Vedral is #3 in Big 10 passing yardage

R U Crazy

All Conference
Feb 11, 2015
3,463
2,209
113
A few teams have had multiple QB's due to injuries & ineffective play (Nebraska and Illinois)
Wisconsin has not played as many games...
Even so, If we are anything but LAST it is a major improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUShea and MrsScrew

rutgersguy1

Hall of Famer
Dec 17, 2008
24,145
5,953
113
Is that yards/game or total yards?

I haven't really looked at stats much this year. It's kind of a strange year for comparison between teams or players etc...because everyone is playing a different number of games. If you're looking at totals vs whatever the stat per game it also can be misleading because of the different number of games everyone is playing. It's a massive improvement over last year for us and I'll just leave it at that.
 

RUinPAC10land

All Conference
Jul 30, 2011
2,841
1,337
113
La Canada Flintridge, CA
I really don't like to speak negatively about our own players, but when you watched the Michigan game, can you really say that you would rather take Vedral over McNamara. After all, Vedral has higher passing yardage over McNamara. Would you take Vedral over Ramsey and Plummer? Come on, OP, Vedral is better equipped to run Gleason's offense (than Art) but your stat is very misleading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUShea

yesrutgers01

Hall of Famer
Nov 9, 2008
22,852
19,917
113
Vedral has a 64% pass completion rate.
I believe I saw 220 yds per game as well. Still not great but it is better than we have seen in years and not at the bottom for sure. And I see "fans" posting how a good QB wouldn't want to come here?????
 

mikebal9

All Conference
Oct 15, 2005
4,110
2,122
113
42
Bound Brook
I believe last year we finished a game with 3 passing yards? Or was it 1? Either way, I'd rather compare this year's team to RU teams of recent past than to our conference mates. And in that respect, we are exponentially better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1984 and RUShea
Sep 11, 2006
52,208
12,507
113
Rutgers has not had a game cancelled... so accumulative stats are hard to compare and rank..

11th in QB rating
4th in getting sacked (negative)
tied 1st in INTS
10th in average completion yards
6th in completion percentage
 

ecojew

All American
Feb 1, 2006
8,605
1,130
113
In all honesty if this is a regular year. The B1G would be embarrassingly bad. Not one team deserves to be in the Top 10
I totally disagree. OSU belongs there and will hopefully make it into the playoffs, if there are any playoffs. And I think the jury is still out on NW, which has for the most part played very well. As you look around the various conferences, there are not that many very strong teams. The B12 played itself out of the playoffs in the first few weeks of the season. Most Pac12 teams may not play enough games to even qualify. And, unless you're drinking the ESPN Kool Aid, you can't really look at the SEC and think that it is it's normal self. So OSU definitely belongs and will hopefully be back on the playing field soon.
 

RU-05

All American
Jun 25, 2015
6,393
4,555
113
Vedral results this season have been mixed, I think the overall stats do suggest he is bottom half in the conf, but if he had a few cupcake games to start the year where he threw for 300 yrds, 3 td's and no picks, I think there would be a more positive view of his in conference play this season.
 

koleszar

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Jan 1, 2010
18,852
25,190
113
I really don't like to speak negatively about our own players, but when you watched the Michigan game, can you really say that you would rather take Vedral over McNamara. After all, Vedral has higher passing yardage over McNamara. Would you take Vedral over Ramsey and Plummer? Come on, OP, Vedral is better equipped to run Gleason's offense (than Art) but your stat is very misleading.
I think it's more our defense made McNamara look really good. Today he absolutely sucks. If Vedral went against our D he'd look like a Heisman trophy candidate.