Just taking a little work break for some play time so I won't go through the whole statistical package. Padilla's numbers tell the story. They were worse than Petras by a significant margin in every category of QBing. That is a very low hurdle and Padilla tripped. Those categories include positive rushing with about the same % of sacks per attempt.
Now this Padilla wins myth is just silly, impossible to believe people are still banging that drum-it sounds like the 4th grade band when they first got their instruments. QBs do not win games by themselves but they can lose games. Padilla's "starting" wins are proof of that axiom. A failure to accept that factual premise undermines any further discussion because anything can happen in unicorn land.
Padilla's wins included NW, although not the starter he played all but what, two possessions. NW was Padilla's best game by far. The Minnesota game where he threw two TDs. One was a really nice throw to a wide open Jones, the other was a typical bad throw that Johnson caught at the peak of his jump, broke a bad tackle attempt and then raced about 30 yards after the catch. His play was otherwise terrible in that game. Padilla's play against Illinois was even worse. Accuracy-6/17. The math on that is 35.2%. The yardage, 83. That's 4.9 yards per attempt. Wasted a great game by Goodson. The next "win" is Nebraska. Of course, Padilla started and by half time he was 6/14, that's a whopping 42.8%. Yardage, get this, 76. No TDs (both were in the Minnesota game) but he bumped it up to 5.6 yards per attempt. Petras came in, got north of 50%, lead a great late game drive and scored the winning touchdown.
Petras made Scott Mullen look good. Padilla made Spencer look good. Sometimes the dog won't hunt.
To close on a very optimistic note. Doesn't McNamara and Labas sound a whole lot better than Petras and Padilla?