Kellen can't win: Freshman QBs beat him out for awards

by Kevan Lee on Dec 15, 2008 8:00 AM PST Comment 15 comments

College Football News, the CFN portion of the Scout.com website, unveiled their annual all-freshman team, and Boise State's Kellen Moore got the snub treatment. Again.

CFN chose NC State freshman QB Russell Wilson for the first team (NC State!), and they explained their pick thusly:

Others put up gaudier numbers, and there's no arguing against Baylor's Robert Griffin or Ohio State's Terrelle Pryor, but no freshman quarterback meant more to his team than Russell did to the Pack. Without him, NC State doesn't go bowling.

Not only do the CFN folks pass over Moore for the first team distinction, they don't even mention that he is in the running. And if their qualification process for being named to the first team is based mostly on how far the team would have got without the player, then Moore should be hands down the favorite. "Without (Wilson), NC State doesn't go bowling." Well, without Kellen Moore, Boise State doesn't go undefeated, rise into the Top Ten of all teams in the country, and be in the discussion for a BCS berth. NC State finished 6-6 and last in the ACC Atlantic Division. Hooray for Russell Wilson. He led the Wolfpack to the Papajohns.com Bowl.

Well, at least there was a spot on the second team for Kellen Moore, right? ... Right? ... Oh, you've got to be kidding us.

QB *Terrelle Pryor, Ohio State

There's no doubt that Pryor is a great athlete and he made a difference for Ohio State this season, but he is not the second best freshman quarterback in America. Plus, he was playing on a team surrounded by unrivaled talent. Even the folks at CFN, who placed him above the likes of Moore and others, recognized that things wouldn't have been all that different for the Buckeyes without Pryor.

Ohio State probably would've been 9-3 at worst with Todd Boeckman under center.

Their final record was 10-2.

At least Moore wasn't completely left out of the conversation. In their obligatory honorable mention section, Moore's name finally pops up - alongside Robert Griffin from Baylor and Austin Davis from Southern Miss.

What? No Colin Kaepernick?

Read more: 2008 CFN all-freshman team [Scout.com]

0 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'll be honest, I did not get to see Kellen in action this year, but had you seen what Russell meant to my Wolfpack over the last half of the year, you'd have been highly impressed. On his shoulders, we finished with four-straight conference wins after losing our first four conference games — the first time a team in the ACC has ever gone 0-4 and finished 4-4.

Moore numbers are gaudy, for sure. And it's tough to argue with an undefeated record with a freshman QB. But whether right or wrong, players from BCS conference teams in larger markets will get more attention.

Nice blog!

by James C. on Dec 14, 2008 8:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I guess if this was the first time Boise State had gone undefeated, he might have garnered some more attention.

Alas, you're right. This is just another reminder that schools are judged on their conference or the perception of fan base rather than the quality of their team.

by Nick on Dec 14, 2008 10:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

As an NCSU alum and a current BSU student, I think that if Moore doesn't win, then Wilson is the next best candidate.

(Hmmm… I checked the stats. I thought that Moore was injured mid-season and missed several of NC State's losses, but it looks like he just missed the 41-10 loss to South Florida. He also played sparingly in the loss to South Carolina and didn't play in the win over William and Mary. Since the ECU game, though, it looks like he's been burning up the stats. I still think that Moore is the better QB, but I think that Moore not winning has something to do with Boise State's national reputation as a team of trick plays and gimmicks, and not as a solid football team.)

by Colin on Dec 15, 2008 12:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Appearantly it is only about the BCS QB's. I guess they don't think he'd fare very well versus any BCS team. Right Oregon? Who knows what he could've accomplished in the weak ACC.

by KYBronco on Dec 14, 2008 9:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

No man, Kellen only did good because Oregon was on their 16th string quarterback. Didn't you know that?

by BigBaloo on Dec 14, 2008 9:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, since we're on the topic of faulty public perception, the notion that the ACC is weak this year is pretty faulty, as well. Sagarin rates it as the toughest conference in all of college football:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc08.htm

What hurt the ACC this year, perception-wise, is that we didn't have a heavyweight this year. There were a bunch of good teams, but no greats. To wit, 10 of the 12 teams are going bowling, the first ever for a conference.

The ACC desperately needs for VaTech to beat Cinn. in the Orange Bowl to help buck the notion of the ACC as a weak football conference.

by James C. on Dec 14, 2008 10:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You know, I sure hope they can beat Cinci… HAWAII almost did! But i think you're facing a lose-lose situation. You lose, everybody says "see, told you so". You win, and everybody says "ah, it was just cincinnati. They almost lost to Hawaii!". Been there, done that!

by BigBaloo on Dec 14, 2008 10:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Slow down, Turbo…10 of the 12 ACC teams are going bowling because mediocrity is being rewarded, not because there are 10 great ACC teams. a 6-6 record is what a freshmen QB is expected to do, again rewarding mediocrity. An undefeated record however, is beyond the normal expectations and thus, should be rewarded. I agree it seems the requisite is BCS conference status, regardless of how ridiculous it sounds. Consider this, 6 of 9 WAC teams are also going bowling, yet there are no ringing endorsements for their strength as a conference. If there were you'd have to assume that Boise State's record and schedule are both more difficult than anyone is currently willing to admit.

by Mikrino on Dec 14, 2008 11:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What hurt the ACC this year is that it is a weak conference. What have they done out of conference to prove they are so good? Lose to East Carolina? Just because a conference can beat up on itself does not mean it is a great conference. Look at the WAC to prove that to you.

by KYBronco on Dec 14, 2008 11:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I provided a link to Jeff Sagarin's ratings that show the ACC—from top to bottom—was the toughest conference in college football. It's a computer ranking, not a subjective one, and as such is a pretty sound means to rate an entire conference's strength.

You guys apparently chose to ignore that, so I'll offer this:
- The ACC played the highest percentage of its OOC games against BCS opponents (23/48 = 47%)
- The ACC won 15 of those 23 OOC games against BCS foes for a .652 winning percentage
- The ACC went 6-4 against the vaunted SEC, 6-1 against teams not named Florida and Alabama.
- The ACC went 4-0 against the Big 12 and 4-1 against Conference USA, including State's win over then-#15th-ranked East Carolina.
- Georgia Tech smashed preseason-national-title favorite Georgia

This is a classic example of folks unwilling to change their perception in the face of the facts. And the facts are, from top to bottom, the ACC was loaded with teams capable of beating just about anyone in the country save for the elite teams at the very top. Tell me which was a better conference in 2008: The SEC, with two elite programs at the top and a bunch of nobodies below, or the ACC, with ten teams going bowling and a 6-4 record against the SEC?

The ACC is clearly the answer.

by James C. on Dec 15, 2008 12:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And 25-33 against top 30 teams. Oops, that's not a winning record is it? But at least they have all those teams in the top 10, too. Wait, they don't. But they do have multiple teams in the BCS bowls. Um, never mind that, too. Just one team that doesn't really deserve it. I guess it does prove that playing the bottom of other BCS conferences does boost your ratings.

by KYBronco on Dec 15, 2008 1:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm so glad you brought up records of games against teams in the Top 30:
- ACC 25-33 (.431)
- Big 12 15-40 (.272)
- SEC 9-31 (.225)
- Big East 4-15 (.211)
- Big 10 8-31 (.205)

The ACC played the second-highest number of games against teams in the top 30 of the Sagarin ratings, and won 43% of the time. Not a winning record, but then again, these are teams in the top 30 of the rankings…one would expect these top 30 teams to win the majority of their games. The conference with the next closest winning percentage was the Big 12, yet they only won 27% of their games against this level of competition. The ACC won 10 more games against top 30 opponents, despite playing three more games against top 30 foes.

No, the ACC didn't have a top-10 team. Nor do we have two teams playing in a BCS bowl game. But if strength at the top of the league is your sole factor for determining how strong an ENTIRE conference is, I think you're way off base.

by James C. on Dec 15, 2008 1:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

So who won all the games? Whenever someone in the ACC would break the top 25, they would lose to someone else in the ACC. In the case for the WAC, because Boise never lost, the WAC has a terrible record against top 25 teams. Having a dominant team will do that to you.

by BigBaloo on Dec 15, 2008 9:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Good christ! Don't turn OBNUG into one of those "you suck, no- you suck" boards like over on the 4-letter (ESPN for those of you with degrees from Moscow Tech).

Grow up or get the hell out!

by MikeTransplant on Dec 16, 2008 3:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs