Impact QB Scouting Report: Jalon Daniels

Everyone loves quarterback talk. Since it's the most important position in the sport and a passer's ability often can be the difference between a victory or defeat, extra weight is put into analyzing these fellows. While most fans are content with volume stats like completions, yards, and touchdowns scored, the archaic metrics do little to tell the story of how a passer actually operates. What if a passer leaned more on screens or lived on the wild side by pressing downfield more often or benefited from being a game manager? 

To cut through the clutter and actually provide some illuminating content this time of year, I decided to chart all 30 of On3’s top Impact QBs against their most challenging defensive opponents to get a better understanding of how the group functions. Instead of letting matchups against Poop State infiltrate our passers’ profiles, focusing on quality opponents present much firmer samples and strong indications of how this lot projects to the next level. Using ESPN’s SP+ Ratings and Expected Points Added/pass to set our benchmarks, each QB was charted against a 5-6 game sample. Some guys still had much easier slates compared to their peers. Nonetheless, this methodology is very helpful in exposing one’s true colors. 

In this piece, Kansas' Jalon Daniels will be the subject. We’ll breakout his profile overall, throwing downfield, working under pressure, surviving outside the pocket, targeting tight windows, operating the dropback game (along with play action), and their “passing floor'' based on how he performed in structure without adversity or schematic elements. 

(To optimize graphics on mobile, tilt device horizontally)

Impact QB #15: Jalon Daniels, Kansas:

The Skinny:

Twitchy athlete with excellent burst and ability to win the edge. Fairly skilled sack eraser. His undersized frame isn’t the strongest and makes it harder to see the field ably. Schemed up well and produced excellent potency and efficiency. Throws a very catchable ball. 

The Fat:

Daniels plays in one of college football’s most unique schemes. Lance Leipold's modern spread attack gifts him orbit motion triple options (with play action and leak plays off those looks), shoot motion zone splits, jet fly options, and snaps with TWO QBs on the field at once. Fun stuff. With his burst, Daniels’ traits obviously pop. Mobile and dangerous, he’s a pain in the ass to corner and takedown. Plus, he throws a really catchable ball. A good deal of my contemporaries concur per him being voted the Big 12’s Offensive Player of the Preseason. But as exciting as Jayhawk football has become, his strength of schedule was butter. Only one opponent (Kansas State) placed inside the nation’s top35 in Expected Points Added/pass. There’s little doubt, this factor buoyed a lot of his numbers. 

Since he’s short, concerns about his ability to see the field emerge. On-coming rushers and congested pockets with clogged passing lanes affect his base and his placement. Honestly, Daniels’ snap-to-snap performance against havoc is remarkable. But, folks know hitting a target is much easier when you can see it. Despite his quick processing skills and snappy release, his low throwing elbow complicates his consistency (scaling an obstacle is challenging with a low launch point). These naturally lead to mistakes, which were also amplified when he attacked tight windows. But while there are outstanding questions regarding his arm talent due to his scheme and slate, our guy logged a throw that topped 50 yards beyond the line of scrimmage before landing in his target’s mitts. Not too shabby for a perceived run-first option. 

Daniels’ baseline expectation is okay. He is often set up to succeed and is undeniably potent. 

Behind the schemey approach, Daniels’ spray was a little atypical for a righty. Not even UTSA’s sinister slinger Frank Harris topped his 46.7% makeup targeting outside the left hash in our study. He also seemed to find key completions in the middle of the field, which isn’t too normal for someone his size. And while not a Field-stretcher Fred, he was 1/6 of our QBs to place above the group average in both Deep and Midrange Makeup. He has the potential to keep Kansas on its upward trajectory. His razzmatazz M.O. and underlying flaws, however, raise doubts the sizzle is sustainable long term. 

Largest Strength: “Catchability” and Open-field Burst

Largest Area of Opportunity: Avoiding Bad Decisions Under Pressure

The Stats: color-coded to reflect percentile standing within impact class (green = great, white = mid, red = bad)

Spray:

Overall:

Daniels’ overall numbers were satisfyingly bang-for-buck. With Leipold’s offense creating room to work, neither he nor his targets biffed many opportunities. His Explosive Pass% and Uncatchable% sat within our group’s top5. And, only Sam Hartman produced a preferable First Down+TD Rate (behind a much more vertical approach, I might add) than his 42.3% clip. Plus, Daniels crossed the all-important +50% Depth Adjusted Accuracy benchmark. And while he faced a form of pressure on over a third of his attempts, he only logged 4 sacks across the top ANY/A among any Impact Power5-er. His 9.2 figure was a half-yard better than the Heisman’s in our study. To reiterate, Daniels beat up a lousy slate of secondaries. And his overall Interceptable% is well into the dangerzone. Still, this high-level efficiency is sexy and worth attention

Downfield:

Only Caleb Williams had a higher Play Action% in our study on downfield throws than Daniels’ 36.8% clip. The manipulation tactic produced increased efficiency and jazzed up our guy’s numbers. Only two of his peers bested his 54.4% Completion% on throws beyond ten yards downfield. And to further stress his ability to maximize these throws, his Accuracy% and Uncatchable% – both deep and on midrange attempts – comfortably topped the standard. That said, he wasn’t without fault. His downfield Interceptable% was not among the group’s upper tier. Moreover, it worsened on non-play fake attempts. And, Daniels can throw some ducks and tossups and rely on his man to make a play rather than overly throwing them open. For the most part, his superb midrange metrics were his primary bright spots compared to his deep ball. 

Pressured:

No stranger to duress, Daniels’ spray wasn’t altered too much when under the gun. As aforementioned, his short stature and low elbow don’t do him much favors in these spots. But as a well-coached offensive executive and electric backyard baller, the Jayhawk secured some of the group’s best stats in our study. Again his foes weren’t as formidable as the rest. That said, his Impact-best Y/A, ANY/A, First Down+TD Rate, Explosive Pass%, and Depth Adjusted Accuracy are impressive and adds fuel to his growing off-season buzz. Additionally, only one of his peers posted a lower Pressure:Sack Ratio who also recorded a below-average Pressure Rate. His instincts and acceleration away from danger kept Kansas alive on countless occasions. And though he was forced into more troubling decisions, Daniels proved to be a clear playmaker on a down-to-down basis. 

Outside Pocket:

Though he can make plays outside of structure with his legs and speed, folks are less-sure about his passing acumen in these spots. Daniels’ leaned into playing hot potato outside the pocket. Focusing toward the flat, he was held to a pedestrian 4.6 Y/A and so-so per-throw efficiencies. He did post sound accuracy stats. But sometimes his extensions resulted in misplaced throws that opponents capitalized on. Daniels’ generally catchable ball also allowed defenders to get in on the party; ala his INTA% tripling his EXP%. Lacking ideal strength, his throws occasionally lose zip or come down with a case of the wobbles when his base is altered. 

Contested/Tight Window:

The Jayhawk tended to be pressured into mistakes. And when under the gun, Daniels’ targets honed in on tight windows where those mistakes potentially are the most devastating. He managed to get tries out on time with his usual catchability and admirable accuracy, but a third of these throws were altered by defenders with over a quarter being straight-up turnover-worthy. That’s a clear red flag based on his moderate affinity for testing tight windows. His results benefited from lucky bounces and a sugary slate – JD’s 7.1 Y/A earned the group’s silver medal. Still, Daniels’ buzz could quickly become a buzzkill if he’s not too careful. 

Dropback:

Due Kansas’ bias towards screens and RPOs, Daniels’ dropback returns mostly mirrored his overall stats from earlier. He threw gems, found key completions, and was dependable with his accuracy albeit some iffy hero balls. He was the only passer in our study to boast a First Down+TD Rate over 40% and an Explosive Pass% over 14% while logging the group’s lowest percentage of off-target throws. 

While there were indisputably cool designs within Kansas’ offense, the vast majority of their core dropback concepts were pretty standard. Seattle/All Verts, Stick Variations, and Mesh led the way. But there wasn’t much separation from other staples like Dagger, Shallow, Wheelie Switches, PA Bootlets and Leak Plays. Of those 8 foundational plays, 5 looks worked at least half the time. Excellent consistency with premier potency projects golden production. And Daniels is one incendiary cog within KU’s dropback offense. 

Dropback Play Action:

One could argue he was his best self in this context. Defenses lines were duped by action, backends had to scramble to cap stressful routes, and he was given room to do his thing. On Kansas orchestrated shot plays and crafty delays, Daniels experienced steady efficiencies but obviously experienced a bottomline boost thanks to snatching more big gainers. His ADOT puffed up 2 yards and his ANY/A improved by 3 on play actions compared to an average dropback attempt. He was 5x more likely to log a 20-plus yard completion than an interceptable. Like most of his metrics, a low Drop Rate helped him optimize his offerings. Still, Daniels did his part as all of his placement stats finished on the good side of the group’s average. 

"Floor" Passing:

When isolating his performance in structure without scheme elements or adversity, Daniels’ passing floor gets a passable grade; but it’s not overpowering. He was competent in the same departments – catchability, efficiency, etc – most of his profile illustrated. But considering the level of competition that produced these returns, you’d like him to be graded a little better than just a C+ performer in terms of process. If the heat gets cranked up, his lofty results will likely crumble. Rarely can average edge out top-level defenses. Still, Daniels’ value comes as a mobile playmaker who’s apt at displacing opponents. That will keep folks interested and drive his brand. However, having a moderate pass floor in a wide-open conference rounds out Daniels’ game and beefs up his resume.