And in a tier above Joey Burrow.

Are you saying that he should be rated higher than that, or lower?

In any case, while the author says "you would take a Tier I quarterback over one from Tier III every time -- but largely, this is about fit". Note that he does not say "you would take a Tier II quarterback over one from Tier III every time."

I see Tier II and Tier III as partially parallel. Tier II is all-Conference selections. Rourke has been a unanimous pre-season All-MAC selection, so he is a perfect fit in Tier II. Tier III is Established starters who are neither Heisman Contenders nor All-Conference selections. Burrow clearly belongs here.

Since Tier II and Tier III overlap, there is no attempt to say that Burrow is better than Rourke, nor the reverse. Rourke is rated as the best QB in the MAC. Burrow is rated as behind Tagovailoa (Alabama), Fromm (Georgia), Mond (Texas A&M), Bentley (South Carolina), and Franks (Florida). How does the 6th best QB in the SEC compare to the best in the MAC? I don't believe this article attempts to answer that. In fact, I believe that it does exactly the opposite. Instead of a unified ranking, I believe it chose to divide them into Tiers precisely to avoid having to make a direct comparison.

WTF is that comment! Really? You are comparing apples to Paw Paw on this one. Look at success and achievement and readiness to the next level. Rourke will join Irons in Canada (good for him), Burrow will play on the big stage and barring being healthy (for both) will be in the running at the end of the season. Better TD to INT numbers, better and against much better competition than the likes of our schedule.

There is some basis for his interpretation. Note that Mond from Texas A&M is in Tier 2, yet he is clearly not the best of Conference, given that the SEC placed not one, but two QBs in Tier 1. Thus, one would think he clearly belongs in Tier 3, yet he is moved up to Tier 2.

Now, one could interpret Tier 2 as "Best in conference who is not in Tier 1", in which case Mond belongs in Tier 2. But, if that is the rule, why isn't Brewer of Baylor in Tier 2, since there is no one from the Big 12 in Tier 2? And the same goes for Perkins of Virginia, since there is no one from the ACC in Tier 2? And, for that matter, why is Zac Thomas from Appalachian State in Tier 3, given that he is listed in Tier 3, while the Sunbelt Conference gets no mention in Tier 2 at all?

All in all, it's a very muddled piece. There is room to interpret Tier 2 and Tier 3 sequentially, and there is room to interpret them as parallel.

🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️

If the kid from buffalo had offers from auburn, I am sure Rourke could have transferred up, he has a better web rating than both with less talent at wide receiver

So in other words, you have zero knowledge, just your opinion stated as a fact.

Lawrence - here - when he comes out



Herbert, Tua, Fromm - here





Everyone else fighting to get drafted and maybe make a roster - here

Just let Rourke and Burrow have healthy years and go from there - and yes, it would be great (and I'm pulling) for Rourke to have a better year than Burrow - Best serves the Cats

Do we really have to have this debate over and over? Can we just agree on a few things?
1. If Rourke has graduated, and I don't know if he has, Rourke could have entered the transfer portal if he wanted to. If he had, he would certainly have has some interest, but from whom, we can only guess.
2. Rourke was a far better QB for Ohio than Burrow was for Ohio.
3. Players from the MAC, and even from FCS and lower have gone on to play in the NFL.
4. Rourke will almost certainly have interest from the CFL

To these, if you want to compare stats, they are very close, but Burrow played against more difficult competition, but with better teammates:
1. Burrow had a higher, but similar, TD/Interception ratio, 3.2 to 2.9
2. Rourke had a higher, but similar, completion rate 60.0% to 57.8%
3. Rourke had a higher pass efficiency 156.0 to 133.2
4. The only stat that I am aware of that adjusts QB performance for the level of competition is ESPN's proprietary stat, QBR. On QBR, adjusted for the level of competition, Burrow had a slightly higher, but similar, QBR 78.4 to 77.6. (unadjusted QBR Rourke was much higher at 81.0 to 68.5)
http://www.espn.com/college-football/qbr
5. If you look at just the pass portion of the QBR, and figure that running isn't that important in the NFL, Burrow is much higher than Rourke, at 51.9 to 38.4, but neither is particularly high. Rourke ranked 52d in the country last year, while Burrow was 33rd.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/qbr/_/sort/cwepaPass...


Beyond these, anything is speculation. If Burrow had come to Ohio, would he have been better for Ohio than Rourke has been? Will Rourke play in the NFL? Will Burrow play in the NFL? The first question will never be answered, and the 2d and third, we will just have to wait and see.

Edit - I'll add that I'm pulling for Rourke to have a great Senior season. If he wants to be known as the best Bobcat QB ever, he needs to lead the Bobcats to an undefeated season, which will top Cleve, while a one loss season would match him.

allen, you're in midseason form with this one! Oooohhh boy!

1. Someone else brought this comparison up

2. Allen stated as fact Rourke could have went higher, offers zero proof. Funny how so many like knocking down the kid of a coach that gave over a decade to Ohio University. Kinda sad actually.

3. I clearly stated he will be in Canada.

allen has been in car washing form ever since he told us all Malik Zaire was coming to Ohio based on his insight into the Ohio program. Wax on, wax off allen...