Thicc Stauskas' Big Ten Position Rankings: Quarterback, Part One
Thicc Stauskas' Big Ten Position Rankings: Quarterback, Part One
Three Big Ten West contenders have bottom-half quarterback situations. Which, yeah, that tracks.
Welcome to the beginning of Thicc Stauskas’ first annual (I promise I’m going to do it this time) B1G position rankings. I’m starting off with the most important position on the field: Quarterback. The line between “passable QB” and “on fire garbage can” is usually the line between decent B1G teams and the B1G West.
I’m going to attempt to rank each team by their overall QB room and not just their starter, but to do that, I need to evaluate the starter first and foremost. This serves as the floor with the talent level as the ceiling.
Each team’s “starter” will be considered to be the leading returning snap-getter. I know that this is not always the case, but I am simply not going to parse spring ball.
Stat Definitions:
Returning: Percent of returning QB snaps, transfer snaps count as returning which is why Indiana has 152%.
Scholarships: Scholarship QBs on roster.
Avg. 247 Rating: Average 247 rating of scholarship QBs on roster.
PFF: PFF grade of starter.
Rank: My B1G ranking. It is law and you will not argue with me.
Standard Down Success Rate: How often do you get half the yards needed on first down, second down and 6 or less, and all of the yards needed on third down or fourth down and 3 or less, when passing.
Passing Down Success Rate: How often do you get all of the yards needed on third or fourth down and 4 or more and half of the yards needed on 2nd and 7 or more.
15+: How often do you get 15 yards or more and a first down when passing.
25+: How often do you get 25 yards or more and a first down when passing.
All Green columns are just standard counting stats and I don’t want to insult your intelligence.
All Red columns are sack-adjusted rushing numbers.
The Chart for Reference:
Without further ado, coming in at…
14. Ryan Hilinski, Northwestern
Ryan Hilinski does nothing well, but the highlights (lowlights) of his stat line are a truly abysmal 23% passing down success rate, a 54% completion percentage, and a 3-4 TD/Int ratio. Good lord dude.
Northwestern is actually losing a lot from last year in Andrew Marty and Hunter Johnson, neither of which were what you would call “good”, but Wildcat fans may be begging for the good old days of 2021 if nobody can unseat Hilinski by year’s end.
Why are the stats the way they are?
Note: this is not a film review column but I am going to try and contextualize things a bit so that I am not just throwing stats out at you.
That said, simply put, Ryan Hilinski is a bad quarterback. Northwestern has decent skill talent and a passable offensive line, but Ryan Hilinski looks fully lost out there. I am not sure what else to say. There is just nothing here. He has decent arm strength and measurables as a former blue-chip recruit, but what promise there once was is long gone by now.
Are there reasons for optimism/pessimism and how high could they climb/fall?
The upside here is that Hilinski is so bad that he almost cannot be the starter come season’s end. This is too poor of quarterback play for even Pat Fitzgerald to tolerate. Anyone with a pulse could do better than this. The downside is the reality of the situation.
The talent in the QB room is mediocre, but there are four certified Warm Bodies. If one of them has picked up a football before, Northwestern could climb as high as 11th. Bleak! Fortunately they cannot be relegated to the MAC, so there is nowhere to fall.
13. Artur Sitkowski, Illinois
Hello again old friend. It’s been a bumpy ride for Art since he was being seriously recruited by LSU way back in the summer of 2016. Ever since he showed up at elite 11 camps and started “throwing” live for coaches, things have gone downhill.
Sitkowski’s throwing numbers rival Hilinski’s in abjectness, but what sets Sitkowski apart is that he is a willing and capable runner who throws more TDs than Ints. That’s it. Otherwise his 4.76 YPA would likely put him at the bottom of this list.
Sitkowski is also the least explosive player on this list, generating a 15+ yard play on less than 10% of passes, and a 25+ yard play on just 3% of passes. He isn’t even a fun-bad QB, just good old fashioned normal-bad. There is a real argument here that I am somehow being unfair to Ryan Hilinski.
Why are the stats the way they are?
I am not going to waste your time with a film breakdown of Art Sitkowski. What you need to know is that he was the backup QB for a year zero Illinois on an offense that was maniacally focused on running the football. He wasn’t asked to do much and he didn’t.
Are there reasons for optimism/pessimism and how high could they climb/fall?
You can copy and paste the Northwestern section here. Art is too bad to hold onto this job, and Illinois has three other warm bodies in their QB room. Tommy DeVito, Italian king, is likely the best bet, but he played sparingly last year at Syracuse, who was stinky.
If Tommy DeVito is a Real Paisan, Illinois could climb up to 11th. If Art is allowed to cook, they could surpass Northwestern in futility.
12. Spencer Petras, Iowa
On the podcast, we talked about Petras potentially being the Mendoza Line for B1G quarterbacks. Upon further review, that was too generous. In addition to being inexplosive and boring, he threw picks on 5% of his passes, so he wasn’t even particularly risk averse. Another QB that doesn’t really do anything well, the only thing that saves Petras from falling into the realm of truly awful QBs is that he is reasonably efficient (37%) on passing downs. He’s also a QB sneak demon. Despite averaging less than 2 yards per carry, he had 5 touchdowns! Hooray!(?)
Why are the stats the way they are?
In a league full of dinosaur offenses, Iowa is by far the most dinosaur. There is nothing inventive or interesting about Brian Ferentz’s outside zone and static short passing focused offense. So, while I don’t think that Petras is a very exciting player in his own right, the worst offensive coordinator in the league doesn’t help anything. It’s telling that Petras is more effective when he’s allowed to work on passing downs as opposed to when he’s operating within the offense on standard downs. That means the offense he’s working within is doo doo.
Are there reasons for optimism/pessimism and how high could they climb/fall?
Petras actually graded out ok according to PFF, so it’s possible that he suffered from more drops than his counterparts around the league. He’s also entering his third full season as starter, so the experience cant hurt. Recruiting at the position has been sub-par and it doesn’t feel like backup Alex Padilla is in any position to challenge for the starting role.
That said, I could see Iowa rise as high as 9th or 10th with a good year, and couldn’t see them falling below Illinois’ Northwestern’s QB situations. I think 12th is the floor, but that’s a pretty low floor. Petras is who he is with little room for improvement but even less room to regress.
11. Noah Vedral, Rutgers
If you’re going to have a bad QB, at least make him a fit. Noah Vedral is a great fit for Sean Gleeson’s option run game and college-style RPO passing game. As sort of an inverse Spencer Petras, Vedral is pretty good when the offense is on schedule. 48% success on standard downs is in line with some of the better QBs in the league. He led the league in QB carries and yards with 72 and 377 respectively, resulting in 5.24 yards per carry. I have a soft spot in my heart for gritty QBs who are willing to get tough yards on the ground.
However, as a pure passer, he is plainly bad. 30% success on passing downs is very bad, and explosive plays are few and far between for Vedral. He didn’t throw many touchdowns, and only generated 6.1 yards per attempt.
Why are the stats the way they are?
If Vedral had some better arm talent, we may really be cooking. The accuracy and throw power just aren’t there when you turn on the tape. Rutgers generated a lot of open receivers downfield that got flat out missed last year. Vedral knows what he wants to do, he usually even knows what he SHOULD do, whether or not he can do it is an open question.
Are there reasons for optimism/pessimism and how high could they climb/fall?
Vedral probably is what he is, but Greg Schiano was able to secure a (semi) blue chip QB recruit in Gavin Wimsatt. Wimsatt left high school last year to enroll early, and understandably struggled last year. There was a concerning tumble down the rankings as his senior year progressed, but the talent is on a level that Rutgers has not seen in many years.
If Wimsatt takes over the job, beating out Noah Vedral, I think they could climb up into the middle of the pack around 7 or 8. I really like the offense that Gleeson runs, and the production he got out of a mediocre thrower like Vedral is promising if he can get ahold of a better talent.
On the other hand, this is Rutgers, and the floor is basically always dead last. A regression from Vedral could drop them to the bottom of the list.
10. Graham Mertz, Wisconsin
The main thing separating Graham Mertz from being a league average level quarterback is that he threw interceptions on Almost 7% of his passes. Otherwise, Wisconsin may have a perfectly passable signal caller on their hands. He was efficient on standard downs, and fine on passing downs, but throwing that many picks without much explosion to offset it will kill an offense. 2022 is put up or shut up for the former blue chip prospect.
Why are the stats the way they are?
Standard downs, notably, are downs when you can use the threat of a run game to increase the efficacy of play action passing. Wisconsin, you may be aware, can certainly run the ball. When presented with simplified concepts and safeties biting on the run, Mertz can deliver pretty balls to open tight ends. Once defenses get Wisconsin in third and long, the lack of talent at WR and poor decision making from Mertz make converting a tougher proposition.
Are there reasons for optimism/pessimism and how high could they climb/fall?
Graham Mertz was at one time a borderline five star prospect, and there are times when it’s not hard to see why. He has consistent, tight mechanics and can make all the throws. We’ve seen QBs put things together late in their career, and Mertz will be well protected and supported with a strong running game. There’s no reason he can’t cut down on the picks and climb up to the 4th or 5th spot on this list. A lot of QBs would kill to be in a situation like Mertz.
I think the floor is more or less where he’s at right now. I don’t see him performing worse than Noah Vedral or anyone else lower on the list. Mertz is at least a serviceable passer, which cannot be said for anyone below him.
9. Tanner Morgan, Minnesota
Tanner Morgan better have a lot of degrees. This man was on the roster for a game against Michigan in Twenty Damn Seventeen. You’d assume that with all that experience, Morgan would develop the steady hand of a vet, but he’s actually just gotten more reckless, which rules in my opinion. Tanner is out here 24 years old throwing interceptions on 6% of his throws, and generating 25 yards or more yards on almost 10% of them. That’s how quarterback should be played baby. Boom or bust. Fuck it, go deep!
Why are the stats the way they are?
Minnesota’s “Oops! All RPOs!” offense has been figured out in a big way, resulting in a below average 46% standard down success rate. Morgan is forced to create big plays on passing downs, where he is only moderately efficient, but very explosive throwing for almost 8.2 YPA. A lot of Morgan’s mistakes probably stem from safeties and linebackers that know exactly where to go to pick off one of Minnesota’s predictable RPO slants. That’s the narrative I’m going with because I think Tanner Morgan is cool and would be better in an offense that wasn’t for babies.
Are there reasons for optimism/pessimism and how high could they climb/fall?
All jokes aside, Tanner Morgan is what he is. He had one tremendous year with two NFL receivers to bring in an outsized proportion of his deep balls, but since then he’s been mediocre to bad. I don’t see anyone surpassing him this season, and I don’t see him having a super-duper senior jump. Minnesota could rise a spot or two depending on the QBs above them, and they could fall below Wisconsin. Let’s call it a range of 8-10.
8. Connor Bazelak, Indiana
Bazelak came from a passing spread system at Missouri and the stats bear that out. 55% efficiency on first down is right up there with the best QBs in the league, but everything else betrays the fact that Bazelak is a system passer. Averaging less than 7 yards per attempt on 65% completion is a tough thing to do, but Bazelak found a way. Nothing else about Bazelak stands out good or bad, but at the very least, Indiana has got a guy that will play within the offense, even when you wish he would improvise a bit.
Why are the stats the way they are?
As I have already stated, Connor Bazelak was a system passer at Missouri. There are worse things you can be. You draw up a swing pass, Connor will throw it. Tunnel screen? Got it. Simple high low read? Absolutely. But pushing the ball downfield and throwing a receiver open on third and long is not in Connor’s wheelhouse.
If new OC Walt Bell is able to find some playmakers and consistently generate good gameplans, Bazelak will execute them, but this is not a quarterback that can pull your ass out of the fire when you inevitably fail to do that at some point.
Are there reasons for optimism/pessimism and how high could they climb/fall?
Bazelak probably is who he is at this point, but there’s actually no guarantee that he’ll be the starter for Indiana. If I were a betting man, I would wager that he takes the first snap, but Indiana also has three other players that took significant snaps last year, too of which (Donaven McCulley and Jack Tuttle) are former blue chips.
While it is true that all of those guys were certifiably butt last season, that speaks more to the poor offensive coaching of Nick Sheridan than anything else. Indiana has five bullets in the chamber here, and I could see them climbing as high as 5th or 6th if one of them really hits. Given how many options they have, I couldn’t see them falling farther than 9th. Anything worse would result in a QB change.
Coming next week: the top half of the Big Ten.