Harrell and 6,000 Yards, Do You Care?

by Seth C on Aug 23, 2008 12:00 PM CDT in Football

The blogosphere has erupted (and when I say erupted, I mean two prominent bloggers wrote about it) with talk of Harrell passing for 6,000 yards. Starting off with ESPN's Big 12 Blogger Tim Griffin who took notice of a Captain Leach line about throwing for a few more yards (which by the way was asked on DTN long before) and Griffin says this:

The Texas Tech program under Leach has obviously produced the biggest passing numbers in college football history. And that's why I'm thinking that having the first passer to toss for 6,000 yards would be kind of Leach's "man on the moon" moment that would truly provide his program with some kind of historical permanence.

Dr. Saturday is concerned about Harrell's right arm and what it would take to reach that lofty goal:

It's not very likely he'll improve on a tremendous 71.8 completion percentage, either, meaning Harrell will either have to throw more (hang around longer in lopsided blowouts, maybe?) or get more out of each throw -- if his total number of attempts is the same (he threw up 713 passes last year, almost 55 per game), Harrell's average would have to improve from 8.0 yards per pass last year to 8.4 to reach 6,000 yards. That's within reason, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Granted, I think it's neat and fun to talk about reaching lofty statistical goals, and perhaps this is a case of me being numb to outrageous passing yards or gaudy offensive numbers, but at this point, I only care about one number, which is the total number of wins. Please don't doubt my alliegences because I love Captain Leach's Air Raid offense, it makes for incredibly entertaining football, but I think I've moved on a bit from being fascinated with huge numbers to being focused on just winning.

I know, how very high-minded of DTN, but as a fan I think I've reached that tipping point of appreciating the offensive numbers and the means to a hopeful end, which is just winning on Saturday.

0 recs | Comment 4 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It's about time...

…somebody said it. The W column is the most important stat. I want Harrell to to do well, and Tech needs him to do well, but total passing yards is not a very good indicator of how well the Team will fair.

I think there are several things that will keep Harrell reaching from reaching 6000 yards passing, all centering around him not throwing the ball as many times:

As practically everyone has said, inclucing the coaching staff, Tech needs more production out of it’s running game. More running = less throwing.
For reasons I explained here, I think the new clock rule is going to reduce the total number of plays run in a game. Fewer plays = fewer opportunities to throw.
If the defense is as improved as advertised, starting field position should be better. Fewer long drives = less yards.

A trip to the Big XII championship game, giving him 14 games instead of 13, might make up for some of the yards. But I would not be surprised if the passing game goes down by at least 50 yards per game. So one extra game is not going to make up that difference.

I will say that, even though the total passing yards may drop, I expect his passing efficiency rating to improve. For him, that is probably a better number to focus on than yards.

by NM99 on Aug 23, 2008 1:10 PM CDT 0 recs

Nope

The only stat I give a crap about is wins at this point. Racking up yards and points in a loss is meaningless. if he throws for 2,200 yds, 20 TDs and 15 INTs, but Tech goes 11-1 then I’d be a happy camper. Shoot, if that happens Tech may even gain some bizarro world extra credit.

by Tech92 on Aug 23, 2008 4:05 PM CDT 0 recs

I dont care about any indivdual record breaking

Seth your observation is right on. No statistical "fluff" is going to make me happy. Its just this simple be the best team on the field of play we can be. My brother said it best " I will be happy if the Raiders just beat Texas". This of course was stated with proviso that by beating the Longhorns we had lived up to the excitement and been a team which won all their games going into that match up. No awards, trophies accolades, records or parades is going to get a rise out of me. Just want to see the team our Raiders – in the Big 12 Championship game and let the best focused group win.

by centexraider on Aug 23, 2008 6:41 PM CDT 0 recs

Not so fast

Although the rules have changed specifically to meet expectations for a 3 hour TV time slot, I think this 40 second rule will be toast after this season.

College football has always been a good 3 to 4 hour game between 2 hours of pregame tailgating and other things and 2 hours of post game tailgating and parties. College football was traditionally a day long event.

Not this season. If you look at the basics, there will be a game that will have a total of technical 62 minutes of offical time with 20 minute half time.

So technically the game could be played according to the rules within1 hour and 22 minutes. I think that there will be games that will be under 2 hours which is unacceptable! The OSU game for example in just under 2 hours 30 minutes is unacceptable. Unlike in the NFL which has more exceptions to the time rules along with more TV timeouts shows that right now, this rule change is horrible for college football.

Of all the college coaches polled, not many were for this rule change. But the NCAA approved it to increase the TV coverages to and extra game here and there. Because if you finish off games in under 2 hours when you have a 3 hour time slot what will TV do for the 1 hour 15 minutes?

One of the best things in college is the comeback game where a team drags itself to victory overcoming huge odds and a large point spread. This clock change kills the underdog which no rule should do.

However with all that I have said, will it really effect our Red Raiders? Not really. Why? Because if Leach does what I think he is doing it won’t matter one bit. The problem is that there is no way to speed a game up that is already running full steam ahead.

By the same token, its going to be near impossible to slow a game down for most teams. So for teams like ours which has no huddle as a set game plan for some teams will be used for all games not just some. Because no huddle provides that extra time that will replace what was lost by the rule change. So the worst that Tech may see is a loss in 1 or 2 plays shorter than before.

So I say not so fast. As for the 6000 issue, I asked Leach at the luncheon and he told me Harrell should throw a few more yards a game to see if its possible this season, including staying in an extra series. As Leach sees it, if your in a blow out game then he views the game as a practice and a mental check for the players.

by Pablo M on Aug 23, 2008 9:13 PM CDT 0 recs