overall, I give the season a "meets expectations" evaluation. However, I would also suggest that the program is on notice that next year expectations will ramp up considerably due to the favorable "even year schedule" and the number of returnees. 9 wins? Why not?
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Exceeded win expectation by 2-3.

I expected the competition to be much better. (Down years for Ole Miss, Davis, N Texas, Washington, WA St., Stanford, UCLA)

Some of the young no names improved greatly with all the play time. (Polk and the receivers, especially)
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Exceeded expectations.

With the OL depth issues, including a key injury or two before the season really even started, the DL issues and new starters at WR and RB, I thought 4-8 to 6-6 was highly likely.
UrsineMaximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
rkt88edmo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Exceeded expectations. I thought we would get six. Happy to get seven, especially considering the injuries in our O. We barely have a QB1, so Modster at QB2 doesn't phase me.
hanky1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The offense wasn't very good but when it came time to seal a game, they usually pulled through.

Overall met expectations.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?
Cal84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
>Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team.

Well in the prior two years we didn't have a competent #1, so...
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?


I was hoping we could improve, but feared we would be about the same.

Last year we were #56 in Sagarin (Predictor) and this year we are #55.

Last year we were 7-5, 4-5 in conference and this year we are 7-5, 4-5 in conference.

Last year we had the #120 offense, #12 offense in the PAC-12. This year we have the #119 offense #12 offense in the PAC-12.

Last year we beat USC in Los Angeles. This year we beat UCLA in Los Angeles.

So VERY similar. The BIG difference is we have the Axe! Win our bowl game and we will have exceeded my expectations.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

Overall, many posters, including me, had Cal going 7-5. Therefore, the Bears hit our predicted target. Based on how the 7-5 was achieved, it is still fair to go back and suggest it could have been better (or worse).

IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team.
On the plus side, despite experiencing a "regression to the mean" pertaining to turnovers, the D held up well, especially the LB corps.
Special teams were a bit shaky. Hopefully, next season, Cal can find another "Doug Brien" from the high school ranks to come in and deliver better than the 65% FG success rate we saw this season.

Overall, I give the season a "meets expectations" evaluation. However, I would also suggest that the program is on notice that next year expectations will ramp up considerably due to the favorable "even year schedule" and the number of returnees. 9 wins? Why not?
Makes sense. One thing off-season will bring is a better understanding where the coaching staff is going.
MB Cal Golf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes win the bowl game and it will have exceeded my expectations. Very pleased how the team rallied after losing 4 in a row. That middle 4 game stretch was brutal.
Cave Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Marginally exceeded my expectations. Defense as a whole was somewhat disappointing. They're solid but I was expecting something closer to dominance. Secondary was disappointing, thought they would be truly dominant. Offense was marginally better than expected, but those expectations were low to begin with. Special teams was downright awful in practically every aspect. Return coverage, return blocking, FG kicking and punting.

I expected 6-6, but I thought our schedule would be tougher than it ended up. The loss to OSU was a massive disappointment. Wins over UW, Stanford and UCLA is awesome, even if all three of those teams are down.
Strykur
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We could have done a lot better, and although I doubt we really could have pushed for the North, our rivals just happen to be on the downswing which made this season much more palatable.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not sure where this goes exactly, but you could draw parallels between this and Tedford's second year in 2003, where people expected a decline thanks to key players leaving and a tougher schedule, but instead he basically matched 2002. Could mean better things for next year.

I expected about the same record and we got that (pending a potentially better one if we win the bowl game), and if Garbers had not been hurt we definitely exceed it (after the 4-0 start I said I expected 8 wins in the regular season, not knowing he would be knocked out of the next game). That may portend a strong year in 2020 with better injury luck.
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.


Out of curiosity do you go to the games in person?

INMHO first year offense under Wilcox/Baldwin far exceeded expectations with a reliable run game and better than expected passing game.

Last year the O was horrendous but this year the offense has been competent once Saffell and Garbers returned and shows promise moving forward.
UrsineMaximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NVBear78 said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.


Out of curiosity do you go to the games in person?

INMHO first year offense under Wilcox/Baldwin far exceeded expectations with a reliable run game and better than expected passing game.

Last year the O was horrendous but this year the offense has been competent once Saffell and Garbers returned and shows promise moving forward.
Yes I attend games, this year I attended: Ole Miss, Washington, Oregun, wazzu & furd.
UrsineMaximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?
I did not predict W/L. I was only interested in player development and depth especially on the offense side of the ball although I was curious about the DL. Suffice it to say that the offense and specifically the staff did not meet my expectations on development.
Nasal Mucus Goldenbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am usually uncomfortable thinking in terms of "expectations" instead of "[perpetual high] standards." If the expectations are low, meeting or barely exceeding them is seldom satisfying to me.

The shortcomings by the offensive staff also included not having a consistent #2 receiver until 3 of the last 4 games of the season. Only then did several of them learn to avoid drops against 3 low-performing defenses. And the #1 receiver was out injured for much of the season.

I am not hopeful about this offensive staff principally because of the continuing middle-of-the-road RECRUITING and no signs of meaningful improvement on that front. If my standard was for an offense/team that is in contention until early or mid-October and then always crashes for most of the rest of the season to end up playing sometimes in a low-tier bowl game, then middle-of-the-road offensive recruiting would be PERFECTLY FINE. But unlike some of you I believe the standard for Cal football should be to become a program that is in contention in late November for ~4-5 seasons every decade and actually wins the conf. championship at least 1x/decade. This offensive staff hasn't shown signs in multiple consecutive years of signing the type of talent (not only "stars" but also less-heralded but dependable reserves who will hold the fort reasonably well during inevitable high-injury weeks) to meet that higher standard.

going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Par
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsineMaximus said:

NVBear78 said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.


Out of curiosity do you go to the games in person?

INMHO first year offense under Wilcox/Baldwin far exceeded expectations with a reliable run game and better than expected passing game.

Last year the O was horrendous but this year the offense has been competent once Saffell and Garbers returned and shows promise moving forward.
Yes I attend games, this year I attended: Ole Miss, Washington, Oregun, wazzu & furd.


Excellent support! Go Bears!
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

Overall, many posters, including me, had Cal going 7-5. Therefore, the Bears hit our predicted target. Based on how the 7-5 was achieved, it is still fair to go back and suggest it could have been better (or worse).

IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team.
On the plus side, despite experiencing a "regression to the mean" pertaining to turnovers, the D held up well, especially the LB corps.
Special teams were a bit shaky. Hopefully, next season, Cal can find another "Doug Brien" from the high school ranks to come in and deliver better than the 65% FG success rate we saw this season.

Overall, I give the season a "meets expectations" evaluation. However, I would also suggest that the program is on notice that next year expectations will ramp up considerably due to the favorable "even year schedule" and the number of returnees. 9 wins? Why not?

To keep our expectations within the bounds of reason,many pundits predicted that the level of Cal's play would improve but Cal's record would not. And in fact a 6-6 or 5-7 record was likely.
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsineMaximus said:

tequila4kapp said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?
I did not predict W/L. I was only interested in player development and depth especially on the offense side of the ball although I was curious about the DL. Suffice it to say that the offense and specifically the staff did not meet my expectations on development.

Disagree as to the offense especially the QB: Garbers.
He had major problems as QB. BB took on the added responsibility of QB coach. It paid off BIG TIME. Garbers was a new man this year.
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

..........IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team............


Not necessarily. With most of the offensive line out for most of the season, Garbers would have been susceptible to further injuries even if he hadn't gotten hurt against ASU. Modster continued to play with that beat up line, 2nd and 3rd stringers, and play against the toughest part of Cal's schedule. Modster played against the two best teams in the conference and in the entire country, Utah and Oregon, and against a very tough USC team. He did not play against a single easy team. USC, WSU, ASU, and Stanford were all ranked in the top 25 earlier in the season. OSU was 5-7 and a tough opponent as well. Modster needed to play better in that one, and didn't. Even with Garbers, without the starting O-line, no way Cal beats Utah or Oregon. And if Modster does not have the great game he had against WSU, Cal is a 6-6 team, instead of 7-5. When was the last time Cal had a competent #2 QB who could win games playing behind a patchwork O-line against some of the best teams in the country?
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GivemTheAxe said:

UrsineMaximus said:

tequila4kapp said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?
I did not predict W/L. I was only interested in player development and depth especially on the offense side of the ball although I was curious about the DL. Suffice it to say that the offense and specifically the staff did not meet my expectations on development.

Disagree as to the offense especially the QB: Garbers.
He had major problems as QB. BB took on the added responsibility of QB coach. It paid off BIG TIME. Garbers was a new man this year.


2018 he completed 61.2% for 1,506 yards 14 TDs and 10 INTs and ran for 420 yards and 2 TDs

2019 he completed 59.2% for 1,500 yards 10 TDs and 3 INT and ran for 242 yards and 2 TDs

Slightly lower completion percentage, less effective running, more yards per reception (receivers had better yac?) the big improvement was he reduced the number of interceptions. Otherwise he has not changed as much as the narrative about him has changed.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cave Bear said:

Marginally exceeded my expectations. Defense as a whole was somewhat disappointing. They're solid but I was expecting something closer to dominance. Secondary was disappointing, thought they would be truly dominant. Offense was marginally better than expected, but those expectations were low to begin with. Special teams was downright awful in practically every aspect. Return coverage, return blocking, FG kicking and punting.

I expected 6-6, but I thought our schedule would be tougher than it ended up. The loss to OSU was a massive disappointment. Wins over UW, Stanford and UCLA is awesome, even if all three of those teams are down.
I agree with everything you said, except I think the offense was marginally worse than expected. That's largely because of Garber's collarbone injury and injuries to the OL.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

GivemTheAxe said:

UrsineMaximus said:

tequila4kapp said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?
I did not predict W/L. I was only interested in player development and depth especially on the offense side of the ball although I was curious about the DL. Suffice it to say that the offense and specifically the staff did not meet my expectations on development.

Disagree as to the offense especially the QB: Garbers.
He had major problems as QB. BB took on the added responsibility of QB coach. It paid off BIG TIME. Garbers was a new man this year.


2018 he completed 61.2% for 1,506 yards 14 TDs and 10 INTs and ran for 420 yards and 2 TDs

2019 he completed 59.2% for 1,500 yards 10 TDs and 3 INT and ran for 242 yards and 2 TDs

Slightly lower completion percentage, less effective running, more yards per reception (receivers had better yac?) the big improvement was he reduced the number of interceptions. Otherwise he has not changed as much as the narrative about him has changed.
Using gross rushing rather than net to account for sacks (yes, he certainly ran for negative yards but short of reviewing the play by play for every game, one cannot break things down to account for those instances), Garbers averaged 5.46/rush in 2018 and 4.51/rush in 2019. One other thought, he played in 12 games in 2018 and in 2019.

In my opinion, he has changed significantly. He is far more confident and decisive. Stats only tell part of the story re: QB's. Otherwise, Dan (Mr. Big Numbers) would have more on his resume than 0 Super Bowl wins. Along with the necessary tangible attributes, the position requires swagger and attitude (see Mike Pawlawski).

dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFCityBear said:

71Bear said:

..........IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team............


When was the last time Cal had a competent #2 QB who could win games playing behind a patchwork O-line against some of the best teams in the country?

Probably Pat Barnes behind Dave Barr.

Man, those mid-1990s Cal teams sure squandered a lot of talent.

dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

calumnus said:

GivemTheAxe said:

UrsineMaximus said:

tequila4kapp said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?
I did not predict W/L. I was only interested in player development and depth especially on the offense side of the ball although I was curious about the DL. Suffice it to say that the offense and specifically the staff did not meet my expectations on development.

Disagree as to the offense especially the QB: Garbers.
He had major problems as QB. BB took on the added responsibility of QB coach. It paid off BIG TIME. Garbers was a new man this year.


2018 he completed 61.2% for 1,506 yards 14 TDs and 10 INTs and ran for 420 yards and 2 TDs

2019 he completed 59.2% for 1,500 yards 10 TDs and 3 INT and ran for 242 yards and 2 TDs

Slightly lower completion percentage, less effective running, more yards per reception (receivers had better yac?) the big improvement was he reduced the number of interceptions. Otherwise he has not changed as much as the narrative about him has changed.
Using gross rushing rather than net to account for sacks (yes, he certainly ran for negative yards but short of reviewing the play by play for every game, one cannot break things down to account for those instances), Garbers averaged 5.46/rush in 2018 and 4.51/rush in 2019. One other thought, he played in 12 games in 2018 and in 2019.

In my opinion, he has changed significantly. He is far more confident and decisive. Stats only tell part of the story re: QB's. Otherwise, Dan (Mr. Big Numbers) would have more on his resume than 0 Super Bowl wins. Along with the necessary tangible attributes, the position requires swagger and attitude (see Mike Pawlawski).



Garbers really cut down on turnovers and that made him a lot more effective.

That said, he was #12 in the Pac-12 in completion% and #9 in Passer Rating.

There's a lot of room for improvement before he would be even a mediocre QB in the Pac-12. I would excuse him by saying that he's young and hasn't played a lot of games, but Slovis and Daniels haven't either and have played a lot better. If he can improve to #5-6 in the Pac-12 that would help a lot. I am not really sure how high his ceiling is but that seems realistic.




OneKeg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In addition to cutting down on interceptions, Garbers went from 5.8 yards per pass in 2018 to 8.2 in 2019. You can't just wave that away by speculating about YAC, that is a huge improvement any way you slice it.

This drastic yards per pass improvement is a big part of Garbers' going from a rating of 119.9 in 2018 to 142.4 in 2019, along with the fewer picks.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4242408/chase-garbers

That being said, Garbers is not yet a "good" Pac-12 QB. Other than a few brief stretches (e.g. final drive against UW), he was really bad until the Ole Miss game. Starting with that game, he has been better. But we as Cal fans are so starved for competent quarterback play, that to us right now he looks like Steve Young.

In reality, we should just hope that next year, perhaps with a new OC, he can improve to upper half in the Pac-12. The league does lose quite a few stud senior QBs... Herbert for Oregon, Huntley for Utah, Gordon for WSU, though with those teams, they will probably be replaced by other stud QBs next year. Hell even Costello for Stanford and Tate for Arizona were seniors, though we've already seen that freshman Mills for Stanford is probably at least as good as Costello.

So Garbers and the Bears will have their work cut out for them, but the improvement was good to see starting in Oxford. We need more of that improvement, and we need a competent #2 QB because it's plenty likely that Garbers, or any starting QB, will be injured again at some point. Hopefully a healthier and deeper, more experienced OL will help.
TheFiatLux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

tequila4kapp said:

UrsineMaximus said:

missed. regardless of injuries the development and recruiting on the offense side of the ball has been piss poor for three years. the coaches own that including Wilcox. but the coaches on the offense have failed in "multiple" ways. no way around that regardless of W/L.
Before the first game was played how many wins did you expect the team to have this season?


I was hoping we could improve, but feared we would be about the same.

Last year we were #56 in Sagarin (Predictor) and this year we are #55.

Last year we were 7-5, 4-5 in conference and this year we are 7-5, 4-5 in conference.

Last year we had the #120 offense, #12 offense in the PAC-12. This year we have the #119 offense #12 offense in the PAC-12.

Last year we beat USC in Los Angeles. This year we beat UCLA in Los Angeles.

So VERY similar. The BIG difference is we have the Axe! Win our bowl game and we will have exceeded my expectations.

Wow, you nailed it. This is just about perfectly said. You could have added in:

"Last year blown out at home by UCLA, this year blown out at home by USC"

Honestly, the symetry of the two season is sort of amazing. Let's get a good bowl victory and i'll feel great going into next year.
TheFiatLux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:

SFCityBear said:

71Bear said:

..........IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team............


When was the last time Cal had a competent #2 QB who could win games playing behind a patchwork O-line against some of the best teams in the country?

Probably Pat Barnes behind Dave Barr.

Man, those mid-1990s Cal teams sure squandered a lot of talent.


1993 was so close to being an amazing year but for the two CRUCIAL injuries on O and D. The conference was down... UW on (too short) probation... and we were pretty loaded... As our dismantling of Iowa (who admittedly wasn't very good) in the Alamo showed, when we had everyone that team was fierce...
johngalenhoward
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

Slightly lower completion percentage, less effective running, more yards per reception (receivers had better yac?) the big improvement was he reduced the number of interceptions. Otherwise he has not changed as much as the narrative about him has changed.


First off, INTs is a crucial stat you seem to brush aside as trivial.

Secondly, if you have not seen major improvement in Garbers from last year to the end of this year then you are either trolling or blind. Your numbers are obviously cherry picked as you conveniently left out passer rating, number of snaps played, YPA, and improvement over the course of the season. Terrible analysis.
Oakbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I had thought we would go 8-4, but then the injuries hit, I am OK with 7-5 and a possible bowl win

Sagarin has us at 45 with the 27th toughest schedule .. with out the injuries we could have been 9-3 (ariz and osu)

I am actuaally a bit stoked about next year due to the amount of returnees
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

Overall, many posters, including me, had Cal going 7-5. Therefore, the Bears hit our predicted target. Based on how the 7-5 was achieved, it is still fair to go back and suggest it could have been better (or worse).

IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team.
On the plus side, despite experiencing a "regression to the mean" pertaining to turnovers, the D held up well, especially the LB corps.
Special teams were a bit shaky. Hopefully, next season, Cal can find another "Doug Brien" from the high school ranks to come in and deliver better than the 65% FG success rate we saw this season.

Overall, I give the season a "meets expectations" evaluation. However, I would also suggest that the program is on notice that next year expectations will ramp up considerably due to the favorable "even year schedule" and the number of returnees. 9 wins? Why not?
I predicted 8-4, but 7-5 was ok. I'm more relieved than anything - at one point, it looked like we might go 4-8.

The $64 question is BB. He is a mild disappointment. He doesn't seem to do anything well. And, his results are all that count. What we'll never know is the quality of replacements out there. We can speculate all we like, but getting "real" as we used to say, there's a lot more to improving in the position at Cal than x's, o's and track record.

Overall, I think JW is on the right path. We'll gradually improve, the extent to which will be determined by his recruiting talent that fits his plan (and his personality).
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OneKeg said:

In addition to cutting down on interceptions, Garbers went from 5.8 yards per pass in 2018 to 8.2 in 2019. You can't just wave that away by speculating about YAC, that is a huge improvement any way you slice it.

That's really the tale of the tape there. A huge jump in yards per pass indicates real improvement. The prior analysis leaves out that Garbers had 260 attempts in 2018 versus only 184 this year (thanks to injuries).
Page 1 of 2
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.