Sirk Headed for "Breakout Season?"

[BD80]

Thomas is listed as one of "five underrated quarterbacks who are likely destined for breakout seasons and are worth respect when handicapping games."

http://www.sportsline.com/insiders/25634202/five-qbs-who-deserve-your-handicapping-respect/

[AustinDevil]

That's awesome! As one who has had reservations about Sirk, I am sincerely and completely rooting for his recovery and for him running the offense from Week One on. The experience and competitiveness outweigh the passing (in)accuracy even if he doesn't improve there (and I think he will).

[CDu]

While that is fantastic that he made the list, I can't help but note that there was no mention of his major achilles injury this offseason. Which leads me to wonder if they didn't know about it.

Sirk's recovery (and its impact on his ability to make strides in the offseason) is unfortunately a big question for me.

[ipatent]

he'll need to get better touch on long passes. A lot of missed chances on those last year.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

Hope so. I'll be rooting for him obviously.

Hard to see where that breakout is gonna come from based on what I remember seeing last year. That was maybe the most frustrating offense I've ever watched, rarely throwing the ball more than 5 yards beyond the line of scrimmage. I don't remember them completing a whole lot when they did go beyond 5 yards. There is no potential for a breakout season if they offense can't break out of it's box this year.

[Olympic Fan]

Hope so. I'll be rooting for him obviously.

Hard to see where that breakout is gonna come from based on what I remember seeing last year. That was maybe the most frustrating offense I've ever watched, rarely throwing the ball more than 5 yards beyond the line of scrimmage. I don't remember them completing a whole lot when they did go beyond 5 yards. There is no potential for a breakout season if they offense can't break out of it's box this year.

What do you remember last year?

You should remember the single most effective season for a Duke quarterback in Cut's tenure ... the best season for a Duke QB since Spurrier's reign in the late 1980s.

Despite his inaccuracy with the deep pass ... Sirk still had the second-best total offense season in Duke history (only Anthony Dilweg in 1988 had more than his 3,428 yards in a single season). His 24 touchdowns were the fourth most in Duke history (really third behind Dilweg and Dave Brown in 1991 ... Brandon Connette actually had the most TDs -- 27 -- but that was more as a short yardage specialist than as a real QB).

His team-directed totals were even better -- he directed the highest scoring Duke offense since 1943.

He was 3rd in the ACC (and 25th nationally) in total offense last season -- behind Deshaun Watson and by 1.4 yards a game behind Marquise Williams. He was 26 yards a game ahead of fourth-place Brad Kaaya of Miami. As a team, Duke was also third in the ACC in total offense.

He quarterbacked the team to eight wins in his 12 games -- really nine wins (with the Miami game stolen).

And, yet, all Duke fans can talk about is his inability to throw the deep ball.

The fact is that Sirk had a breakout performance LAST year. He was one of the best QBs in college football.

With a slight improvement in his one weak area -- lack of accuracy with the deep ball -- maybe even Duke fans will realize what they have. But even if he's the same guy we saw last year, we've got one of the best quarterbacks in college football.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

What do you remember last year?

You should remember the single most effective season for a Duke quarterback in Cut's tenure ... the best season for a Duke QB since Spurrier's reign in the late 1980s.

Despite his inaccuracy with the deep pass ... Sirk still had the second-best total offense season in Duke history (only Anthony Dilweg in 1988 had more than his 3,428 yards in a single season). His 24 touchdowns were the fourth most in Duke history (really third behind Dilweg and Dave Brown in 1991 ... Brandon Connette actually had the most TDs -- 27 -- but that was more as a short yardage specialist than as a real QB).

His team-directed totals were even better -- he directed the highest scoring Duke offense since 1943.

He was 3rd in the ACC (and 25th nationally) in total offense last season -- behind Deshaun Watson and by 1.4 yards a game behind Marquise Williams. He was 26 yards a game ahead of fourth-place Brad Kaaya of Miami. As a team, Duke was also third in the ACC in total offense.

He quarterbacked the team to eight wins in his 12 games -- really nine wins (with the Miami game stolen).

And, yet, all Duke fans can talk about is his inability to throw the deep ball.

The fact is that Sirk had a breakout performance LAST year. He was one of the best QBs in college football.

With a slight improvement in his one weak area -- lack of accuracy with the deep ball -- maybe even Duke fans will realize what they have. But even if he's the same guy we saw last year, we've got one of the best quarterbacks in college football.

Or, counterpoint, his QB rating was 14th out of the 15 QBs who qualified in the conference last year. He's limited as a passer at all distances. His yards per attempt was also 14th out of 15. He did throw the 2nd most number of passes in the conference, and I wouldn't be surprised if he led the conference QBs in rushing attempts. He's an effective runner at the QB spot, but ultimately these are carries that he is essentially taking from other effective runners on the team. All these yardage totals you're throwing up there are true, but I would argue they're more a byproduct of his tremendous volume than his effectiveness.

I'm not saying he's useless. And if you want to call last year a breakout year, go ahead. But if we're discussing the potential for growth this year, then again I would argue it's unlikely, not unless they open things up some and he shows an ability to consistently hit passes beyond 5 yards.

[Olympic Fan]

Or, counterpoint, his QB rating was 14th out of the 15 QBs who qualified in the conference last year. He's limited as a passer at all distances. His yards per attempt was also 14th out of 15. He did throw the 2nd most number of passes in the conference, and I wouldn't be surprised if he led the conference QBs in rushing attempts. He's an effective runner at the QB spot, but ultimately these are carries that he is essentially taking from other effective runners on the team. All these yardage totals you're throwing up there are true, but I would argue they're more a byproduct of his tremendous volume than his effectiveness.

I'm not saying he's useless. And if you want to call last year a breakout year, go ahead. But if we're discussing the potential for growth this year, then again I would argue it's unlikely, not unless they open things up some and he shows an ability to consistently hit passes beyond 5 yards.

First, lets get our facts straight -- I'm sure you are quoting the ESPN stats which are both tagged and calculated incorrectly. QB Rating is an NFL term ... in college football, the equivalent stat is Passing Efficiency ... And Sirk ranked 11th, not 14th, in the ACC last year. Here's a link to the official ACC Media Guide -- you'll have to scroll down to page 37 to see the official ACC stats:

http://raycomsports.com/sports_labs_docs/m-footbl/2016accfbguide.pdf?utm_source=all&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=fb&utm_content=guide

But if I were you I wouldn't waste my time. Coach Cut has said that passing efficiency numbers are totally bogus -- it's an artificial stat that bears little relationship to the real world. Allow me to offer you an example -- a year ago, Georgia Tech's Justin Thomas hit 41.7 percent of his passes (Sirk hit 58.8 percent) for 1,345 yards (Sirk threw for 2,625 in the same number of games). Sirk threw for more touchdowns and had a better interception rate.

Yet, Thomas had a better passing efficiency rating.

Want another example? Virginia Tech's Brendon Motley hit 56.1 percent of his passes (less than Sirk) for 1155 yards (not half as many as Sirk). He had five less TD passes and a worst interception rate.

Yet, Motley ranked sixth in ACC passing efficiency -- five spots ahead of Sirk.

I concur with Coach Cut -- Passing Efficiency is a ridiculously artificial stat.

As for your comment about Sirk's rushing numbers "taking from other effective runners on the team" I suggest you find somebody to explain the read option to you -- you might understand why Sirk's running actually helps open things up for our other runners. And, taking out sacks on passing plays (which were actually quite low), Sirk rushed 150 times on running players fo 876 positive yards -- almost 5.9 yards a carry. That's better than Powell (our No. 2 rusher at 4.3 yards a carry) or Shaun Wilson (5.0 yards a carry). Jela Duncan did average more -- 6.9 yards a carry, but hje had physical issues that limited him to 67 attempts (about half as many as Powell).

Actually, I'm still not sure why so many Duke fans -- such as you -- are so unable to understand what an effective QB Sirk was last season. Only two ACC QBs had more total yards (and UNC';s Williams edged Sirk by 1.4 yards a game). Watson and Williams were the only ACC quarterbacks who started more winning games than Sirk's eight (which should have been nine).

I'm glad you don't think the most effective Duke quarterback in a quarter century was "useless".

But I'm baffled why you seem so convinced that he won't improve his passing numbers in his second season as a starter. Lewis improved in every area in his second season as a starter. Renfree's total passing yardage declined in his second season, but his completion percentage went from 61 to 65 percent and his TD/INT ratio went from 14/17 to 14/11. Anthony Boone's completion percentage dropped in his second season, but his yardage increased by over 500 yards and his TD/INT ratio went from 13/13 to 19/8.

Why is it so hard to conceive of Sirk improving his already solid passing numbers -- 58.8 percent completions/2.625 yards/16 TDs/8 INT -- in his second season.

I realize there are concerns about his offseason rehab, but that's actually given him more time to work on his throwing accuracy. If he makes the normal improvement of a Cut QB between his first and second season as a starter, Sirk could go from having the best QB season in a quarter century (as he did last year) to having the best QB season in Duke history (that would be Dilweg in 1988).

[Bob Green]

I'm not saying he's useless. And if you want to call last year a breakout year, go ahead. But if we're discussing the potential for growth this year, then again I would argue it's unlikely, not unless they open things up some and he shows an ability to consistently hit passes beyond 5 yards.

I believe you are overstating Sirk's limitations as a passer. Let's take a look at some of his touchdown passes:

Tulane: 29 yard TD to Johnell Barnes
NCCU: 43 yard TD to Max McCaffrey (the 89 yard pass to Shaun Wilson was a screen pass Wilson took to the house)
Georgia Tech: 11 yard TD to T.J. Rahming
Virginia Tech: 25 yard TD to Erich Schneider (an absolutely perfect pass)
Wake Forest: 18 yard and 28 yard TD passes to Max McCaffrey

Sirk can definitely "hit passes beyond 5 yards." He isn't perfect and his deep ball needs a lot of improvement but I am very happy he could be ready to go for his senior season. Sirk brings a strong intangible onto the field - he is a winner!

[BD80]

I believe you are overstating Sirk's limitations as a passer. Let's take a look at some of his touchdown passes:

Tulane: 29 yard TD to Johnell Barnes
NCCU: 43 yard TD to Max McCaffrey (the 89 yard pass to Shaun Wilson was a screen pass Wilson took to the house)
Georgia Tech: 11 yard TD to T.J. Rahming
Virginia Tech: 25 yard TD to Erich Schneider (an absolutely perfect pass)
Wake Forest: 18 yard and 28 yard TD passes to Max McCaffrey

Sirk can definitely "hit passes beyond 5 yards." He isn't perfect and his deep ball needs a lot of improvement but I am very happy he could be ready to go for his senior season. Sirk brings a strong intangible onto the field - he is a winner!

Since he was off of his feet much of the last year, maybe he worked on his arm?

[CDu]

I feel the need to make a few corrections here:

First, passer ratings exists in both the NFL and college. ESPN has created QBR, but that is separate stat (that is the subjective one). QBR exists at both the college and pro level. Passer efficiency ratings capture only passing stats and are driven by completion %, yards per attempt, TD%, int %. You reference counting stats throughout your comparisons, but those are essentially irrelevant in passer efficiency rating. Efficiency is essentially a "per attempt" metric. It is a very straightforward formula where TD% happens to be weighted more heavily than INT%, which is why those guys you compared to Sirk have better numbers (they had subtantively better TD% along with substantively better yards per attempt). QBR is a more subjective stat, and tries to account for decisionmaking and situational performance and not just overall performance.

Sirk was 11th of 15 qualifiers in QBR. He ranked 14th out of 15 in passer efficiency rating. His low passer rating was a function of an extremely low yards per attempt (his completion % was buoyed by a TON of WR screens, which in turn drag down his yards per attempt) and a low TD% (second lowest in the conference). Sirk's QBR ranking was better thanks to his running prowess, but still it was easily in the bottom half og the conference.

But the question for me remains: how effective will he be coming back from a second achilles injury. We are talking about a QB who struggled mightily with accuracy on throws beyond the line of scrimmage, and relied heavily on his running prowess to be effective. Now he has had to spend a huge chunk of his offseason (the time he would have used to work on his passing accuracy) rehabbing a major injury. Will he be as effective running the ball? Will he show any improvements on passes beyond the line of scrimmage? I certainly hope so, but it is a big question mark for me.

[Bob Green]

We are talking about a QB who struggled mightily with accuracy on throws beyond the line of scrimmage...

I disagree. Sirk struggled with deep pass accuracy, but he completed a lot of medium length passes. Earlier in the thread, I posted some examples of his touchdown passes greater than 10 yards. I used touchdowns because it is easy to grab the info out of the box scores where as non-touchdown passes require digging through the play-by-play stats.

However, seeing as I so strongly disagree with the "Sirk is inaccurate" meme here are a few random non-touchdown examples:

NCCU: 3rd and 12, at Duke 37, Pass complete to Barnes for 44 yards to NCCU 19.
NCCU: 3rd and 7, at Duke 40, Pass complete to Rahming for 59 yards to NCCU 1.

Indiana: 3rd and 9, at Duke 32, Pass complete to Rahming for 18 yards to 50 yd line.
Indiana: 2nd and 10, at Indiana 40, Pass complete to Schneider for 17 yards to Indiana 23.

VT: 3rd and 10, at VT 19, Slant pass complete to Barnes for 14 yards to VT 5.
VT: 1st and 10, at Duke 37, Deep pass complete to Nash for 45 yards to VT 18.

Miami: 1st and 10 at Miami 15, Pass complete to McCaffrey for 12 yards to Miami 3.
Miami: 2nd and 7 at Duke 36, Pass complete to Deaver for 15 yards to Miami 49.

I could keep going. The box scores/play-by-play are full of medium length passes Sirk completed.

[CDu]

I disagree. Sirk struggled with deep pass accuracy, but he completed a lot of medium length passes. Earlier in the thread, I posted some examples of his touchdown passes greater than 10 yards. I used touchdowns because it is easy to grab the info out of the box scores where as non-touchdown passes require digging through the play-by-play stats.

However, seeing as I so strongly disagree with the "Sirk is inaccurate" meme here are a few random non-touchdown examples:

NCCU: 3rd and 12, at Duke 37, Pass complete to Barnes for 44 yards to NCCU 19.
NCCU: 3rd and 7, at Duke 40, Pass complete to Rahming for 59 yards to NCCU 1.

Indiana: 3rd and 9, at Duke 32, Pass complete to Rahming for 18 yards to 50 yd line.
Indiana: 2nd and 10, at Indiana 40, Pass complete to Schneider for 17 yards to Indiana 23.

VT: 3rd and 10, at VT 19, Slant pass complete to Barnes for 14 yards to VT 5.
VT: 1st and 10, at Duke 37, Deep pass complete to Nash for 45 yards to VT 18.

Miami: 1st and 10 at Miami 15, Pass complete to McCaffrey for 12 yards to Miami 3.
Miami: 2nd and 7 at Duke 36, Pass complete to Deaver for 15 yards to Miami 49.

I could keep going. The box scores/play-by-play are full of medium length passes Sirk completed.

The stats simply don't back up this claim. Sirk was 10th in completion % (and in the neighborhood of several others). But his yards per attempt was second lowest by a fairly wide margin (~15% lower than the next worst). So if he was doing well in completing longer passes with accuracy, his yards per attempt would be better (as his completion % isn't bad). But instead we see a very low yards per attempt, meaning a low yards per completion. And sure enough, Sirk has the second lowest yards per completion in the conference.

The stats you have shown aren't terribly complete. First, how far downfield were those passes actually thrown? Short passes (even those behind the line) can go for big gains. Second, how many throws did he miss? Third, nobody is saying Sirk never completed a long pass. Just that - relative to the rest of the ACC - Sirk struggled to complete passes beyond the line of scrimmage. If we had completion % on passes thrown >5 yards downfield, I would guess Sirk would rank at or near the bottom.

[Bob Green]

The stats you have shown aren't terribly complete.

I clearly stated they were random examples.


First, how far downfield were those passes actually thrown? Short passes (even those behind the line) can go for big gains.

I watched every game last season. Seven at the stadium (six home games plus in Charlottesville) and six on TV. I know what I saw and I saw Sirk complete passes downfield. In the examples I offered, I specifically avoided screen passes where all the yardage was gained after the catch such as Shaun Wilson's 89 yard TD reception against NCCU.


Second, how many throws did he miss?

Not all misses are on the quarterback. Receivers drop balls. Receivers run lousy routes.


Third, nobody is saying Sirk never completed a long pass. Just that - relative to the rest of the ACC - Sirk struggled to complete passes beyond the line of scrimmage. If we had completion % on passes thrown >5 yards downfield, I would guess Sirk would rank at or near the bottom.

Sirk did not struggle to complete passes beyond the line of scrimmage, he struggled with deep ball accuracy. A contributing factor in his low yards per attempt/low yards per completion statistics is offensive play calling strategy. Duke throws a lot of short passes.

[CDu]

I clearly stated they were random examples.



I watched every game last season. Seven at the stadium (six home games plus in Charlottesville) and six on TV. I know what I saw and I saw Sirk complete passes downfield. In the examples I offered, I specifically avoided screen passes where all the yardage was gained after the catch such as Shaun Wilson's 89 yard TD reception against NCCU.



Not all misses are on the quarterback. Receivers drop balls. Receivers run lousy routes.



Sirk did not struggle to complete passes beyond the line of scrimmage, he struggled with deep ball accuracy. A contributing factor in his low yards per attempt/low yards per completion statistics is offensive play calling strategy. Duke throws a lot of short passes.

I also watched all the games, and I stand by what I have said. Sirk threw more short/behind-the-line passes than most because he struggles with accuracy. I stand by the statement that - relative to the rest of the ACC - Sirk was not as good at completing passes on throws more than 5 yards downfield.

There is a difference between saying he struggled with those throws (which I said) and saying he never completes those throws. Sirk certainly completed passes of all sorts of distances last year. That does not mean he was effective at completing passes at all sorts of distances. He was effective on short throws. He was below average to bad on throws of any distance downfield.

Doesn't mean he isn't a useful QB. His running ability and toughness is a definite plus. But as a passer he has been well below the average ACC starting QB.

[AustinDevil]

The stats simply don't back up this claim. Sirk was 10th in completion % (and in the neighborhood of several others). But his yards per attempt was second lowest by a fairly wide margin (~15% lower than the next worst). So if he was doing well in completing longer passes with accuracy, his yards per attempt would be better (as his completion % isn't bad). But instead we see a very low yards per attempt, meaning a low yards per completion. And sure enough, Sirk has the second lowest yards per completion in the conference.

The stats you have shown aren't terribly complete. First, how far downfield were those passes actually thrown? Short passes (even those behind the line) can go for big gains. Second, how many throws did he miss? Third, nobody is saying Sirk never completed a long pass. Just that - relative to the rest of the ACC - Sirk struggled to complete passes beyond the line of scrimmage. If we had completion % on passes thrown >5 yards downfield, I would guess Sirk would rank at or near the bottom.

My views last season aligned very closely with this post, CDu. However, it is late July 2016, Sirk is recovering with amazing rapidity, he will be our quarterback this fall, I love his running ability and his toughness, and I personally am done criticizing anything about his 2015 performances. Let's go, Duke, and Thomas Sirk as our QB!

[CDu]

My views last season aligned very closely with this post, CDu. However, it is late July 2016, Sirk is recovering with amazing rapidity, he will be our quarterback this fall, I love his running ability and his toughness, and I personally am done criticizing anything about his 2015 performances. Let's go, Duke, and Thomas Sirk as our QB!

Yeah, just to be clear, I am very much cheering for Sirk to do well this coming year. Just trying to give an honest assessment of where he was last year snd what he has had to overcome since then. He is tough and has been a heck of a runner. I am hopeful that his injury doesn't hurt his running ability and that the rehab doesn't/hasn't kept him from making strides on what I see as weaknesses (his passing accuracy). I am certainly hopeful for him, but I think there is reason for caution in expectations for him.

[Bob Green]

Thomas Sirk accurately throws the ball downfield to Max McCaffrey for a touchdown:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRLywB0CLjc

Thomas Sirk accurately throws an 11 yard touchdown pass to T.J. Rahming on a slant route:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=517uQgHujZE

Thomas Sirk accurately throws a 16 yard touchdown pass to Max McCaffrey on a slant route and a 25 yard touchdown pass to Erich Schneider on a sideline route:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKk4pk2joaY

Thomas Sirk accurately throws the ball downfield to Jela Duncan on the wheel route:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz7blRyUX3o

[Mabdul Doobakus]

Yeah, my points are being argued more clearly and effectively by CDu in this post, so I'll just say "ditto".

I wish we had numbers regarding attempts and completions on balls thrown to different areas of the field, and the ability to compare them to other QBs in the conference, but I don't have that. We can argue volume stats vs efficiency stats all day.

There is no question that Sirk is capable of hitting medium and deep passes and has done so on multiple occasions. The question is whether he can do it on a reasonably consistent basis, and whether the coaches will allow him to try to do so. I guess some people want to argue that he's already doing that, but I don't think the numbers would back that up. I just don't have the numbers.

And, just to echo another of CDu's sentiments, I am very much rooting for Sirk. I do not argue that we should replace him. He is very likely the best we have, and in some instances he is very effective.

[CDu]

Thomas Sirk accurately throws the ball downfield to Max McCaffrey for a touchdown:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRLywB0CLjc

Thomas Sirk accurately throws an 11 yard touchdown pass to T.J. Rahming on a slant route:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=517uQgHujZE

Thomas Sirk accurately throws a 16 yard touchdown pass to Max McCaffrey on a slant route and a 25 yard touchdown pass to Erich Schneider on a sideline route:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKk4pk2joaY

Thomas Sirk accurately throws the ball downfield to Jela Duncan on the wheel route:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz7blRyUX3o

And this post does nothing to disprove what I said.

[budwom]

I also watched all the games, and I stand by what I have said. Sirk threw more short/behind-the-line passes than most because he struggles with accuracy. I stand by the statement that - relative to the rest of the ACC - Sirk was not as good at completing passes on throws more than 5 yards downfield.

There is a difference between saying he struggled with those throws (which I said) and saying he never completes those throws. Sirk certainly completed passes of all sorts of distances last year. That does not mean he was effective at completing passes at all sorts of distances. He was effective on short throws. He was below average to bad on throws of any distance downfield.

Doesn't mean he isn't a useful QB. His running ability and toughness is a definite plus. But as a passer he has been well below the average ACC starting QB.

I'm with you 100%, CDu...I too watched all the games, and way too often he couldn't hit guys coming out of the backfield in stride, forcing them to jump, or retreat, to catch the ball.
He's a great kid, great leader, has tremendous heart...but he definitely has been lacking in the accuracy department, and not just on long throws. (But I don't expect to convince anyone).

[Bob Green]

And this post does nothing to disprove what I said.

My post is video evidence Thomas Sirk can complete passes greater than 5 yards from the line of scrimmage. He accurately threw the ball downfield plenty of times in 2015.

[Bob Green]

Yeah, just to be clear, I am very much cheering for Sirk to do well this coming year.

This is something we all are in agreement on! Sirk healthy and ready to go at quarterback gives us the best chance for success in 2016.

[CDu]

My post is video evidence Thomas Sirk can complete passes greater than 5 yards from the line of scrimmage. He accurately threw the ball downfield plenty of times in 2015.

Please point to me where I said he cannot complete the ball downfield. I said he struggled with it (relative to the rest of the ACC). I did not say he never did it. In fact, I said the opposite of "he never did it." So your evidence has successfully discredited an argument that nobody has made, but does basically nothing to disprove my statement.

For a corrolary point: I woild argue that Michael Jordan struggled to hit in professional baseball. If you posted box scores and videos of him getting base hits, would that mean my statement was wrong? Obviously not, as empirically he did struggle, even though he also did get some hits. But that is the equivalent of what we have going on in this thread.

[Bob Green]

Please point to me where I said he cannot complete the ball downfield. I said he struggled with it (relative to the rest of the ACC). I did not say he never did it. In fact, I said the opposite of "he never did it." So your evidence has successfully discredited an argument that nobody has made, but does basically nothing to disprove my statement.

My basic disagreement with you (and others) is in my opinion you overstate Sirk's accuracy issues. Yes, he struggles at times especially with the deep ball but I believe too much is made of his shortcomings. Hopefully, our disagreement will be moot in 2016.

[CDu]

My basic disagreement with you (and others) is in my opinion you overstate Sirk's accuracy issues. Yes, he struggles at times especially with the deep ball but I believe too much is made of his shortcomings. Hopefully, our disagreement will be moot in 2016.

You can certainly have that opinion. I stand by my opinion that he is way below average in terms of accuracy at the ACC level. But hopefully you can at least understand why the evidence you have presented isn't terribly helpful in this discussion as nobody is saying he can't do it. We are saying he is worse at it than most of the other starting QBs in the conference.

The data we would need to definitively answer the question would be stats for all the QBs on throws of various distances. These data are readily available at the NFL level but I suspect they are not there for college QBs. If they were, that would be the type of data to answer the question. Not a perfect measure, but pretty close. And at least would be a meaningful attempt at answering the question.

I certainly do hope he makes a big step forward in accuracy this year and becomes above average in passing accuracy.

[Pghdukie]

I respect all of the above poster's opinions and theories. 1 aspect of passing stats not mentioned above are the YAC's. Yards After The Catch.

[Olympic Fan]

My basic disagreement with you (and others) is in my opinion you overstate Sirk's accuracy issues. Yes, he struggles at times especially with the deep ball but I believe too much is made of his shortcomings. Hopefully, our disagreement will be moot in 2016.

That's the point that I keep trying to make in this thread.

Yes, Sirk does have some issues throwing the deep ball accurately -- a problem that he and Cut acknowledge and one that Sirk insists that he worked on all summer (he couldn't throw much last spring).

MY POINT -- and I think Bob agrees -- is that even with this flaw in his game, Sirk was in 2015 the most effective quarterback Duke has had in the Cut era -- at least since Dilweg in 1988 (when he had the greatest single-season QB performance in Duke history). His ability to run effectively, his protection of the ball (his interception to pass attempt is the fourth best in Duke history -- better than Sean Renfree had in his best season), his ability to avoid sacks, his performance in the clutch (Virginia Tech, Miami and Indiana stand out) are all enough to offset his difficulty connecting on the deep pass.

The offense with Sirk at the controls gained more yards and scored at a higher rate than any of Cut's offenses.

Sirk IS a great quarterback. If he can improve his one flaw,

[budwom]

It's NOT just the deep ball. Not sure we can resolve this, but the notion his only accuracy problem is with the deep ball does not hold water.
Here's hoping he makes it all a moot point this year.

[Bob Green]

It's NOT just the deep ball. Not sure we can resolve this, but the notion his only accuracy problem is with the deep ball does not hold water.
Here's hoping he makes it all a moot point this year.

Sirk's accuracy issues are primarily with the deep ball. Yes, he missed on some swing passes to running backs but he also completed a lot of swing passes. My biggest disagreement with those who believe Sirk is inaccurate is Sirk completed a lot of medium length slants and sideline passes. I tried to illustrate my point with video clips of Sirk accurately throwing completions of 11, 16, 25 yards etc...He simply isn't as inaccurate on the mid-range routes as the average Duke fan believes. And speaking of routes, some of those incomplete passes Sirk threw were because the receiver wasn't where he was suppose to be.

[Bob Green]

The offense with Sirk at the controls gained more yards and scored at a higher rate than any of Cut's offenses.



This is where the rubber meets the road!

[CDu]

Sirk's accuracy issues are primarily with the deep ball. Yes, he missed on some swing passes to running backs but he also completed a lot of swing passes. My biggest disagreement with those who believe Sirk is inaccurate is Sirk completed a lot of medium length slants and sideline passes. I tried to illustrate my point with video clips of Sirk accurately throwing completions of 11, 16, 25 yards etc...He simply isn't as inaccurate on the mid-range routes as the average Duke fan believes. And speaking of routes, some of those incomplete passes Sirk threw were because the receiver wasn't where he was suppose to be.

And here we are back to where we were a few posts ago.

Sirk has thrown a lot of passes at a lot of different distances. So OF COURSE he has a lot of completions at different distances. Being an inaccurate passer is not in any way mutually exclusive with having lots of completions of different distances. One is measured in efficiency, the other is measured in volume.

[CDu]

And again, saying Sirk is an inaccurate QB isn't saying he is a terrible QB overall. Just that in terms of passing, he is inaccurate. Duke's offense was still similarly effective to those offenses of the past few years. The 2013 offense was a bit better (averaging more yards per play and more points per game), while the 2012 and 2014 teams had comparable yards per play and comparable/more points per game. But the 2015 success was largely based on the running game, including Sirk's running. The passing game produced the second fewest yards per attempt of the Cutcliffe era (ahead of Anthony Boone's rough senior year).

[IsInTheDetails]

I'll just go with an ambiguous and agreeable take - Sirk has room for improvement in downfield accuracy. I'll also lean toward optimism and say that I think we'll see improvement this year, as one would expect from a second-year starter and a worker like Sirk. Should we see that improvement, I like what it could mean for the offense more generally.

I (vaguely) recall that before last season ever started, Cut talked up the strength of Sirk's arm and made it sound as if downfield, home-run throws were going to be a meaningful part of the arsenal. Similarly, I (somewhat less vaguely) recall that we opened up a lot of games/halves/drives with a big throw downfield on first down, more often than not unsuccessfully, and we stuck with that plan to the end. From a strategic perspective - at least for a while - both the talk and the play calling had the effect of stretching out the defense, opening up space for screen passes, running game, and especially QB runs, since we proved we were willing to take those big shots.

As the season wore on, and especially as the competition stiffened and had the benefit of our game film to watch, that strategic advantage faded. Teams were more willing to tighten the defense up front and keep a single corner playing man coverage on receivers downfield. (Anyone else remember seeing our receiver(s) beat their man a number of times, only to be unable to get to the ball?)

So, what if we're able to complete a few more of those shots and keep the threat alive? We know we have guys that can get downfield in a hurry - Cut has recruited speed very, very well. If a few of those home run swings turn into actual home runs, defenses will have to stay honest as the season progresses, leaving more room for Wilson and Duncan to get going out of the backfield, not to mention everyone's favorite screen & swing passes.

I'm a huge Sirk fan. He has so much going for him - smarts, leadership, toughness, great runner, etc. - and I think he's a decent passer that will only get better. If so, the whole offense will get better, and it was pretty danged good last year.

[Olympic Fan]

You can certainly have that opinion. I stand by my opinion that he is way below average in terms of accuracy at the ACC level..

As you note earlier, we're obviously not going to agree about Sirk's accuracy on short and medium passes. You think it's "way below average" ... I think it's pretty good.

Allow me to cite some numbers -- maybe they'll help you more than Bob's video examples.

Despite his inaccuracy on deep passes (which we all agree on) Sirk hit 58.8 percent of his 453 attempts.

How does that accuracy rate?

Well, it's the 11th most accurate season for a Duke quarterback in school history -- the fifth best for a QB with 450 attempts or more.

That doesn't sound "way below average" to me.

In fact, while there is no way to precisely measure his accuracy on deep balls -- so we can't put a numerical record on his short and mid-range accuracy, but to achieve that overall accuracy in the face of his long-range inaccuracy, he must have connected at a very good rate in the short and mid-range.

I understand that you rely on your eye test and disagree. My eye -test says that Sirk is one of the more accurate short and mid-range passers we've had at Duke -- and my personal experience goes back to the days of Leo Hart (we were classmates, in fact). Actually, I remember Don Altman, Walt Rappold and Scotty Glacken -- three great QBs from the early and mid 1960s.

I'd like to see Sirk improve his long-ball accuracy ... but even last year, he was accurate in the short and mid-range.

[CDu]

As you note earlier, we're obviously not going to agree about Sirk's accuracy on short and medium passes. You think it's "way below average" ... I think it's pretty good.

Allow me to cite some numbers -- maybe they'll help you more than Bob's video examples.

Despite his inaccuracy on deep passes (which we all agree on) Sirk hit 58.8 percent of his 453 attempts.

How does that accuracy rate?

Well, it's the 11th most accurate season for a Duke quarterback in school history -- the fifth best for a QB with 450 attempts or more.

That doesn't sound "way below average" to me.

In fact, while there is no way to precisely measure his accuracy on deep balls -- so we can't put a numerical record on his short and mid-range accuracy, but to achieve that overall accuracy in the face of his long-range inaccuracy, he must have connected at a very good rate in the short and mid-range.

I understand that you rely on your eye test and disagree. My eye -test says that Sirk is one of the more accurate short and mid-range passers we've had at Duke -- and my personal experience goes back to the days of Leo Hart (we were classmates, in fact). Actually, I remember Don Altman, Walt Rappold and Scotty Glacken -- three great QBs from the early and mid 1960s.

I'd like to see Sirk improve his long-ball accuracy ... but even last year, he was accurate in the short and mid-range.

I am not just relying on eye test, but nice attempt at discrediting my argument. In fact, I have presented a bunch of statistical evidence. I am relying on eye test AND the numbers.

You keep referencing Duke history, but that is a terrible tool for comparison. Passing games in both the NFL and in college are WAY more efficient than they were 20-30 years ago. Don't believe me? Go pull the stats for Marino, Namath, Stabler, Unitas, Tarkenton, Tittle, etc., and compare them to the stats of today's QBs. Those hall of famers' numbers look like borderline starters' numbers today.

The game has evolved. You note that Sirk's 58.8% is the 11th best in Duke history. That may very well be true, but I counter that it was only good for 10th in the ACC last year. So, below average. And he required the second lowest yards per completion to achieve said percentage, meaning he was getting that completion % (which was already below average) on shorter throws than the rest of the conference. Hence, way below average.

Being statistically better than most of Duke's former QBs (many of whom were awful and most of whom played in eras of lower completion %) does not imply being even average in today's game.

[Olympic Fan]

Being statistically better than most of Duke's former QBs (many of whom were awful and most of whom played in eras of lower completion %) does not imply being even average in today's game.

This came up before ... I know Duke has had some stretches of bad football (and some good ones -- a 1962 NCAA study found Duke was 10th in NCAA wins in the preceding quarter century). But over the years, Duke has been very good at quarterback -- some were awful, but historically, Duke's QBing has been pretty good.

I love the way you try and twist numbers to create the false meme that Sirk is "way below average" -- last year 26 players started at quarterback for at least one game in the ACC. Nine of those players completed a better percentage than Sirk ... 16 were worse. By that measure, he was in the top half ... not "way below average in the ACC"

Or, put it another way, ACC teams completed 3124 of 5449 passes last season -- that's 58.2 percent ... Sirk (58.8 percent) was better than average, not "way below average in the ACC."

Because Sirk was "way below average" when it comes to the deep ball, it's obvious that to be better than average overall, that he's significantly better than average with the short and medium game.

And, again, I remind you that passing accuracy -- whether long, short or medium -- is just one part of a quarterback's game. When it comes to total yards gained, turnover avoidance, scoring and games won as a starting QB, Sirk finished behind Deshaun Watson and Marquise Williams ... nobody else. Take Brad Kaaya -- maybe the best NFL QB prospect in the league. He certainly had better passing numbers than Sirk ... but Sirk had 26 more yards total offense a game. The Duke offense directed by Sirk ranked ahead of Miami in total offense ... and scoring offense.

Which was the more effective QB?

He's a slightly above average ACC passer when it comes to accuracy (better than that over the short and medium range). He's a MUCH better than average ACC quarterback when his entire game is considered.

[gep]

... Because Sirk was "way below average" when it comes to the deep ball, it's obvious that to be better than average overall, that he's significantly better than average with the short and medium game.

And, again, I remind you that passing accuracy -- whether long, short or medium -- is just one part of a quarterback's game. When it comes to total yards gained, turnover avoidance, scoring and games won as a starting QB, Sirk finished behind Deshaun Watson and Marquise Williams ... nobody else. Take Brad Kaaya -- maybe the best NFL QB prospect in the league. He certainly had better passing numbers than Sirk ... but Sirk had 26 more yards total offense a game. The Duke offense directed by Sirk ranked ahead of Miami in total offense ... and scoring offense.

Which was the more effective QB?

He's a slightly above average ACC passer when it comes to accuracy (better than that over the short and medium range). He's a MUCH better than average ACC quarterback when his entire game is considered.

I read this thread with much interest. Because, for me, no one is perfect in all facets of the game. But the one thing that matters most to me (although passing in general can be frustrating) is the 8 win season including the BOWL WIN. I hope Sirk can be at least as good this year. If the second year as a starter means improvement, that's more than enough for me... winning season, bowl win. GO DUKE!!!

That's all I gotta say about this...:cool:

[Devilwin]

I believe you are overstating Sirk's limitations as a passer. Let's take a look at some of his touchdown passes:

Tulane: 29 yard TD to Johnell Barnes
NCCU: 43 yard TD to Max McCaffrey (the 89 yard pass to Shaun Wilson was a screen pass Wilson took to the house)
Georgia Tech: 11 yard TD to T.J. Rahming
Virginia Tech: 25 yard TD to Erich Schneider (an absolutely perfect pass)
Wake Forest: 18 yard and 28 yard TD passes to Max McCaffrey

Sirk can definitely "hit passes beyond 5 yards." He isn't perfect and his deep ball needs a lot of improvement but I am very happy he could be ready to go for his senior season. Sirk brings a strong intangible onto the field - he is a winner!

Exactly! He has trouble with the long ball, we got it. But he can run like a tailback, and hit the short pass as good as anyone. Last season he had a lot of good throws dropped by receivers right on target. The bottom line is, can he win games for us? I think he's answered that one....

[CDu]

This came up before ... I know Duke has had some stretches of bad football (and some good ones -- a 1962 NCAA study found Duke was 10th in NCAA wins in the preceding quarter century). But over the years, Duke has been very good at quarterback -- some were awful, but historically, Duke's QBing has been pretty good.

I love the way you try and twist numbers to create the false meme that Sirk is "way below average" -- last year 26 players started at quarterback for at least one game in the ACC. Nine of those players completed a better percentage than Sirk ... 16 were worse. By that measure, he was in the top half ... not "way below average in the ACC"

Or, put it another way, ACC teams completed 3124 of 5449 passes last season -- that's 58.2 percent ... Sirk (58.8 percent) was better than average, not "way below average in the ACC."

Because Sirk was "way below average" when it comes to the deep ball, it's obvious that to be better than average overall, that he's significantly better than average with the short and medium game.

And, again, I remind you that passing accuracy -- whether long, short or medium -- is just one part of a quarterback's game. When it comes to total yards gained, turnover avoidance, scoring and games won as a starting QB, Sirk finished behind Deshaun Watson and Marquise Williams ... nobody else. Take Brad Kaaya -- maybe the best NFL QB prospect in the league. He certainly had better passing numbers than Sirk ... but Sirk had 26 more yards total offense a game. The Duke offense directed by Sirk ranked ahead of Miami in total offense ... and scoring offense.

Which was the more effective QB?

He's a slightly above average ACC passer when it comes to accuracy (better than that over the short and medium range). He's a MUCH better than average ACC quarterback when his entire game is considered.

I am not twisting numbers, you are. There were 15 players who met the qualifications as starting QBs in the ACC last year. Sirk finished 10th in completion %. That Sirk beat out backups filling in for spot starts does not make him an above average passer among starting QBs. Yes, he may have had an ever so slightly above average % (he was still not above average in terms of being an accurate thrower; see below) when you account for the walk-ons, freshmen, and others who had to fill in due to injuries to the starters. He has a below average % when compared to the other true starters.

And you keep saying that because Sirk was bad on deep balls he must be better on short balls to be near average overall. No, that is not true. In fact, it is quite possible for a player to be below average in accuracy at every distance but have the highest completion percentage overall. This is simple math. All you have to do is throw more of your passes at the very short (higher %) distances compared to what other QBs do. And that is exactly what Sirk did. He wasn't better at throwing shorter passes. He was just throwing a higher proportion of those short passes than other QBs, as evidenced by his having the second lowest yards per completion of any qualifying starter last year.

As I have been saying, Sirk is a way below average passer for a starting QB in the ACC, but he compensates by throwing a much higher volume of very short, high percentage passes.

And again, I have repeatedly said he has had plenty of value outside of his inaccuracy as a passer. Despite being a way below average passer he was a way above average runner. So on average, he was probably an average starting QB, and maybe even above average. But my concern is that this second major achilles injury will weaken his effectiveness as a runner. If it does, that will put more emphasis on his passing, where he has been way below average for a starting QB.

Hopefully he will be just as effective as a runner on his return. If he does, then he will be an average to above-average starting QB this year. But I can't say that I am anywhere close to 100% certain he will return to form (complete recovery is a tough thing to do), though I hope he will. Because if he doesn't then his value plummets, because he is a way below average passer compared with the rest of the conference's starting QBs.

[Pghdukie]

Is anyone as concerned as I that Sirk maybe coming back too soon ? Although he has gone thru this before, I just worried he may not be in football condition. Running, exercising, etc is great, but what happens when he starts getting hit ? Blind side hits just can't be enacted in the gym.
My best wishes for Sirk to set my mind at ease.

[CDu]

Is anyone as concerned as I that Sirk maybe coming back too soon ? Although he has gone thru this before, I just worried he may not be in football condition. Running, exercising, etc is great, but what happens when he starts getting hit ? Blind side hits just can't be enacted in the gym.
My best wishes for Sirk to set my mind at ease.

I am not overly concerned about him having come back too soon, as the typical recovery time is ~4-6 months. I more concerned about what "recovered" will look like. He is a QB who has been very reliant on his running ability to define his value. He has been a well below average passer. Now, there has to be at least some concern that his effectiveness as a runner will be diminished. If so, he will need to rely on his passing, which has been a weakness for him. And he has lost at least 3-4 months of practice time when he would have been working on his throwing accuracy due to rehab from the injury. Nso it is harder to believe he will be more accurate this year.

I certainly hope that he is able to recover to full strength and will be the same runner as before. I also hope that he will still have had enough time to improve his passing accuracy. But those are the two auestions I have for him, both entirely contingent upon the uncertainty of the impact of this second achilles injury.

[BD80]

... Now, there has to be at least some concern that his effectiveness as a runner will be diminished. ...

I have not heard that concern expressed by anyone who has seen Thomas rehabbing or working out recently.

Repeating speculation over and over does not make it less speculative.

When there are reports of Sirk's condition, speed, and/or growth/decay as a passer, then perhaps it would be more worth the argument.

[Bob Green]

Now, there has to be at least some concern that his effectiveness as a runner will be diminished.

Last season, running the read option, Sirk's first option seemed to be keeping the ball himself while handing it off to the running backs often enough to keep the defense honest. My druthers for 2016 is to see Sirk opt to hand the ball off to the running backs more keeping it himself enough to keep the defense honest.

With Jela Duncan, Shaun Wilson and either Brittain Brown or Elijah Deveaux lined up behind Sirk, and reports the offensive line gained strength over the off season, I am not overly worried about our ability to establish the run.

[CDu]

I have not heard that concern expressed by anyone who has seen Thomas rehabbing or working out recently.

Repeating speculation over and over does not make it less speculative.

When there are reports of Sirk's condition, speed, and/or growth/decay as a passer, then perhaps it would be more worth the argument.

I didn't say it was more than speculation, and that isn't what this argument has been about. Obviously we won't know how well Sirk has recovered snd how much he has inproved as a passer until he starts seeing live action. And equally obviously any discussion of what might happen in the future is speculative. Speculation is like 90% of what goes on in this thread. If we aren't to speculate then almost all posts discussing the coming season go away.

The poster asked if anyone was worried about him coming back too soon, and I voiced what I am concerned about. Totally separate discussion from whether or not he has been an accurate QB.

[hudlow]

I'm certain that Coach Cut is sandbagging with the info he's giving out about Sirk's progress.

"Breakout" may be on the mild side.

[Olympic Fan]

Last season, running the read option, Sirk's first option seemed to be keeping the ball himself while handing it off to the running backs often enough to keep the defense honest. My druthers for 2016 is to see Sirk opt to hand the ball off to the running backs more keeping it himself enough to keep the defense honest.

With Jela Duncan, Shaun Wilson and either Brittain Brown or Elijah Deveaux lined up behind Sirk, and reports the offensive line gained strength over the off season, I am not overly worried about our ability to establish the run.

Bob, the point of the read option is to "read" the defensive end. On most occasions, Sirk does not start the play with the predetermined idea that he'll keep it or hand it off.

By default, most defenses commit the end to the running back, which explains why Sirk keeps so often.

Based on yards-per-carry, our best options are (1) Duncan; (2) Sirk; (3) Wilson ... we don't know about the freshmen. I hope Duncan is healthy enough to get more than 67 carries (if you remember, he missed the first three games with a torn pectoral muscle and was limited in several others).

He could be part of a great rushing attack --as we saw against Indiana in the bowl game, when we had three rushers over 100 yards -- Sirk (155), Duncan (109), Wilson (103).

The dual threat that Sirk poses -- his running ability and his accuracy on short and medium passes -- make him one of the most dangerous QBs in college football. If he does fix his flaw as a deep passer, we could be in for an epic season.

[Bob Green]

Last season, running the read option, Sirk's first option seemed to be keeping the ball himself while handing it off to the running backs often enough to keep the defense honest.


Bob, the point of the read option is to "read" the defensive end. On most occasions, Sirk does not start the play with the predetermined idea that he'll keep it or hand it off.

By default, most defenses commit the end to the running back, which explains why Sirk keeps so often.

I understand Sirk reads the DE and doesn't have a predetermined idea to keep the ball or hand it off. However, Sirk keeps it a lot and I'd prefer to see the ball in the running backs hands a little more. Another thing I'd like to see is Duke run the traditional option pitch to give the running backs an opportunity to turn the corner outside. I'm talking the play Shaun Wilson ran for a long touchdown against Virginia Tech. The play is at 47 seconds mark of the video clip below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKk4pk2joaY

I know I'm stretching my wishes here, but playing Duncan and Wilson in a two back set seems logical to me. Duke is pretty much committed to a single back set.

[Jim3k]

I don't know that I'm qualified to take a stand on Sirk's efficiency. Both sides here, Bob/Oly v CDu/BudWom, seem to have valid points regarding his passing success.

But I would like to look back over 50 years (to 1961 or so) and without looking up the stats point out that the few single wing tailbacks of that era did much the same thing as the read option QBs do now. The classic tailback from back then was Billy Kilmer, a Heisman nominee out of UCLA in an era of T-formation variants. As a result he did both a lot of running and a lot of passing. So does Sirk, who probably runs more than other collegiate run-option QBs of today. Sirk is quite a bit taller and heavier than Kilmer ever was (but then so are today's defensive folks). Still, if Sirk has the same quickness, and I think he does, he's a formidable weapon.

All I know is that if Sirk can match up with Kilmer as a total offense guy, we have a helluva QB. Let's all hope he's healthy and stays that way.