IUFB vs Old Dominion - Saturday, 08.30.25 @ 2:30 on FS1

[Hoosier987 2,878]

8 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

I get the Mendoza hype, but his pocket presence, decision making, and accuracy left a lot to be desired. His footwork also needs a ton of work. Mendoza going to have to reach his ceiling to replicate last year; his floor is exponentially lower than Rourke’s, that’s my concern.

Maybe hype was part of the issue? Certainly didn’t look anywhere near an NFL qb let alone a first rounder like the hype has been. Again, first game…hopefully he improves. 

[AH1971 3,436]

7 minutes ago, Hoosier987 said:

Maybe hype was part of the issue? Certainly didn’t look anywhere near an NFL qb let alone a first rounder like the hype has been. Again, first game…hopefully he improves. 

He’ll put up numbers in this system no question. But the difference between 9-10 wins and 6-7 wins is going to be the three things I listed. It is one game thankfully.

[Napleshoosier 10,980]

After calming down some I gotta say I do trust in cig.  Why, because I googled him again!  On to next Saturday. Go Hoosiers.

[WayneFleekHoosier 51,830]

1 minute ago, AH1971 said:

He’ll put up numbers in this system no question. But the difference between 9-10 wins and 6-7 wins is going to be the three things I listened. It is one game thankfully.

We agree. That QB play today will cost us close games.   It was worse than many want to admit. However, hopefully it’s the worst we will see him.   Next 2 weeks will give us a bigger window then the Illinois game obviously.   Warning signs aplenty but time to straighten things out. 

[realTomCrean 2,787]

10-2

[AH1971 3,436]

1 minute ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

We agree. That QB play today will cost us close games.   It was worse than many want to admit. However, hopefully it’s the worst we will see him.   Next 2 weeks will give us a bigger window then the Illinois game obviously.   Warning signs aplenty but time to straighten things out. 

People will compare Rourke’s first game to Mendoza’s first game. I don’t buy it. Mendoza’s ability to process just didn’t seem there. 

[RaceToTheTop 31,595]

1 minute ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

We agree. That QB play today will cost us close games.   It was worse than many want to admit. 

I have yet to see anyone saying it was good.

His touch on short passes was bad.  He made some decisions to throw in double coverage that weren't good despite them not getting picked.

That said, he has a two year track record of being pretty good.  I'm not going to throw it away on one game.

[AH1971 3,436]

8 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I have yet to see anyone saying it was good.

His touch on short passes was bad.  He made some decisions to throw in double coverage that weren't good despite them not getting picked.

That said, he has a two year track record of being pretty good.  I'm not going to throw it away on one game.

Deep analytics show his decision making is poor and is a high turnover prone player. At least at Cal. You can tell all the physical tools are there.

[WayneFleekHoosier 51,830]

6 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I have yet to see anyone saying it was good.

His touch on short passes was bad.  He made some decisions to throw in double coverage that weren't good despite them not getting picked.

That said, he has a two year track record of being pretty good.  I'm not going to throw it away on one game.

Neither am I.  However before this game and with his preseason hype I thought he’d be a major strength.  After seeing him in the Cream and Crimson I’ve got major concerns I didn’t have before. That’s all. 
 

Maybe he settles in after watching film and can be an asset vs just a game manager. 
 

I do trust CIG to put us in the best spot to win games however that might mean making Mendoza a game manager and not slinging that thing around the field. Will cap our ceiling. 

Edited August 30 by WayneFleekHoosier

[Home Jersey 16,803]

1 minute ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Never am I.  However before this game and with his preseason hype I thought he’d be a major strength.  After seeing him in the Cream and Crimson I’ve got major concerns I didn’t have before. That’s all. 
 

Maybe he settles in after watching film and can be an asset vs just a game manager. 
 

I do trust CIG to put us in the best spot to win games however that might mean making Mendoza a game manager and not slinging that thing around the field. Will cap our ceiling. 

All true. That said, if Riley Leonard could game manage ND to the CFB title game, I think Mendoza could manage us into the CFP. Leonard was god awful most of the year as a passer and they became a very one dimensional offense. Trusting in Cig. 1-0. Like you said, time to straighten things out.

[RaceToTheTop 31,595]

6 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Deep analytics show his decision making is poor and is a high turnover prone player. At least a Cal. You can tell all the physical tools are there.

'deep analytics'.

He threw 6 interceptions in 386 passes last year despite playing behind a putrid line.

[Lebowski 3,799]

7 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I have yet to see anyone saying it was good.

His touch on short passes was bad.  He made some decisions to throw in double coverage that weren't good despite them not getting picked.

That said, he has a two year track record of being pretty good.  I'm not going to throw it away on one game.

I thought he was good. He didn't throw a pick or lose the football via fumble. He hit multiple targets and threw to open receivers, that dropped his passes. He read the RPO correctly, for the most part. He rushed for positive yards when needed. And yes, he made typical 1st game mistakes. But most importantly, he managed the game to a win.1-0. On to the next game. 

[JerryYeagley23 5,185]

I’ll give Mendoza the benefit of the doubt. We ran the ball 57 times. It’s a small sample size 31 passes and one of the incompletions should have been a 54 yard TD. His touch playing at game speed will come. 

[AH1971 3,436]

12 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

'deep analytics'.

He threw 6 interceptions in 386 passes last year despite playing behind a putrid line.

Like you said, “decisions to throw in double coverage that weren't good despite them not getting picked”.

That’s not a recipe for long term success.

 

[Home Jersey 16,803]

4 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Like you said, “decisions to throw in double coverage that weren't good despite them not getting picked”.

That’s not a recipe for long term success.

 

... so you don't have "deep analytics" to support your claim? :)

[AH1971 3,436]

2 minutes ago, Home Jersey said:

... so you don't have "deep analytics" to support your claim? :)

Peep his pff grades from last year.His expected turnover %\throw was extremely high. PFF is about as analytical as it gets.

[RaceToTheTop 31,595]

4 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Peep his pff grades from last year.His expected turnover %\throw was extremely high. PFF is about as analytical as it gets.

Actual interceptions thrown is as analytical as it gets.

[Home Jersey 16,803]

7 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Peep his pff grades from last year.His expected turnover %\throw was extremely high. PFF is about as analytical as it gets.

PFF is about as analytical as it gets.

Based off subjective data though. PFF aka Pretty Flawed, Frankly. Lol

Maybe he had a very high "expected turnover %\throw" ... he still threw 6 picks last year. That's the objective data. Regardless I don't think we have to worry about Mendoza creating a ceiling of 6-7 wins for this team. At least not after one performance. Let's see how things look come B10 season.

[AH1971 3,436]

3 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Actual interceptions thrown is as analytical as it gets.

So if you throw into double and triple coverage and the ball doesn’t get intercepted it’s still a good throw? lol.

That’s the entire point. His decision making is subpar. That’s what analytics show. Good grief.

[Home Jersey 16,803]

Just now, AH1971 said:

So if you throw into double and triple coverage and the ball doesn’t get intercepted it’s still a good throw? lol.

That’s the entire point. His decision making is subpar. Good grief.

Because some guys grade a given throw as risky on a scale of -2 to +2 doesn't really tell you much in a meaningful way. People extrapolate PFF grades to all sorts of wacky arguments, like calling a QB that threw 6 INTs last year a poor decision maker and turnover prone. Lol