Noted: Play Tee Martin instead of Peyton Manning. Got it.Heck, Tee Martin took his team further than Peyton Manning ...
And what's Tee Martin doing today?
Rudock
- Thread starter GunnerHawk
- Start date
And what's Tee Martin doing today?
You're about 50/50 IMO.
Harbaugh is trying to pick a starter from a handful of kids he has very little (or mostly none) personal knowledge about, has never Coached any of them in a game situation. That's a far cry from Iowa's situation when Rudock was here.
Kirk has done some really good things at Iowa which should be and have been acknowledged by "apologists" and "haters" alike. But as far as Kirk's current level of competency goes, he can prove it to me at Florida, Utah, Boston College, wherever. Anywhere but Iowa.
I've never been a quitter so it is hard for me to relate to Jake.
I don't think you can compare stats considering Rudock would of had a better opportunity to play more convenient minutes. CJ comes in when the train is derailed and then has to make something happen....can't compare the two fairly! We will know better after CJ plays a complete season...
I don't remember hearing a lot of complaining about two starters, more about the one who was starting. KF gets credit for the wins and loses, but with the loss of NP, KO and a few of the other assistants it's shows me who was responsible for his record. He gets the credit for hiring the guys he did...I think we are seeing what happens when to much is put in KF hands!
Jake reminds me a lot of Tate Forcier. A gifted athlete who just couldn't get much done. Actually, I think Forcier might have been a better QB. He also moved around a lot for various reasons and, now, is just a guy- albeit a guy who, for 28 days, was a member of the CFL team Hamilton Tiger-Cats.
At least Rudock might be a doctor someday.
At least Rudock might be a doctor someday.
Is it me or is this guy more out of touch than the Kirk Ferentz offense? I don't think I heard ANYONE critique that Ferentz didn't "stick with one starter" last year. In fact, the by and large complaint by 99% of the fans was that he DID stick with one starter, and that starter was the 3rd best QB on the roster at the start of the season. The complaint was that Rudock did not get benched at all until the bowl game, long after the season (and the game) was out or reach. Did you watch any football last year?
As for stats and game performance, again, I ask if you watched any football at all last year? Jake had the luxury of rummaging through our cupcake schedule. CJ would come in for a series at a time, or at the end of games for hail mary/mop up duty. When he did play extensive minutes, we simply won games. The Purdue game, his only real chance to play all season, he was right on the money, hit the deep balls, and was plagued by having one of the worst WR rosters in college football drop every pass that didnt beam them right in the ribs. I mean, that game was almost comical how many drops there were (I believe the exact number was 9).
As for stats and game performance, again, I ask if you watched any football at all last year? Jake had the luxury of rummaging through our cupcake schedule. CJ would come in for a series at a time, or at the end of games for hail mary/mop up duty. When he did play extensive minutes, we simply won games. The Purdue game, his only real chance to play all season, he was right on the money, hit the deep balls, and was plagued by having one of the worst WR rosters in college football drop every pass that didnt beam them right in the ribs. I mean, that game was almost comical how many drops there were (I believe the exact number was 9).
WR coach at USC.
Side note he was one of 6 guys in ESPN segment on 6 qbs drafted before Brady. Pretty interesting to see how bad that draft class was for qbs and how things ended up for each.
I was unaware CJ was the only one plagued by poor wide receiver play last year. I seem to remember one of Rudock's 5 interceptions last year being the result of Damond Powell dropping a ball that should have been a touchdown against Pittsburgh. I don't get why some only make excuses in favor of CJB.
CJB had his chance to win the QB position when he got the start against Purdue, and he also played in the first half against Indiana the next week. He did not play poorly, and yes a big reason his completion percentage was so low both those games was due to poor wide receiver play. Even considering those factors, however, he failed to do enough to impress the coaches enough to be named the starter although he did play in 5 of the season's final 7 games after Indiana.
There have been countless threads like this the past two years, and each time I attempt to explain why the decision of which QB should start isn't as easy as many portray it to be. And each time the thread follows the same pattern:
(1) Someone says Ferentz is dumb for not seeing that CJB is a "gamer" and a much better QB and that it's obvious to everyone else.
(2) I say that although CJB possesses more physical talent, Jake is the more trusted QB for the coaches due to his experience and his production is actually above average and statistically is better than CJB.
(3) The response is to question if I watch the games and that you cannot just look at the stats because of factors x, y, and z.
The point many fail to realize is that even though they are correct to point out that certain factors worked in CJ's favor (the WR drops in the Purdue game, the fact that CJ didn't get as many reps with the first team, only truly started one game, etc.) the need to rely on these extenuating factors actually supports the position that the decision was not so black and white. There were factors that supported starting CJ and there were factors that supported starting Rudock.
I happen to think both are pretty good college QB's. CJB definitely has the higher ceiling and is the only one of the two with a chance to make it to the NFL, but Jake has a higher floor because the coaches know what they can expect from him.
I don't think anyone is wrong to say that CJ should have started last year. In fact, I probably would have agreed with them because our running game stunk and we needed someone at QB that could stretch the field more and could extend plays with his legs. At the same time, I do think it is wrong to say that the only reasonable option was to start CJ and anyone who thinks Rudock should have started is/was an idiot.
Rudock benefitted from some darn solid offensive lines. He was "talented enough" ... but he failed unambiguously seize the starting QB position. That is NOT a matter of hyperbole from the fans. While Beathard will not be the next Peyton Manning ... it was still quite obvious, even a year ago, that he had a higher ceiling than Rudock. There's a reason why Podolak was spouting off about how Beathard will be the future QB for the Hawks (even while Rudock was an incumbent starter).
In all frankness, arguably one of the biggest knocks on Rudock was that he failed as a leader of men. A QB is supposed to be a leader. He's supposed to inspire confidence in those around him. Such players make those around them better. Rudock simply wasn't "that guy."
That is no surprise, Manning chokes in big games, 9 times one-and-done in the playoffs. Manning never beat Tennessee's biggest rival the Florida Gators. Peyton has great stats and 1 SB win against a lame Bears team coached by Lovie Smith. Manning is Mr. Regular Season!Heck, Tee Martin took his team further than Peyton Manning ...
Talk about dumb. It only took one paragraph to figure out that you don't know anything about football. You didn't watch the games if you think CJ was given an opportunity to win the spot in games or practice.You probably think he gave Willies a shot also.
I thought it was a joke until I read his first paragraph. It is sad that the Iowa program is still saddled with this coach and fans like him that are outspoken about things they no nothing about.
Thanks for the info.
I think I'll stick with the guy who won a Super Bowl and 5 million NFL Games however, and is still doing it.
That's 9 more times of making the playoffs than most I would surmise. And one LOUSY Super Bowl. Why the hell did he even bother to keep playing?
I'm not a big Peyton Manning fan, but he did win me a couple of Fantasy Football Titles pairing him with Priest Holmes in back to back years and DOMINATING! I would have also loved to have him on my NFL team, at any time. I'm guessing somewhere like Cleveland would have LOVED to have lost 9 first round playoff games..........................
You already said that game performance is an obvious answer to solving a QB controversy. I'm interested in how you care to explain why sitting the guy with the better in-game stats (Rudock) is the obvious answer.
Ive said it many times. Im afraid Beathard will have the same issues Rudock did. Confusion. Both QBs look confused as hell in the pocked under Greg Davis. Now, when they get in the 2 minute, like the 2nd half against Wisconsin, Rudock looked completely different. He had 1 or 2 reads and let the ball go. The QB problems at Iowa have a lot to do with the guy coaching them.
I've never seen anyone post something that comes remotely close to this statement. You even reinforced your belief by saying you feel secure in saying that Beathard is not the next Peyton Manning. It's this kind of made up drivel that cheapens the discussion on this board.
No one has ever said this. But that doesn't stop you from trying to pass this off as truth, does it?
All anyone has ever said was that he was the better QB of the two, and it seems like you couldn't handle that. No one has even hinted that he is an NFL QB. But here you go, blowing out of proportion what others have posted. You're the definition of a "drama queen".
Last edited:
I'd pay imaginary money to someone that can post the classic picture of Tate Forcier having an awesome day!
I can't help someone with zero football knowledge understand why Jake did not have better game performance no matter what stats you cherry pick. The only stats that matters are points scored and Wins with wins being all that really matters.
I also can't hammer it through enough that CJ never got to practice with the ones and was much less experienced, yet still outperformed Jake. He didn't get the starts due to Jake being a practice warrior and our coaches not realizing after 15 years how to get the talent on the field.. Fail on the coaches who are supposed to know better and fail on you for posting about what you know nothing about. Sit back read and learn about the game. Or get together with the other 4 or 5 people that thought Jake was the better game performer and talk football all night.
lenoxhawks.."I can't help someone with zero football knowledge understand why Jake did not have better game performance no matter what stats you cherry pick. The only stats that matters are points scored and Wins with wins being all that really matters."
____________________________________________________________________________
As a Husker fan I agree with that totally.
____________________________________________________________________________
As a Husker fan I agree with that totally.
Ah yes, those pesky cherry-picked stats of completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns, interceptions, and efficiency rating. How could one possibly judge a quarterback's production by such inconsequential stats?
What is your point? You prove my point with your comment, "he did win me a couple of Fantasy Football Titles pairing him with Priest Holmes in back to back years and DOMINATING!" Correct me if I am wrong, because I do not participate in Fantasy Football, but it was Peyton's regular season play that won you your Fantasy Football titles, right?
I am not a Peyton Manning basher or hater, just pointing out the obvious. Peyton is a HOF 1st ballot; however, he is also a big game choker more often than not.
UM no, KF had it wrong in 2001. He should have started Banks. Not pull him after gaining the lead in several games.[/QUOTE]
----------------------------------------------
When the QB only knows a limited number of plays, he can't stay in the game too long.
Not only is it an issue of how many plays the less experienced QB knows ... but there is also the issue of development. Guys develop and improve. Shonn Greene really didn't look all that impressive in 2005 when he saw reps (go back and look at how upright he ran against an undermanned Ball State team). However, by the time the 2008 season rolled around ... he had improved AND, more importantly, he was more mature and more focused. I imagine that Brad Banks greatly benefited by NOT being thrown to wolves in 2001. He had less forced upon him ... so he could still focus on improving in the "little picture." It never fails to boggle my mind how often fans seem to think that these players come "ready made."
It's mind boggling to me that anyone would think the difference between the 2001 Brad Banks was any different than the 2002 version. We are going junior to senior year here? Every time he came in the offense thrived and good things happened. Our offense is not that complicated....just watch it! KF liked Mc Cann because he very conservative and would not rock the boat. Kyle Mc Cann would not play for any other team in the BIG....another KF flop!
Shonn Greene got better moving furniture?? LOL He not running standing up because he gained 50 pounds.
Last edited:
Similar threads
