Drive Chart: O'Korn vs. Peters

Submitted by DM2009 on

This is mostly a duh, but I wanted to post the drives for O'Korn and Peters in the Rutgers game.

O'Korn:

  • 7 plays, 27 yards, punt
  • 3 plays, 11 yards, INT
  • 13 plays, 80 yards, TD
  • 3 plays, 1 yard, punt

Peters:

  • 8 plays, 77 yards, TD
  • 7 plays, 49 yards, TD
  • 4 plays, 54 yards, TD
  • 11 plays, 47 yards, missed FG
  • 2 plays, 61 yards, TD
  • 11 plays, 52 yards, downs
  • 3 plays, 7 yards, punt

Rutgers caveats, obviously, but that is a huge difference. Only drive Peters had were we didn't get a first down was the garbage time drive at the end. Every other drive besides that led us into a spot where we should get points. 

Peters' final stat line also reminds me of the stats Speight was putting up last year when we were bludegeoning teams. Enough to keep the defense honest and let the run game go wild. Considering our improved run blocking, all our QB needs to do is keep the safeties from sprinting downhill at the snap.

I'm really having a hard time not getting excited about his performance. It was exactly what we needed.

SeattleWolverine

October 29th, 2017 at 12:34 PM ^

Can we also acknowledge that it would be pretty difficult to be any worse in the next few games than O'Korn has been since Purdue? Here are his stats: 45 for 89 (50%) with 0 TD, 4 INTs, 4.9 yards/attempt. Plus the fumbles and sacks that are on him. He might struggle but he's unlikely to play much worse than O'Korn has. 

 

 

Blue_Bull_Run

October 29th, 2017 at 12:08 PM ^

The logical problem I have with your line of thinking is that you saw Peters play basically 2.5 good quarters of football and extrapolate that to mean that he's always been a superstar. You dont account for the fact that he started the season as the #3 QB and has obvioisly been making big strides to learn the playbook over the past weeks. In other words, there is little reason to believe (other than hindsight) that he was a better option against MSU. And before you come back and tell me that his throws were better than JOK's, I want to remind you that a QBs responsibility also includes checking into the correct run plays. Dont get me wrong, Im jumping all aboard the Peters bandwagon, but I just dont buy you argument that Peters has always and forever been the best.

CHUKA

October 29th, 2017 at 12:19 PM ^

I never said Peters was the best option forever either, or even the best option going into Michigan State. I also never said he was superstar. And, he's never had a problem with the playbook as you alluded to. Pep Hamilton said he had a great grasp and great football IQ. Brandon Peters himself said the one place where he worked on was communication. Is that enough to keep him off the field?

CHUKA

October 29th, 2017 at 12:28 PM ^

Coaches can't make mistakes? Of course Jim Harbaugh has more football intelligence than me, I would hope so. On the same token it's wrong to nullify other people's opinions because they are not in the same position as the subject. Other people have played on the college level, other people have coached in the past.

G. Gulo of the Dale

October 29th, 2017 at 1:11 PM ^

"I never said Peters was the best option forever."  Who said you did, and what would that even mean?

"I also never said he was a superstar."  Again, why is this relevant to how this debate has unfolded? (though you did refer to him as "super man")

"... or even the best option going into Michigan State."  Well, here's what you did say that kicked off this exchange:

"All I can really ask is why it took so long for Harbaugh to see that. I don't think Peters just turned to super man over the past week. If he was played earlier we might've only had one loss and have a chance for the B1G. I'm starting to not believe this best player plays shit that Harbaugh insist he does."

So, you're angry because you think Harbaugh sabotaged our chances against Penn State by not playing Peters on the road in Happy Valley?  

CHUKA

October 29th, 2017 at 12:11 PM ^

No, what I've done is look at the data I've had to work with (the Rutgers game if you're catching up), and determined that Brandon Peters was the better quarterback. Then, on my own intuition determined that he didn't just show he was better than O'korn this week. This of course could be untrue, as I don't watch the practices. I think it's an extremely fair assumption to make though.

RockinLoud

October 29th, 2017 at 12:05 PM ^

You make it out like Peters has been exactly the same since the start of the season, when that's not the case at all.There's a lot to playing QB, especially in a Harbaugh offense that is more complex than the average college offense, and the staff didn't feel he was ready until now. Example: Peters was lacking in his communication and command, which by his own and Harbaugh's admittance, has gotten a lot better since fall camp. I still think the playbook is going to be limited, but if the other position groups can keep improving it should be enough to be in every game this season from here on out.

 

taistreetsmyhero

October 29th, 2017 at 12:27 PM ^

Peters still didn’t look like he had a full grasp of the offense in this game. He botched like 3 hand offs where it didn’t seem like he knew the plays.

But he also showed that not fully knowing the playbook is way less important than actually being able to make decisive reads and throw an accurate ball.

It just seems like it was a miscalculation by the staff. Shit happens.

LKLIII

October 29th, 2017 at 3:09 PM ^

That's true if you're considering Peters vs. JOK in an isolated drill-type scenario.  But as others have mentioned, there are additional moving parts that may have contributed to Peters finally becoming "the guy" or at least getting a chance to prove during Rutgers that he should at least get a shot at starting.  Namely:

 

  1. Peters probably did have some element or incremental improvement during the past 3 or 4 weeks.  If he did start to mentally "check out" once he was burried at #3 on the depth chart, maybe her perked up and also got some more quality snaps during practice when it became clear he was the #2 and that JOK was wobbly at best.
  2. MSU night rivaly game/monsoon and PSU white out aren't great games in which to cut your teeth.  This home vs. Rutgers/home vs. Minnesota/away vs. Maryland was the softest 3 game schedule possible for breaking in a new guy.
  3. The offensive running game has been improving over the past few weeks.  In addition to throwing in a young QB, you want to make sure he's got at least SOMETHING to lean on a bit.  That was basically nothing 3-4 weeks ago, whereas now there's at least there's something.

Bottom line is it's possible that the above 3 factors all started vectoring together to put the decision to play Peters in the "yes" column maybe even as long as 2-3 wees ago.  Based on the Harbaugh presser, it sounds like maybe sometime after Indiana, the coaching staff decided that Peters would play, but they'd ride w/ JOK at PSU simply becasue they didn't want to put the young guy in the meat grinder for his very first start.

 

 

bamf16

October 29th, 2017 at 12:31 PM ^

For fuck's sake.

 

First, Peters was hardly "Superman", so your premise is flawed.

 

When exactly before yesterday's game was this change supposed to happen? Before Purdue? I don't know, JOK looked pretty good at Purdue.

 

MSU in the monsoon? 

 

Indiana with the whitehout the following week?

 

At PSU?

 

It's one thing to whine and complain, but another to suggest a better alternative. 

CHUKA

October 29th, 2017 at 12:49 PM ^

By saying super man I was trying to say that he made a rapid improvement. I could have worded that better. And I think he should have played whenever he proved he was better. Harbaugh himself said, "he's been ready for weeks".

Wolfman

October 29th, 2017 at 2:29 PM ^

and how do you know we could have gone there faster? Serves none, absolutely not one fucking purpose for James Harbaugh to hold this kid out of the lineup if he's better equipped to be our starter than the incumbent. Better equipped includes the tangibles as well as the obvious physical attributes.  On the other hand, it would serve Harbaugh and staff a world of good if he had a 'known" commodity on the sidelines that he could insert whenever he even feared the danger of a loss. It's a weird proposal you lay in front of me, that the recognized elite coaches" opt to play lesser players because that is what all great coaches do. 

i just don't fucking get it. Every coach in America, at every level, is going to play the person he feels will give his team the best chance to win. Reason is simple. We all like to win, winning is the reason we get involved in sports and winning is more fun than shaking hands as the losing coach. I've done both and it's not even fucking close. 

bcnihao

October 29th, 2017 at 1:35 PM ^

In postgame interview, Peters said he began practicing differently--as if he were the starter--after Speight went down with injury.  So, after the Purdue game.  It's not too much of a stretch to think that a few weeks of improved practice would start to show results about now.

Gucci Mane

October 29th, 2017 at 2:21 PM ^

I think this was managed correctly. Have to start O’Korn vs. MSU as he just played well against Purdue. Indiana was a close call but give O’Korn one last chance. And PSU you don’t start Peters in that game. Coaches saw Rutgers as a good place to start him probably since after MSU game.

Blue_Bull_Run

October 29th, 2017 at 11:51 AM ^

But I think we are all excited. Obviously Peters was better yesterday, but I'm really excited/hopeful/scared to see if thus can translate into five good outings in a row. Fox showed a stat that JOK was 3/15 on passes over 20 yards. Improving on that will be Peters biggest chance to boost our offense. The only deep throw I remember, he sailed out of bounce looking for DPJ. Hopefully we finally starting hitting passes over the top next week.

bamf16

October 29th, 2017 at 12:33 PM ^

Nose of the ball was up on a lot of his throws, the deep one you're referencing being probably the most visibly awkward.

 

Even on his third down pass to Gentry where he was able to step into it, the nose was up. Aain, a minor issue that's fun to be talking about in light of everything else that happened yesterday.

 

Not sure to what extent wind played a factor.