The Skinny: Undersized yet explosive runner and potent passer. Okay drive but generally a good placer in rhythm. Damaging burst on scrambles, erasures, and designed carries. Found wins on the move and vs tight windows. Sees the field well despite stature but lacks great anticipation. 

The Fat: Old Man Travis is an early Heisman-favorite and lead catalyst for why FSU is a dark horse title contender. For whatever reason, everything clicked into place for the veteran once former OL coach Alex Atkins started coordinating the Seminoles’ offense. Travis’ ADOT remained in the double-digits - a feat he’s accomplished every season as a starter. Travis was one of the more vertical passers in our study as 46% of his attempts traveled beyond ten yards downfield. Only Sam Hartman’s claims a higher makeup. But he wowed everyone with improved savvy, poise, in polish that resulted in him snatching copious situational victories. Outside the study, he placed inside the nation’s top-dozen in Yards/Attempt and First Down+TD/dropback. 

Travis’ tape is riddled with examples of explosiveness. No Impact QB had a preferable percentage of passes that gained at least 20 yards than his 15.3% clip. If his bombardier M.O. didn’t sell you on his incendiary ways, a fifth of his designed carries topped ten yards and he averaged over two erased sacks per game against his hardest opponents. Not really one to play bully ball, Travis excels separating to space. To maximize his mobility, like a good amount of QBs that lack ideal height, Travis was prone to work on the move. FSU featured bootlegs; but it also wasn’t uncommon for Travis to break rank to help his downfield vision, even when unpressured. As desired, he logged firm figures outside the pocket. However despite the proactive approach, he still was altered by obstructed passing lanes and pressure. There seemed to be a noticeable shortcoming passing over the middle; particularly midrange attempts. This subsequently saw Travis try his outside the numbers, often with the aid of play action. The results – and most of his process – in these spots have fueled his enhanced play. 

While Travis has matured and scans the field well within FSU’s progressions, he still lacks desirable anticipation. Excluding contested bucket throws to his large receivers, the ‘Nole resembles more of a “see it, throw it” passer. Meaning, he usually waits until his man is clearly open before he lets it rip. His quick twitch has allowed him to extend and survive, but if he’s late on a read, he’s not as successful. Far from a nibbler, Travis lacks ideal zip when off-platform. And that simply cuts down his ceiling even if he’s a play maker that has potential to score on any snap. His verticality naturally ups his degree of difficulty, which conversely hurts his consistency. So extra weight is placed on his aim big, miss big approach. Entering 2023, that doesn’t appear much of a problem. But Travis could improve his stock tremendously by shoring up his intermediate ball placement. 

Largest Strength: Big Playmaking 

Largest Area of Opportunity: Midrange accuracy and consistency vs pressure

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

Spray:

Overall: 

The first word that comes to mind summing up Travis’ sample against his hardest opponents is eruptive.  Against a below-average Pressure Rate, his Explosive Pass% was tops amongst the group and his ANY/A cracked the top10. To reiterate, FSU didn’t mind winging it downfield. Travis’ 11.3 ADOT was two yards over the average. So, the big gainers were very much an intended byproduct of his verticality. With longer throws on average, Travis was less refined on a down-to-down basis as some of his peers. Over a fifth of his tries were uncatchable and his Adjusted Completion% finished well below standards. And while his raw Accuracy% was an ant above average, his weighted figure illustrates optimism within his process. Along with crossing the important 50% benchmark, only Bo Nix and Drake Maye had preferable Depth Adjusted Accuracy% among Impact Power5-ers. Still even without premium placement stats, Travis finished in the green in most result metrics against the meat of his schedule. 

However, his numbers were affected by a few factors. The aforementioned pressure had a negative impact on his consistency despite maintained potency. On the flip side, Travis benefited by 44% of his attempts coming outside the pocket or off true play action. The overall package is enticing, but because of these breakouts, folks need to be cautiously optimistic how his game might level up with added expectations and adversity. 

Downfield:

Travis was the most accurate deep passer in our study. Over half of his tries were perfectly on-target and less than a quarter were deemed uncatchable. He was the only Impact QB to complete over 45% of his deep targets and rock a single-digit Interceptable%. Thank you, Johnny Wilson. FSU’s 6’7 flanker was responsible for half of his deep completions and yards. But no matter the intended recipient of his bombs, 68% of them were launched outside the right hash. He only mustered a 1/9 showing on other throws against his hardest opponents. 

Though Travis’ 29.6% midrange makeup was nearly a group-high, his returns did not justify the volume. About 1/7 intermediate passes were turnover-worthy and the rest of his placement stats were resoundingly tepid. He tended to target the perimeter where his just okay arm talent failed to maximize opportunities. This remains to be a major opportunity for Travis entering his final year. Even if his size prevents him from feeling comfortable targeting the middle of the field, no one will take him incredibly seriously next April if solely lives and dies based on the placement of his deep ball. 

Pressured: 

Thanks to his maturity and athletic burst, Travis was a pretty even-keeled passer under the gun. He kept a double-digit Explosive Pass%, a single-digit Interceptable%, and beat the group standard in everything except Adjusted Completion%, which still happened to cross the 50% threshold. All of his successful connections under duress resulted in either a first down or a score. But all else considered, Travis was closer to average than elite. That said, his knack for avoiding takedowns proved to be quite valuable. He negated 14 sacks and ultimately finished cozily snuggled in the top half of the group in Sack Rate and Pressure:Sack Ratio.  

Outside the Pocket: 

Travis was a wonderful operator on the move and outside the pocket. He placed above the group mean in every result stat, highlighted by the 4th-best Yards/Attempt and Explosive Pass%. For good measure, he also boasted a top8 Success Rate despite seeing a damaging amount of drops. Either by design or out of necessity, 23% of his sample throws occurred outside the pocket. So these plays are responsible for a sizable chunk in Travis’ game. To that point, his lackluster accuracy stats hint he could regress in this department, which would be bad news for his encore. Sure, he’s far from a bum. Plus, he throws a relatively catchable ball on the move. But way too many tries could’ve been picked off. And since this tactic is a scheme emphasis, seeing a more trusty process is a fair ask even if our guy performed better than most.

Contested/Tight Window:

Though his profile wasn’t perfect, Travis showed nice passing acumen on tight window targets. The highlights were his bucket throws outside the numbers. But over a quarter of his sample’s throws were contested in some way. Ever the playmaker seeking a splash, these attempts tended to come with Travis under pressure. A backbreaking 20.8% Drop Rate prevented his results from jumping off the page. But, ‘Nole Nation should adore his strong accuracy stats. Sure, relying too much on these throws can result in serious backsteps due to the variables involved. But, folks at the next-level are always thirsty for passers keen on threading the needle or working small windows. And while he wasn’t strong preventing uncatchables or breakups, only two other Impact QBs posted a preferable Interceptable%.

Dropback: 

Though FSU didn’t feature too many crazy scheme elements, true screens were the ‘Noles most-targeted pass concept in Travis’ sample. Without them and RPO outlets, the byproducts of Travis’ verticality were accentuated. He flaunted the group’s 2nd-highest ADOT and remained palpably potent behind the top Explosive Pass%. Not bad considering an eighth of these tries were dropped. Though his placement stats suffered as a result and 23% of his dropback attempts were uncatchable, his weighted accuracy stayed firm and true. And since he refused to take many sacks, his 8.7 ANY/A was the 5th-best figure among Impact Power-5ers. 

In the dropback game, the ideas were overly straightforward. Horizontal spacers like Curl+Flats or All Curls worked short. Floods like Sail, Cross, and bootlegs worked the midrange. And All Verts looked to stretch secondaries deep. None of them, however, topped a 45% Success Rate, which explains his mellow down-to-down result metrics. Again, Travis can flash. But he simply must shore up his dependability and execute his offense’s core concepts at a better rate in order to get his team over the hump. 

Dropback Play Action: 

FSU featured play action to help maximize throwing windows, create separation, and lean into Travis’ explosive tendencies. Almost a quarter of his throws against his hardest foes came off true play action. But while this tactic buoyed his depth, his numbers weren’t noteworthy. However, after finagling the figures, Travis can claim the group’s top First Down+TD Rate – among individuals with at least 22 play fakes. But other than his 6.7% Interceptable%, all of his placement metrics using play action were subpar. Regardless of the context, it’s never the best look when both a third of your attempts cannot be caught and less than half are on-target. 

“Floor” Passing: 

Travis has an exciting passing floor. Versus the meat of his schedule, he worked downfield, captured plenty of splash completions, kept the ball away from danger, and was accurate on over two-thirds of his throws in this context. And assuming FSU’s pass catchers don’t replicate their butterfingers, it’s safe to assume his profile could look even better after another off-season of work. Of course, Travis may have already capped out. But if these returns are run back, ‘Nole Nation will be more than happy. He was 1/4 Impact QBs with a “floor” ANY/A over 9.5 with a +50% Success Rate. Heighted by said sturdy placement, he possesses capabilities to drive both FSU’s consistency and potency within structure. Yes, a sixth of his attempts were uncatchable thanks to the downfield-oriented style of play. But Travis’ top-end accuracy within structure shined behind his 63.5% Depth Adjusted Accuracy. Whatever you want to call them – big time throws, dimes, beaut balls – they were littered across his sample. So even if he had a few misfires, Travis floor remains lofty.