This is my answer. Feel free to quote any section from it and dispute it.
**********
The number I selected that becomes a critical point in this discussion is 140.0.
Last season, an efficiency rating of 140.0 would have ranked 41st in the nation, while a 150.0 rating would have ranked 23rd, a 160.0 rating would have ranked 10th and a 170.0 rating would have ranked just outside the top five. While the numbers can change from year to year, these numbers should provide a very basic snapshot of what represents pretty good vs. elite at the quarterback position. In my mind, a 140.0 rating in the modern age of college football offense represents approximately the minimum bar of success for slightly above average quarterback play in the passing game.
Since 2010, here’s a look at both UT's primary starting quarterback rating and the overall team quarterback rating, along with the team’s final record.
2016: 136.0/134.4 (5-7)
2015: 126.1/120.5 (5-7)
2014: 116.5/116.2 (6-7)
2013: 109.3/117-7 (8-5)
2012: 153.3/154.4 (9-4)
2011: 131.9/122.1 (8-5)
2010: 111.0/111.2 (5-7)
In the last seven years, only the 2012 version of David Ash has been able to clear the 140.0 bar for an entire season, which also just happens to be the only nine-win season during this time span for the Texas program.
What’s interesting about this note is that it goes hand in hand with the supporting data from 2002-2016, which shows that in the nine seasons in which the Longhorns won nine or more games, the quarterback play posted a 140+ rating in seven of them. The two outliers?
2007: (139.2) Colt McCoy’s worst season was just an eyelash below the mark in what was a very uneven season.
2004: (128.4) Vince Young’s superhuman running skills more than overcompensated for his passing deficiencies.
Although it has taken me awhile to get there, I hope I’ve created a picture that safely paints the 140.0 rating as a fairly safe data point that establishes a minimum bar for success in the modern passing game inside college football, at least as it relates to the Texas program. If anyone out there feel like I’ve been unfair in choosing this admittedly arbitrary number as a baseline for success… my apologies (I tried).
Follow
Chuck Carlton
✔@ChuckCarltonDMN
Tom Herman on QB signee Sam Ehlinger: "Is he going to push Shane [Buechele]? I hope so." Reiterates that there are no starters in his mind
2:34 PM - 1 Feb 2017
As we bring the discussion forward to the upcoming 2017 season, the Longhorns return second-year sophomore starter Shane Buechele, who just finished his freshman season with a 136.0 rating, which on the surface seems to indicate that he’s on the cusp of giving the Longhorns enough at the quarterback position to lead the team into the nine-win range with its quarterback play.
Yet, if you dig a little deeper, you’ll find that the quarterback position is probably more of a question mark than peripheral numbers suggest. It’s possible that Buechele was so good in his first two starts against Notre Dame (169.7 game rating) and UTEP (206.3 game rating!) that we just didn’t pay enough attention to the fact that the next 10 games were rarely like the first two.
Some Buechele numbers from the final 10 games of last season…
* Buechele only posted a 140.0 game rating in three of his final 10 games (146.0 vs Iowa State, 176.0 at Kansas State and 195.4 vs. Baylor), which means that Buechele only cleared the 140.0 rating in five of 12 games, posting a 4-1 record in those five games.
* While he posted a 136.0 rating for the entire season, Buechele posted a 127.8 rating in the final 10 games of the season, which is lower than the rating Tyrone Swoopes posted in the first 11 games of the 2014 season.
* Buechele completed only 58.6 completion percentage and a 15/10 touchdown-to-interception ratio.
If you’re thinking that I’m trying to take a shot at Buechele by pointing these facts out, you’re sorely mistaken. As I’ve said repeatedly, I think he has all-Big 12 and championship upside. On top of that, I’ve never heard anyone say a bad thing about the young man and I ranked him as the No.10 prospect in the state in my 2016 rankings.
Considering how stagnant business gets when the program goes through a seven-season rut, I’d be borderline close to selling my soul to the sports gods if it meant Buechele led Texas to the type of promised land that gets a jersey number retired.
No, the point of this entire section is to point out that while Buechele absolutely represented improvement as a true freshman against almost everything Texas had at the position in the last seven years, there are still very real steps that he needs to take before we can safely call Buechele an above-average starting quarterback at this level.
First and foremost, it’s the game-in and game-out consistency that Buechele needs to improve on. It’s not a matter of ability because he displayed that at an above-average level in five games last season, which witnessed Texas win four of them. However, he can’t be a box of chocolates, going from good to bad in yo-yo fashion over a 12-game season.
If you told me right now that Buechele won't post a single 180 game-rating this season, but never goes under a 140 game-rating, I’d suggest that the Longhorns will be very close to nine wins this season. Hell, they won 80-percent of the games in which he went beyond 140 on a 5-7 team.
What’s funny is that I’ve been discussing the talent levels/upside between Buechele and true freshman Sam Ehlinger in the last week and wondering how the staff’s view of short-and long-term projections might impact snap distribution this season, but the better question might involve which quarterback can most consistently play at a 140.0+ level. You can beat Iowa State by three touchdowns with 146.0 play, but you can’t beat TCU if the yo-yo drops down to 82.9.
