QB Room
- Thread starter HawkeyeInCentralIowa
- Start date
Soooo ... are you trying to say that Labas isn't going to win the starting spot in 2021? I, so totally, had my heart set on that scenario too!
New and shiny - that's what I'm lookin' for! Just call me "the fat trash panda!"
That's my one wild off the wall prediction. Its a longshot but sometimes you have to put 'em all on red 77 and let it roll.
I think KF's history is that he has a prototype qb that he prefers. And that seems to take precedence. Big, not very mobile, does what he's told(read no improvising) and strong arm. Petras is that guy. So despite his underwhelming performance last year, the track record for the Captain is that he's picked his QB. He may be the "best" in the sense that he fits the mold that KF wants to run the offense.
My response was to the post about it being an open competition. Again, count me skeptical that it's open in the clearest sense of the word in this case.
Lol. Yes (as a matter of fact), I do. They have been doing so for years.....
Wow, he has improved his completion percentage in practice. By all accounts he looked great in practice last year as well, and we all saw what happened in games when it counted. Petras will start, and take every meaningful snap until he graduates, no matter how bad he is. KF plays the best guy in practice, no matter what they do in games, and none of the other guys will get the chance to show what they can do in a game situation, other than maybe in garbage time if we get a 30 point lead on someone, then they will come in and hand the ball off play after play.
Agree. Seniority is the name of the game with KF. And even if you cite examples of him leaving a better QB on the bench others will just say 'well, that other QB who came in and ended up being way better wasn't ready before and wouldn't have done as good had he been the starter earlier'. A pretty convenient argument.
Yes, always seniority, which is how our last two starting QBs beat out a player who'd been in the program longer than them, and Deuce Hogan has a shot to do the same...
It's nice how some folks don't account for how players can develop and improve through their careers. It's not as if they are "students of the game" during their time playing college ball [sarcasm intended here - if you're wondering].
Lastly, how about the raw data that the coaching staff has available as compared to what we fans see? Is that not worth anything?
Fans sometimes remind me of teenagers sometimes ... as if they know everything and are experts on everything.
It's not like our QB coach has experience training guys who've been in contention for the Heisman or anything ...
Fans sometimes remind me of toddlers... as if their parent (or favorite coach) has never been wrong and can't be wrong.
You 2 are just pathetic arm chair QBs with no freakin' clue about anything.
You should get outside and take in some fresh air or something. You're taking this stuff awfully personal.
Nope. Just pointing out the obvious.
You don't know jack sheet about the QB position, who's performing well in practice, etc. Kirk, Brian, and Ken do, however. You just bitch about anything and everything that went wrong in games and blame most, if not all, of it on the QB. You ASSume that there is a better option than the guy Kirk/Brian/Ken put on the field.
Crazy statement. The facts are:
Stanzi started over Christensen
Beathard started over Ruddock
Stanley started over Weigers and Boyle
Petras started over Mansell
Most of the Iowa QBs under Ferentz/O'Keefe have started over upperclassmen. Tate is the last example of one the didn't because the other QBs on the roster left before his sophomore year because they knew he was the starter.
Christensen started over Stanzi first.
Rudock started over Beathard first.
That's kind of my point. Yeah these younger guys eventually got the spot but only after the worse guy was tabbed the starter... because of seniority. Hell I remember when Paki O'Meara was #1 on the RB depth chart because he was an upperclassman, to be replaced exactly 1 game into the season by a younger RB who was just better and didn't fumble as much as Paki did.
For the record, I'm a big fan of KF. But that doesn't mean I think he gets things right 100% of the time. See Stanzi and Beathard. Some of you take these critiques and skepticism as if I'm kicking your dog or something.
They were a year or more ahead. And they were REPLACED by underclassmen. You said that never happens. You are wrong. Accept it.
Yeah, they had seniority. Which is why they started first. Like I said. Glad we eventually got the better QB in there though.
I’m not going to bash Chad for tweeting that. He’s looking for clicks and wanting subscribers. I will never fault anyone for doing their job.
At the same time, he knew what he was doing with that tweet. He also knew what he was doing tweeting about Petras not caring about what the fans think recently. Even though I like that attitude from the QB, it was unnecessary for Chad to tweet about it without any context. Most fans on Twitter are going to read that and never look at the article for context. They will start to really dislike him.
It’s nice to hear Padilla has made strides. If he’s the better QB, he will play. But if he doesn’t start, a small, loud minority of the fan base will voice their displeasure because they will hang on to this tweet for dear life.
Need proof? Just look at some of the posts in this thread. It’s picking up steam now.
At the same time, he knew what he was doing with that tweet. He also knew what he was doing tweeting about Petras not caring about what the fans think recently. Even though I like that attitude from the QB, it was unnecessary for Chad to tweet about it without any context. Most fans on Twitter are going to read that and never look at the article for context. They will start to really dislike him.
It’s nice to hear Padilla has made strides. If he’s the better QB, he will play. But if he doesn’t start, a small, loud minority of the fan base will voice their displeasure because they will hang on to this tweet for dear life.
Need proof? Just look at some of the posts in this thread. It’s picking up steam now.
I'm at least as shocked to learn a head football coach starts the QB that works his system best as was Captain Reno when he discovered gambling in Casablanca.
Do you think there are very many college coaches that start QBs that don't do what their told to do? I'm guessing that's a no.
I'm often critical of Ferentz and Co ... however, I supply far more than opinions to support those critiques.
In a profession where coaches often get cycled through like underwear ... the fact that Kirk has managed to remain at Iowa suggests that he's pretty competent and knows what he's doing.
When I write posts about math or science, you're well served to trust what I write because I'm expert. That doesn't imply that I won't encourage you to also be skeptical ... however, if you choose to voice a contrary view, you ought to support your contentions.
There are many programs that have struggled mightily due to mismanagement in how they chose QBs. Brady Hoke, at Michigan, was an example of that. While I like Lovie Smith ... his handling and/or development of QBs at Illinois also left something to be desired.
The QB situation at Purdue, prior to Brohm, was also a complete mess.
When coaches don't handle the QB position well (or well enough) ... those coaches lose their jobs. That hasn't happened with Ferentz.
Can you want the Hawks to do an even better job with their QBs? Sure ... However, I'd be curious as to what evidence you have that they're not already doing the best they can with what they have to work with.
Pretty good idea to tether opinions to reality. I won't list each season but when has KF/staff made the wrong call at QB?
2001, 2007, 2008, 2014
Last edited:
I am seeing a lot of black and gold glasses on here that cannot see the light of day. SP had a pathetic season. I hope he either improves immensely or another QB steps up to the plate much better than last year's product. Here is what I just read -
"Ihmir Smith-Marsette, WR, Iowa: Getting open downfield was never an issue for Smith-Marsette, who routinely ran past defensive backs for big-play looks. But Iowa's shaky quarterback play left many of those opportunities unrealized, and he recorded just 25 catches for a team-best 345 yards a senior. Projecting as a deep-threat specialist, Smith-Marsette will have to demonstrate he can catch passes more comfortably than he did in college and avoid being erased by more physical defensive backs. But NFL teams will find ways to position him for success, particularly on special teams after he averaged 26.7 yards per kick return for the Hawkeyes."
"Ihmir Smith-Marsette, WR, Iowa: Getting open downfield was never an issue for Smith-Marsette, who routinely ran past defensive backs for big-play looks. But Iowa's shaky quarterback play left many of those opportunities unrealized, and he recorded just 25 catches for a team-best 345 yards a senior. Projecting as a deep-threat specialist, Smith-Marsette will have to demonstrate he can catch passes more comfortably than he did in college and avoid being erased by more physical defensive backs. But NFL teams will find ways to position him for success, particularly on special teams after he averaged 26.7 yards per kick return for the Hawkeyes."
2001- No. Banks wasn't ready and it showed.
2007- Hell no. A) Stanzi wasn't ready, and B) it wouldn't have mattered WHO the QB was behind that OL
2008- Legitimate competition, that Stanzi won.
2014- The only true controversy on this list, and people like to lay a lot more blame on Rudock than he deserves, rather than GD, having a FB at running back, and a defense that was soft on the edges.
Lol, exactly. "Those guys wouldn't have been as good if they'd started then."
Classic.
And it doesn't mean you have a fooking clue what you are talking about.
I doubt you get much right in anything that you do 100% of the time, either.
There's a reason KF has been coaching for a very long time and there's a reason you have not.
"what is development"
You've got yourself in some circular logic there, without actually addressing anything I brought up. Pretty classic if you ask me.
Haha, right, by your logic it's actually impossible for KF to ever be wrong. Because, development. Lol.
Solid.
Not close to what I said, but fine. You gonna make a real argument or keep babbling like a child?
I'm looking for Petras to step it up B1G time. But the staff has to be ready and willing to pull him if he isn't cutting it.
He WAS cutting it at the end of last year. With no Spring practice, little to no summer practices, and no early non-con games. A little early this year to talk about a quick hook.
In 2001 Iowa, coming off two disastrous seasons. We need to play close to the vest to win. BB made some good plays but many dumb, typical first year player mistakes because he wasn't ready for a Big Ten starting gig. Its hard to look past the great senior season but the Rabbit Catcher, like most JUCOs and other first year players, was just not ready to start. We also had a finally healthy Four year starter who had a pretty good mistake free season himself:
Your assumption about 2007 is just silly. The team was one of the weakest Iowa has fielded since 2001. You are assuming that a completely inexperienced true freshmen would have been better than this:
Again, Jake wasn't great but those aren't terrible numbers. Jake didn't turn it over. This team struggled, can you imagine what more interceptions would have done to that squad.
Ricky, with a year under his belt, won the starting job in Game 2, Game 3 at the latest. So the right QB started and the competition was brief. So, you think some egregious mistake was made:
With better receivers, and starting 10 or 11 games Ricky threw fewer TDs and more interceptions. Had more fumbles lost as well. Not to say Ricky wasn't the better player but he won the starting job in 1 or two games. I think Ricky started game 2 and definitely game 3, although Jake did return for the comeback against the Clowns. So, not as utterly a one-sided competition as you make it seem; and definitely not a long one.
This was CJ's soph season in 2014.
This was Jake's junior season:
Rudock had the better performance in every statistical category. How many losses would have been taken while CJ brought his performance up to Jake Rudock's level? By the end of the season CJ had pulled even or a little ahead and won the job. Both guys went on to the NFL. Historically three of CJ's 4 seasons were worse than Jake's sophomore and junior seasons. This seems like the kind of decision that would be very difficult for coaches since so much of CJ's value was intangible.
The coaches, unlike pundits of fame or anonymity, have to prepare each game before them. They do not have the luxury of risking current losses to develop a potentially better QB. They also do not have the benefit of hindsight.
Lol... right, so Banks, Stanzi, Beathard wouldn't have been better if they'd started earlier.
Too funny. Good work though, that's a lot of typing by you.
So, your opinion is based on the pure speculation that defies the players' actual performances on the field. You are entitled to your opinion, of course. However, it is precisely that kind of fantastic thinking in which coaches cannot indulge because they have to win the next game on the schedule.
No, my opinion is based on the fact that Banks > McCann, Stanzi > Christensen, Beathard > Rudock.
But of course, if they'd all started earlier than they did, they wouldn't have been better. Lol.
