Iowa qb situation
- Thread starter 1inamillion
- Start date
When the main topic is whoever turns it over the least wins the job, does little to inspire.
If you actually listened to Lesters interview he said they are evaluating literally EVERY snap all of the QB's have taken since spring practice started. TO's was simply one of dozens of analytics they've charted over this entire time period. He also said at that point it was a dead heat, so nothing has set one part from the other enough to make the call.
Last edited:
If this was the main topic it sounds like the decision will come from KF...like usual. Unfortunately
My interpretation was that they are both having a lot of good reps. With a solid running attack and a strong offensive line, eliminating mistakes is critical. The QB that makes the fewest mistakes gets the nod.
Year over year, this team is probably down a notch in special teams or at least unproven. OL is very close YOY. Running Backs, TE's, and WR's are better. Defense line is a ?, LBers and secondary are deep and talented. So limiting turnovers and the ability to hit a few plays to stretch the field is critical. Remember Gronowski struggled early in the season.
I trust Lester and the new QB coach.
Put me in the camp of "if you have two quareterbacks, you don't have any quarterbacks."
I just believe that if one of those guys, Heck or Hank, was any good, he would have separated himself by now, and we are looking at a mediocre QB this year, something akin to Rudock/Nate Stanley.
But, having said that, it is conceivable to me that we could be pretty successful (maybe even 9-3?) with a mediocre game manager due to our other offensive strengths: TE, running back, and presumable OL being not only talented but probably decent depth in case of injury.
Remember that Ricky Stanzi and Nate Stanley were not that great, but we had some good years probably because the rest of the team was very good.
I just believe that if one of those guys, Heck or Hank, was any good, he would have separated himself by now, and we are looking at a mediocre QB this year, something akin to Rudock/Nate Stanley.
But, having said that, it is conceivable to me that we could be pretty successful (maybe even 9-3?) with a mediocre game manager due to our other offensive strengths: TE, running back, and presumable OL being not only talented but probably decent depth in case of injury.
Remember that Ricky Stanzi and Nate Stanley were not that great, but we had some good years probably because the rest of the team was very good.
We’re all holding onto hope that things will change even knowing Kirk Ferentz is still the head coach.
Shame on us.
Ah, Nate Stanley. The guy who threw for almost 8500yds and 70TD's at Iowa. The last guy to have games over 300yds, and have back to back seasons almost 3000yds passing. If we had that guy last year we're in the playoff, pure and simple.
Last edited:
Its pre season. Better to hope the whole thing turns to crap and we have a losing season and not be disappointed when we do better, right?
This sentiment is appealing and I do agree to some extent. It’s frustrating.
At the same time, I kind of hold onto hope “things will change”. Why?
Because I believe my opinion is shared by a majority of fans, to wit: sweeping changes aren’t needed.
I believe a small adjustment in approach and sensible tweaks to the offense and playbook could produce bigger payoffs and success.
Not really a “roll of the dice” which implies high risk. More like a sensible bet at the blackjack table when you hold a pair of aces and the dealer is showing 5 (or any play where the odds clearly favor the bettor). Make the bet.
Last edited:
Career Passing Touchdowns by Iowa Hawkeye Quarterbacks:
Chuck Long...74
Nate Stanley...68
Drew Tate...61
Ricky Stanzi...56
Chuck Long...74
Nate Stanley...68
Drew Tate...61
Ricky Stanzi...56
I’m surprised Chuck Hartlieb only had 37, despite having the #1 and #3 seasons in terms of passing yards. (And 3 of the 4 top passing games, by yardage.)
Nate Stanley got halfway to McNamara‘s total touchdown passes for Iowa in one game versus Ohio State…
Because he only started for 2 seasons, while Chuck Long had 4 and the other guys 3 each.
That's KF's MO. Always has been, which is one reason Iowa has struggled so often on offense. KF has no clue about QBs, or any so-called skill position players. That's not an opinion. That's a fact based on the preponderance of the evidence over more than a quarter of a century. Obviously, you don't want careless TOs in any sport. But Tom Brady and Peyton Manning and every other great QB threw plenty of INTs. Babe Ruth and Ohtani and every other great power hitter struck out a lot. KF's ultraconservative nature has been the Achilles heel to his own success and to that of the Iowa football program, certainly.
Anyone who starts Deacon Hill has no concept of QB play whatsoever. When Iowa has had dynamic QBs--Chuck Long, Chuck Hartlieb, Matt Rogers under Hayden Fry--and only reluctantly under KF Brad Banks, Drew Tate, Ricky Stanzi, and CJ Beathard--Iowa has been outstanding. If KF had simply kept his hands off the QB position in particular and the offense in general, Iowa would have won a lot more football games.
Stanley was the icon of inconsistency. He looked like an easy Heisman Trophy winner in the destruction of Ohio State 55-24, and a week later looked like he'd never played football before. He was an enigma, and it may have been because Iowa lacked a good QB coach, or maybe it's just who Stanley was.
this happens every single year. you can count on it like the sun coming up in the morning. ever since chuck long and harleib. and that dude named macguire.
In some games sure, but do tell how many "inconsistent, QB's who looked like they never played before" throw for 8300yds, and 68Tds? I repeat if he'd been the starter last season this teams in the playoffs, and might have been winning some games there as well.
5 TD passes vs Ohio State in one game. Stanley was a very average qb except when he wasn't.
That game he was unbelievably good. That was not the norm. He wasn't great, he wasn't bad he was an okay qb. I'd take a guy like beathard any day of the week over Stanley. Not trying to be mean it's just my opinion.
The one with a defender wrapped around his leg and he still threw a dart to Hockenson in the endzone being the best of the game.
And he was a deer in headlights every time he played Wisconsin as well as some other teams with a good pass rush.
That 2017 game against Wisconsin was extra painful.
8-of-24 passing, 41 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT
**edit***
his other two games weren’t as bad.
Last edited:
NEVER said he was great. When he graduated many said good riddance. I laughed and said we'd appreciate what he DID accomplish when he was gone. How's it looked since then? Still think we'd have been a playoff team last season with Stanley at QB, or a healthy Beathard as well....
As another poster put it, he was inconsistent. He’d have great games and then deer in headlights games. No one can deny his stats though, which put him up there with the best QBs in Iowa history.
Latest
-
01
Hawkeye Report
Iowa Football fall camp stock risers
-
02
Hawkeye Report
SEASON KICKOFF SALE: Get 75% off subscription to Hawkeye Report
-
03
Hawkeye Report
Friday Five - Picks for Iowa's MVP's and Unsung Heroes
-
04
On3
NCAA adopts proposals to significantly alter current college football calendar, transfer portal window
-
05
On3
ESPN ranks college football's Top 20 most likely first-time national champions