Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Coker was not a "great college quarterback." He threw 25 TDs to 8 INTs over the course of his entire college career. No conference honors. Never a finalist for the Davy O'Brien Award. He was a 3-star coming out of HS. Nobody would ever say he was a "great college quarterback." That type of language is reserved for the Tebows, Troy Smiths, J.T. Barretts and Danny Wuerrfels of the world who had great success in college but couldn't sustain it at the next level.
Even if you dismiss all of the "fluky" TDs you say Bama scored in that game, that's still 24 points Coker and Co. put up on the Tiger defense, which is more than the 16 points Tua and Co. put up on the Tiger defense in 2019.
Clemson's 2018-19 defensive line will probably go down as one of the best ever. Certainly a Top 5 in the last 30 years or so. Three D-linemen are projected to go in the 1st Round. I have a hard time believing that Coker or Hurts would find more success against that defense than Tua did.
He was a good college QB on a team with a dominant run game. To beat Alabama a team has to slow down their rush which opens up the passing game.
Renfrow and other players for Clemson was not highly rated recruits so it is silly to argue recruiting rankings matter when talking about an individual player.
He was a good college QB on a team with a dominant run game. To beat Alabama a team has to slow down their rush which opens up the passing game.
So now you've toned it down from "great college quarterback" to "good college quarterback." TBH, I'm not even sure he qualified as a "good" QB at the collegiate level. Mitch Trubisky was a good college QB, not a great one. Jake Fromm is a good college QB, not a great one, at least not yet. Coker was at best a game manager who just needed to hand the ball off to one of the best college RBs in recent memory and connect on the occasional slant/out route and play action (to 5-star TEs and WRs, mind you).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
Renfrow and other players for Clemson was not highly rated recruits so it is silly to argue recruiting rankings matter when talking about an individual player.
And the strawman argument award goes to....
My point was that you were arguing that Coker was a "great" QB based on absolutely nothing objective at all. His HS recruiting rating is just one piece of that. To do a quick rundown...
-No conference honors
-No national honors/recognition
-3 star recruit
-Fewest TD passes of any starting Alabama QB under Saban
Renfrow received conference honors and will be drafted so he's not even comparable. Even Blake Sims received SEC honors. And let's be real, it's not like the SEC is exactly known as a bastion of QB talent. The reality is that Jake Coker was true to his 3-star recruiting rating, but fortunately for him that was enough to win a championship on an otherwise stacked team.
By that standard, Coker still isn't great because he went undrafted.
Ok.
I thought you or somebody else said he was drafted. I don't follow Alabama player or even Clemson players careers in the NFL.
Do you think Saban recruits QBs that aren't good?
He made several big throws in the title game against Clemson so it is funny to me you act like he was a trash QB. I don't know how a QB can throw the ball better than he did in that game.
Ok. I thought you or somebody else said he was drafted.
Nope. Never said that. In fact, I'm sure I mentioned the fact he went undrafted at least twice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
Do you think Saban recruits QBs that aren't good?
A.J. McCarron was good. McElroy was above average. Sims and Coker were not good, which was why they were never drafted and never made an NFL roster. Hurts was effective albeit a limited passer. Tua is obviously the best of the lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
He made several big throws in the title game against Clemson so it is funny to me you act like he was a trash QB. I don't know how a QB can throw the ball better than he did in that game.
Derrick Henry rushed for 2,200+ yards that year. Alabama's dominant run game helped open up their passing game. There are a large number of 3-star recruits who can hand off the ball to a Heisman trophy winner who runs behind a dominant offensive line and then hit the occasional play action over the top once the safeties start cheating up.
Clemson's defense this year would have been better equipped to deal with that type of run-heavy offense, especially if Dexter Lawrence plays. The front 4 alone could have done a decent job against him without having to move safeties into the box. That would have limited Coker's production significantly.
Clemson had some key injuries on defense including a NFl corner
Bottom line is that the 2015 defense was not as good as the 2018 defense. That should be obvious to any college football fan and especially obvious to any Clemson fan. FWIW, the 2018 defense ranked 3rd in S&P+ ratings with a rating of 12.6. The 2015 defense ranked 11th with a rating of 17.2 Whether judging by the eye test or advanced stats, the 2018 defense was better.
That being said, the argument comes down to whether the offense was better in 2015, and that's a close call since the only position at which the 2015 team was decisively superior was Tight End.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
I don't understand why u keep talking about recruiting rankings as those are set in stone.
I think some of these points are going "whiff" right over your head.
The point was that you could bring in any 3-star recruit and grind 12-14 wins out of a Saban-led Alabama team. Are STARZZZ the end-all-be, all? No, of course not. But to say they don't matter at all is laughable when any college coach, Swinney included, would love to have a recruiting class with nothing but 5 stars each year over a recruiting class with nothing but 3 stars. We can't talk about Coker's "success" at Alabama without bringing up the fact that he played with 5-star receivers and tight ends and the best O-Line in college football.
So we can put this "Jake Coker was a good QB" non-sense to rest once and for all, I present to you his scouting reports.
Quote:
Cover your ears, Coker family, as this might get ugly. "He makes too many poor decisions, is inconsistent with his accuracy and looks a little tentative in the pocket" Breitenbach wrote, adding, "Coker took a number of sacks by holding the ball too long in 2015 and appeared a little gun-shy at times, preferring to go down rather than find a receiver down field." The analyst wouldn't even toss the 6-foot-5, 236-pounder a token "game manager" label, noting that he sometimes made mistakes even in management. While Breitenbach categorizes Coker as an UDFA, other analysts continue to hold out hope. In early March, CBS Sports draft analyst Rob Rang relayed that some sections of the scouting universe remained intrigued by a "raw upside" factor. Of course, if Coker had played for say, Boise State, it is doubtful that he would be drawing much attention. One of the perks of playing for Alabama.
Quote:
This is a deep class of lower-tier quarterbacks, too, many of whom showed either more polish (Arkansas' QB Brandon Allen), more raw athletic upside (Mississippi State QB Dak Prescott) or more mystical intrigue (Oregon QB Vernon Adams) than Coker. As Chase Goodbread rightly notes, Coker's "slow delivery and slow field reads" should be considered legitimate concerns--particularly given that the quarterback played with so, so much mouth-watering talent and still failed to really spark.
Quote:
"A national championship doesn't punch a combine ticket; that's the lesson learned for the Crimson Tide quarterback who will instead prepare for UA's heavily scouted pro day," wrote College Football 24/7 writer Chase Goodbread. "With all the size and arm strength NFL clubs look for, the scouting concerns on Coker surround his relative lack of college experience, a slow delivery and slow field reads." We've never been fans of Coker's work. The 6-foot-5, 230-pounder failed to get onto the field throughout his career until finally breaking through in 2015. He was so limited that the Tide turned absurdly conservative through the air despite boasting a series of former elite recruits on the perimeter.
Quote:
The Tide coaching staff made a conscious effort to limit Coker's exposure throughout the season for a reason. NFL teams looking for an elite arm in the draft should turn their sights elsewhere--two good games does not a good QB make--but it's still a nice close to his senior season.
I think some of these points are going "whiff" right over your head.
The point was that you could bring in any 3-star recruit and grind 12-14 wins out of a Saban-led Alabama team. Are STARZZZ the end-all-be, all? No, of course not. But to say they don't matter at all is laughable when any college coach, Swinney included, would love to have a recruiting class with nothing but 5 stars each year over a recruiting class with nothing but 3 stars. We can't talk about Coker's "success" at Alabama without bringing up the fact that he played with 5-star receivers and tight ends and the best O-Line in college football.
It is weird that you are being contentious over Jake Coker.
I've already said that Coker was playing with on a team with a good rush offense which opens up the passing game. You seem to want to debate a strawman argument.
I think that Coker was one of the better QBs in college football that season based on his performance in games that I saw. He needed to throw it more against Clemson than other teams Alabama saw that year because Clemson had a better defense.
Teams tend to be more aggressive throwing the ball against Clemson.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
