This week I spent some time studying Indiana quarterback Kurtis Rourke. He burst onto the scene this season with the Hoosiers starting 7-0 under intriguing Head Coach Curt Cignetti.
I’m not familiar with offensive coordinator Mike Shanahan (no relation to Kyle) but the first thing that stood out to me was how well the Indiana offense functions. Their pass protection is good, the receivers run crisp routes and everything is effective, on time and it works.
Rourke certainly plays his part in this — he gets the ball out quickly, he seems to have a strong grasp of the scheme and as the distributor of the football, he is the focal point. Yet it’s been quite a while since I watched an offense function at this level. Cignetti and his staff deserve a lot of credit.
From a draft perspective it’s actually helpful that Rourke isn’t playing against Washington this weekend due to a thumb injury. Now we get to see how the offense operates without him to compare. Hopefully he’ll be back for contests against Michigan’s NFL-heavy defense and Ohio State — two vital games that will help shape his stock (and Indiana’s season).
With all this in mind, how do you assess his play? The first thing I’d say is he’s always in attack mode and I like that. He’s willing to go after every area of the field. Often a highly functioning offense includes a lot of cheap short passes and run after the catch situations. That isn’t the case with Indiana. They go for chunks of yardage with their throws.
I think he scans the field very well. You can see him waiting for routes to develop. He does a good job with his ball placement and he’s mastered the back-shoulder throw. There are some impressive passes on tape that I would compare to Michael Penix last year where he throws from the far hash to the opposite sideline with timing, velocity and accuracy. He doesn’t have Penix’s arm talent but that’s not a knock, few do.
Indiana’s giving up just 2.5 sacks per game which is pretty good — it’s the 29th best rate in college football. In comparison, Garrett Nussmeier at LSU is being sacked four times a game — the second highest rate. Everyone talks up the two LSU tackles as NFL prospects but they haven’t played well this season.
Part of Indiana’s low sack rate, though, is the quickness with which Rourke distributes the ball. There’s never any messing about. Yet while watching tape, I didn’t see him under constant duress at any point.
PFF tracks pressures allowed/created by the quarterback and not the O-line. Here are the numbers for the season so far:
Shedeur Sanders — 20
Garrett Nussmeier — 13
Cam Ward — 10
Brady Cook — 10
Carson Beck — 9
Seth Henigan — 9
Jalen Milroe — 9
Jaxson Dart — 9
Drew Allar — 8
Miller Moss — 8
Quinn Ewers — 7
Kyle McCord — 6
Will Howard — 5
Billy Edwards Jr — 3
Kurtis Rourke — 3
I think this is a combination of everything clicking for Indiana on offense — the quarterback getting the ball out quickly and the protection being good. It’s a positive all round. Can Rourke do this at the next level? Will he get an environment that allows him to be this economic and effective? That’s a question teams will ask.
He only has 10 ‘big time throws’ for the season compared to six ‘turnover worthy plays’. So while he’s PFF’s top graded passer in college football currently — he’s not asked to complete many difficult throws. Meanwhile, the six turnover worthy plays within this environment is a bit of a concern — because you wonder if that number grows in a harder pro environment.
Here are some of the names among the top ‘big time throw’ leaders this season:
Billy Edwards Jr — 21
Kyle McCord — 21
Cam Ward — 20
Shedeur Sanders — 19
Seth Henigan — 15
Garrett Nussmeier — 14
Jaxson Dart — 14
Kurtis Rourke — 10
Here are the TWP numbers for the list above:
Kyle McCord — 11
Cam Ward — 9
Jaxson Dart — 8
Billy Edwards Jr — 7
Seth Henigan — 7
Garrett Nussmeier — 7
Kurtis Rourke — 6
Shedeur Sanders — 4
Now here are the BTT/TWP numbers when a quarterback is under pressure:
Cam Ward — 8/4
Kyle McCord — 7/3
Billy Edwards Jr — 6/2
Shedeur Sanders — 6/2
Kurtis Rourke — 5/2
Garrett Nussmeier — 2/4
Jaxson Dart — 2/4
Seth Henigan — 2/5
I think this stat is interesting because it highlights how pressure has effected quarterbacks in a bigger way than others. The fact that half of Rourke’s big time throws have come when he’s under pressure is a positive. Meanwhile, only two of Nussmeier’s 12 came under pressure.
Note how well Billy Edwards Jr rates in these categories — a player I wrote about here.
Rourke has good size, a very decent arm and he does deliver passes with touch to varying levels of the field. There are certain offensive schemes where you can imagine him having a lot of success. He’s another player who I think would work very well in the Shanahan system — one that lays the table for a quarterback and they have to read their keys and distribute the ball quickly and accurately.
I also think he’d look great in the DeBoer/Grubb offense we saw at Washington. Thus, he might be considered a fit in Seattle. He definitely has the size and attacking mindset I think John Schneider likes.
I’m increasingly convinced that you need a level of mobility, escapability and an ability to play off-platform if you’re going to thrive in the NFL. Rourke is not agile or a great mover. He’s not terrible either. Looking at some of his Ohio tape I thought he was a bit leaner and more mobile/nimble. He looks bigger and a bit slower at Indiana.
There are examples where he does get out of the pocket and he can deliver on the run. He can also scramble for a few yards when the opportunity emerges and he can manipulate the pocket to extend. At the next level though, where everyone is faster, I’m not sure he’ll be effective to extend, create and play off-platform.
Overall I was impressed. His ball placement is good, he’s executing the offense at a high level, he attacks the defense to every level, he’s a big, tall passer with a good arm and I’m intrigued to see more.
I think you have to look for special physical qualities in college QB’s and/or look at the players who are performing in situations that are transferable (eg — anticipation throwing, dealing with a lot of pressure, third down conversions etc). I’m not sure Rourke has special qualities or the transferable situational tape — but there’s something here that at the very least makes him interesting from a NFL perspective.
For what it’s worth, Indiana has the seventh best third down conversion percentage in college football (50.8%). I will go back and track Rourke in third down situations before the end of the year.
This isn’t a great quarterback class. I don’t think it’s as bad as 2022 — but I don’t currently have anyone I feel comfortable grading in round one. It won’t be a surprise if Rourke’s star rises if he can return to health and play well in the big games coming up for Indiana.