Stanley

[ANYCHawk]

He currently has a pass efficiency rating of 149.3, the highest rating in the last 14 years for an Iowa QB, outside of Stanzi's Senior year. He's currently ranked 34th in the country, and only 11 in front of him are the same year or younger, and only 2 have actually thrown more passes. For those really concerned with Stanley, I suggest they go watch some other teams around the country throw some passes. I even watched Rodgers overthrow a few receivers last weekend too. Brady threw a pick as well, overthrowing Hogan.
Now, as for the Dline having some issues, that's definitely open for discussion.

I get all the stats that say he's good, but they do not match the eye test. I can live with an overthrow now and then. But, we are not talking every now and then. Everytime he does a five or seven step drop you can yell overthrow...and guess what you're gonna be right.

Other guys overthrow, yes that's true. But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady. I'm sure even you can admit this.

The biggest problem I have is that he has shown no signs of it getting better (same with holding onto the football or making good decisions on when to throw it away). If there was some progress it be OK, but even that is lacking.

And pass efficiency is a terrible stat, that nobody uses. Hell ESPN had to go invent the just as terrible QBR to be slightly less worse than Qb rating.

 

[ANYCHawk]

When Beathard was in his 2nd year on campus ... folks would "ooh and aah" about his long ball. However, against Wisconsin he had to come in and play due to an injury to Rudock. In that game, he threw way too many long balls ... and failed miserably to connect on most of them. Needless to say, his completion percentage that year was terrible.

Folks now "ooh and aah" about Stanley's big arm ... but now complain about him missing on long-ball opportunities. Some of this concern is fair ... because you have to be able to hit on at least some of those opportunities in order to keep Ds honest. However, as Ferentz often repeats ... hitting on the long ball is more of a "practice thing" rather than an ability thing. Should we be surprised at there being issues as it relates to connecting on the long ball?

I would argue that we shouldn't be surprised for the following reasons ....

• Stanley split reps with Wiegers before the season ... thus, while that pushed forward both of their respective developments ... it obviously could impact the chemistry/timing between the WRs and QBs.
• VandeBerg is Iowa's most experienced receiving threat ... but still missed all of the spring and was limited (to some degree) during fall camp. That will obviously impact the timing he'd have with Stanley.
• Iowa's most promising long-ball threat, ISM, has only been on campus since this summer. Thus, not only has ISM seen limited work with Stanley prior to the season .... he's a young guy who's also still learning the O.
• As many fans have pointed out - some of the long balls still may have been catchable the target would lay-out for the football.

I'm pretty confident that we will see improvement with the long ball as Stanley, the WRs, and the TEs continue to develop together.

I'd love to see the improvement. But, we are halfway through now. This ain't game two anymore.

That's what has me most worried, is that we haven't seen the signs that its getting better. That it was just an inexperienced thing. If that was the case occasionally we'd see him get close or the wide receiver make a bad play. That isn't what is happening. These guys are open and Stanley is throwing it 6 feet over the head.

 

[Johnsoda123]

I'd love to see the improvement. But, we are halfway through now. This ain't game two anymore.

That's what has me most worried, is that we haven't seen the signs that its getting better. That it was just an inexperienced thing. If that was the case occasionally we'd see him get close or the wide receiver make a bad play. That isn't what is happening. These guys are open and Stanley is throwing it 6 feet over the head.

Are you saying play Wieger?

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

I'd love to see the improvement. But, we are halfway through now. This ain't game two anymore.

That's what has me most worried, is that we haven't seen the signs that its getting better. That it was just an inexperienced thing. If that was the case occasionally we'd see him get close or the wide receiver make a bad play. That isn't what is happening. These guys are open and Stanley is throwing it 6 feet over the head.

My guess is that most of the week is more about implementing the game plan, prepping for what to expect from the opposition, and doing a lot of film-work to determine tendencies of the opposition. For a more experienced QB, getting down the timing with the WRs wouldn't be as big of an issue. However, as a young guy, I'm sure Stanley feels like his plate is very full. While I'm sure he works on the long ball some with his guys .... I'd anticipate that the best opportunities for those developmental gains would be made would be during spring and fall camp, bowl prep, and, to a lesser extent, during bye-weeks.

Frankly, given how opposing Ds have game-planned against Iowa ... you have to remember that Iowa has been competitive in every game we've played ... and the 15 TDs that Stanley has thrown is a big reason why Iowa was competitive in those games. While I wouldn't yet say that Stanley has proven that he can "win games" for the Hawks with his arm ... largely because Wadley has made some pretty heroic plays after the catch to get some of those TDs ... I would say that Stanley is "learning how to win" with his arm. As Torbee has stated ... it's all about consistency now. Improved consistency comes with repetitions, preparation, and successes that have been built upon.

As we get deeper in the season ... I would expect the long ball to become even harder to connect on. Wind conditions in the Midwest are one of the most underrated factors considered by fans ... and yet they can play a huge role in how effective an O can execute.

 

[David1979]

I get all the stats that say he's good, but they do not match the eye test. I can live with an overthrow now and then. But, we are not talking every now and then. Everytime he does a five or seven step drop you can yell overthrow...and guess what you're gonna be right.

Other guys overthrow, yes that's true. But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady. I'm sure even you can admit this.

The biggest problem I have is that he has shown no signs of it getting better (same with holding onto the football or making good decisions on when to throw it away). If there was some progress it be OK, but even that is lacking.

And pass efficiency is a terrible stat, that nobody uses. Hell ESPN had to go invent the just as terrible QBR to be slightly less worse than Qb rating.

So basically you want him to be an elite college QB and also stats that show how good of season he is having don't count. Cool

 

[hawkeyeinmo]

I get all the stats that say he's good, but they do not match the eye test. I can live with an overthrow now and then. But, we are not talking every now and then. Everytime he does a five or seven step drop you can yell overthrow...and guess what you're gonna be right.

Other guys overthrow, yes that's true. But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady. I'm sure even you can admit this.

The biggest problem I have is that he has shown no signs of it getting better (same with holding onto the football or making good decisions on when to throw it away). If there was some progress it be OK, but even that is lacking.

And pass efficiency is a terrible stat, that nobody uses. Hell ESPN had to go invent the just as terrible QBR to be slightly less worse than Qb rating.

THIS is exactly what I am talking about when I earlier said fans "losing their minds" about a handful of overthrows. "But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady". Oh sure ill admit that he overthrows more than (arguably) the 2 best throwing QB's in NFL HISTORY!

 

[ANYCHawk]

THIS is exactly what I am talking about when I earlier said fans "losing their minds" about a handful of overthrows. "But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady". Oh sure ill admit that he overthrows more than (arguably) the 2 best throwing QB's in NFL HISTORY!

I'm not the one that cited Brady and Rogers, someone else did in making their case that somehow every QB has 96 overthrows a game.

And its not a handful. if you think its a handful you're not paying attention. It's nearly every one.

0-10 yards and when he can fastball it in, Stanley is great. Everything else not so much. And its not just that he misses, it's the lack of improvement in the area.

 

[ANYCHawk]

So basically you want him to be an elite college QB and also stats that show how good of season he is having don't count. Cool

I guess.

But, I guess you'd be cool if our running back had 100 yards on 56 carries. I mean they got 100 yards so its totally cool, right? Stats don't always show the whole picture. And I don't think he's having that great of a season. He can complete short passes just fine but lacks on the deep ball which pulls defenses back, excited the crowd, swings momentum, etc. He also has had issue with ball security and when to throw it away. But, hey at the end of the day his completion percentage is high from some short 3 yards passes so he must be the bestest ever!

 

[David1979]

I guess.

But, I guess you'd be cool if our running back had 100 yards on 56 carries. I mean they got 100 yards so its totally cool, right? Stats don't always show the whole picture. And I don't think he's having that great of a season. He can complete short passes just fine but lacks on the deep ball which pulls defenses back, excited the crowd, swings momentum, etc. He also has had issue with ball security and when to throw it away. But, hey at the end of the day his completion percentage is high from some short 3 yards passes so he must be the bestest ever!

Above you make it seem like he hasn't completed passes over 10 yards. He has missed on some deep throws ok. But those aren't high percentage plays. How long was the throw to Easley against Wyoming? How long was the throw to ISM in the back of the end zone ISU. These are just a couple of examples. Do you realize he is averaging 7.8 ypa and his adjusted YPA is even better. I think it is top 3 or 4 in the Big Ten. He has made mistakes. Sure, but if you think he hasn't done a good job you are just aren't paying attention. Especially when you look at in the context of what he has been working with.

 

[David1979]

here is a state for you. Most touchdown passes when kept clean in the pocket without throwing interception. Top 3 in CFB
JT Barrett 15, Baker Mayfield 13, Nate Stanley 13.

 

[David1979]

What about the perfect strike he threw to Easley at the end of the first half against PSU?

 

[hawkeyeinmo]

I'm not the one that cited Brady and Rogers, someone else did in making their case that somehow every QB has 96 overthrows a game.

And its not a handful. if you think its a handful you're not paying attention. It's nearly every one.

0-10 yards and when he can fastball it in, Stanley is great. Everything else not so much. And its not just that he misses, it's the lack of improvement in the area.

You are out of your mind. I am paying attention and have watched every game not once but twice and writing down some notes when I rewatch.....Okay Anyhawk, you say your eyeballs are better than any stats. I take it your eyeballs watch other B1G football. Let's throw out the 2 senior starters JT Barrett and McSorley who we would obviously want leading our team. Which B1G QB would you swap Stanley for? MI's O'Korn or Speight? MN Rhoda?, NE Lee?, ILL George or Crouch?, IN Lagow or Ramsey?, RU Bolin?, MI State Lewerke?, PU Blough or Sindelar? NW Thorson, MD (Kasim Hill injured so can't take him), WI Hornibrook?

And before you say Thorson did you watch how god awful he looked in 2015 his first year starting?

 

[nitewing]

Not the FR the unit as a whole right now.

I dont think you will find much disagreement with that statement.

what's wrong with them other that they are very young and getting better,
a QB any QB in his 1st season starting would not have 15 TD's if their W's were as bad as you imply.
what were you expecting 500 yard receivers by now? we clearly are watching a different group of WR's.

 

[bojihawk44]

You are out of your mind. I am paying attention and have watched every game not once but twice and writing down some notes when I rewatch.....Okay Anyhawk, you say your eyeballs are better than any stats. I take it your eyeballs watch other B1G football. Let's throw out the 2 senior starters JT Barrett and McSorley who we would obviously want leading our team. Which B1G QB would you swap Stanley for? MI's O'Korn or Speight? MN Rhoda?, NE Lee?, ILL George or Crouch?, IN Lagow or Ramsey?, RU Bolin?, MI State Lewerke?, PU Blough or Sindelar? NW Thorson, MD (Kasim Hill injured so can't take him), WI Hornibrook?

And before you say Thorson did you watch how god awful he looked in 2015 his first year starting?

This is a great way to look at it. I'm definitely taking Nate over any of the other guys that you have listed there. I can live with the occasional overthrow from a sophomore who is obviously very talented. And your point about Thorson is spot on. He was absolutely terrible his first year as a starter but has some talent and rebounded nicely with a great year last year. Nate, on the other hand, is playing extremely well by comparison and certainly has more natural ability than Clayton, so I'm very optimistic that if he's playing this well already he will be an absolute stud the next two years.

 

[nitewing]

I guess.

But, I guess you'd be cool if our running back had 100 yards on 56 carries. I mean they got 100 yards so its totally cool, right? Stats don't always show the whole picture. And I don't think he's having that great of a season. He can complete short passes just fine but lacks on the deep ball which pulls defenses back, excited the crowd, swings momentum, etc. He also has had issue with ball security and when to throw it away. But, hey at the end of the day his completion percentage is high from some short 3 yards passes so he must be the bestest ever!

as long as the hawks keep winning who other than a few out of their collective minds like you care, here were Stanzi's numbers the year they went 11-2 and won the Orange Bowl
171-304 56.3 % completion rate, 2417 yards, 7.95 per attempt. 17 TD's 15 INT's QB rating 131.6

you know what stats truly are for losers, sorry but these stats stand out, 15 TD's, 2 [TWO] INT'S thru 6 games tells and shows me when I watch the game Iowa has a damn good QB, and now poster are bellyaching because Iowa is not 6-0 and in the top 5 AND nothing else.

 

[buttermypancakes]

I get all the stats that say he's good, but they do not match the eye test. I can live with an overthrow now and then. But, we are not talking every now and then. Everytime he does a five or seven step drop you can yell overthrow...and guess what you're gonna be right.

Other guys overthrow, yes that's true. But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady. I'm sure even you can admit this.

The biggest problem I have is that he has shown no signs of it getting better (same with holding onto the football or making good decisions on when to throw it away). If there was some progress it be OK, but even that is lacking.

And pass efficiency is a terrible stat, that nobody uses. Hell ESPN had to go invent the just as terrible QBR to be slightly less worse than Qb rating.

LOL

 

[PaleoMan]

I get all the stats that say he's good, but they do not match the eye test. I can live with an overthrow now and then. But, we are not talking every now and then. Everytime he does a five or seven step drop you can yell overthrow...and guess what you're gonna be right.

Other guys overthrow, yes that's true. But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady. I'm sure even you can admit this.

The biggest problem I have is that he has shown no signs of it getting better (same with holding onto the football or making good decisions on when to throw it away). If there was some progress it be OK, but even that is lacking.

And pass efficiency is a terrible stat, that nobody uses. Hell ESPN had to go invent the just as terrible QBR to be slightly less worse than Qb rating.

He already had 15 Td’s......CJ only had 17 both starting years........he’ll get better. Part of why he overthrows is just due to timing and....!!!!! He’s making sure the defender doesn’t have a chance to get it.

Go by production, and so far his is crushing CJ’s, Jakes, James, and even Stanzi’s pacing wise.

 

[hawkeyeinmo]

I guess.

But, I guess you'd be cool if our running back had 100 yards on 56 carries. I mean they got 100 yards so its totally cool, right? Stats don't always show the whole picture. And I don't think he's having that great of a season. He can complete short passes just fine but lacks on the deep ball which pulls defenses back, excited the crowd, swings momentum, etc. He also has had issue with ball security and when to throw it away. But, hey at the end of the day his completion percentage is high from some short 3 yards passes so he must be the bestest ever!

Uh no. 100 yards on 56 carries would be a BAD stat. Poor analogy. ....... I would agree on needs to improve ball security ( and he has shown improvement)but he has not had issues on throwing the ball away. If this were an issue he would have more INTs and/or more sacks.

 

[Birky]

Uh no. 100 yards on 56 carries would be a BAD stat. Poor analogy. ....... I would agree on needs to improve ball security ( and he has shown improvement)but he has not had issues on throwing the ball away. If this were an issue he would have more INTs and/or more sacks.

No joke.

The analogy would be a guy who had 203 yards on 30 carries, but got caught from behind on some long runs...clearly some of our fans would want that running back benched.

 

[relishingwinning18]

I get all the stats that say he's good, but they do not match the eye test. I can live with an overthrow now and then. But, we are not talking every now and then. Everytime he does a five or seven step drop you can yell overthrow...and guess what you're gonna be right.

Other guys overthrow, yes that's true. But, Stanley's rate is higher than Rodgers or Brady. I'm sure even you can admit this.

The biggest problem I have is that he has shown no signs of it getting better (same with holding onto the football or making good decisions on when to throw it away). If there was some progress it be OK, but even that is lacking.

And pass efficiency is a terrible stat, that nobody uses. Hell ESPN had to go invent the just as terrible QBR to be slightly less worse than Qb rating.

Apparently you are only watching his overthrows. Did you see the perfect bullet to Fant 20 yards downfield, Vandy's TD, another throw that drilled Fant in the helmet as he tripped? What about the TD read to Easley after going through his first couple options? Those are just a couple of his passes that were very very good this last weekend. He's not throwing INT's, and that's a good thing.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

I'd love to see the improvement. But, we are halfway through now. This ain't game two anymore.

That's what has me most worried, is that we haven't seen the signs that its getting better. That it was just an inexperienced thing. If that was the case occasionally we'd see him get close or the wide receiver make a bad play. That isn't what is happening. These guys are open and Stanley is throwing it 6 feet over the head.

Another thing that strikes me as odd is how can you fairly and accurately state that he hasn't shown any improvement? How are you disentangling issues with his throws as it relates to pressure he his feeling due to break-downs in protection?

You do realize that as a true SO who has limited prior experience ... he's one of only two QBs who managed to have over a 50% completion percentage against MSU's D? Against a blitz-happy PSU squad ... ultimately it was his guidance of the O that led to us nearly pulling off the upset! And, against lesser Ds, his play well above average (as compared to prior Iowa QBs).

In game 1, we saw a lot of issues with Stanley as it related to ball-security. It seemed that he improved in that category ... and it took a pretty salty MSU defense for us to get hurt with his ball-security issues. Even against tougher Ds ... he's still averaging around 200 yards a game. That is nothing to sneeze at ... particularly when the running game hasn't been helping him all that much.

Just by maintaining his level of production, against higher level Ds ... even with a one-dimensional ... that suggests improvement to me. Not the absence of improvement. By what criteria are you using for performance when you conclude that he's shown no improvement?

 

[Johnsoda123]

He's been one of the most productive in FBS when he has a clean pocket. I can't wait to see if he can progress like Chuck Long did and step up in the pocket, figure out the hot route on blitzes and improve his accuracy and touch. Might be a really good pro style QB.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

He's been one of the most productive in FBS when he has a clean pocket. I can't wait to see if he can progress like Chuck Long did and step up in the pocket, figure out the hot route on blitzes and improve his accuracy and touch. Might be a really good pro style QB.

It's intriguing to compare him to Wisconsin's Hornibrook. In his second year on campus, as a RS FR, Hornibrook started 9 games and played in 12 .... passed for 1262 yards (completion percentage of 58.6%) , 9 TDs, and 7 INTs on the season ... all while operating within an established offensive system.

In contrast, in his second year on campus, as a TR SO, Stanley has started all 6 games he's played .... passed for 1290 yards (completion percentage of 57.7%), 15 TDs, and 2 INTs .... all while operating within a new offense.

If you look at Hornibrook in '17, he's now benefitting from a more dangerous running game, and his numbers have been improving accordingly ... passing for 1011 yards (completion percentage of 64.5%), 10 TDs, and 4 INTs through 5 games.

Given the youth of Iowa's O, there is every reason to believe that Stanley could/should improve similarly to Hornibrook. Given where Stanley is starting from (in '17) ... we're looking at a JR season where expectations could be ridiculously high (just look at the schedule).

 

[nitewing]

the only SR in the receiving Department will be Easley, who looks to have replaced the meercat as Stanley's security blanket. 3 TE's have caught passes with the to 2 Fant and Hochenson,

Stanley has the 20-25 yard passes down pretty good, the fact that he has thrown further down field is getting the defenses attentions, I will take those 10-20 yards passes all day long. as they will be turned into 10+ yards after the catch.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Not at all. Just given Iowa's track record with blocking .... our "standard" just happens to be very high. I'm frankly very excited about the future upside of the Iowa O ... however, from what I've been observing from the team, the group is still a ways off from achieving the level of play that it is capable of developing toward. I believe that if the players really focus on the "little picture" and truly embrace the "improve every week" mantra ... I think that they really could exceed my expectations.

Think about it this way ... last year Iowa had two 1000 yard rushers and averaged around 172 rushing yards per game. Two years ago ... a year where we finished the regular season undefeated, we averaged around 182 rushing yards per game. This year, we are averaging only 139 yards per game. Right now that might not seem like a big difference, but given that Iowa still has to play some strong run defenses through the season ... that number really could continue to drift lower depending on how much improvement is demonstrated by the squad.

If this year's rushing yards were on par with 2015 or 2016, there's a good chance our punter isn't punting from inside our 20, which is very tough on our defense, and won't bode any better the second half of the season.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

If this year's rushing yards were on par with 2015 or 2016, there's a good chance our punter isn't punting from inside our 20, which is very tough on our defense, and won't bode any better the second half of the season.

Absolutely! The D can play a bit more aggressively if the opposing O has normal to bad field position. When the opposing O is working with a shorter field ... that's A LOT more pressure to put on the D.

 

[nitewing]

with Butler coming back from injury, this will open the offense even more, as Butler can put him at RB and put Wadley in the slot, or vice vs's as Butler is a very good receiving threat out of the slot or backfield.

before Butler was hurt he had 36 carries for 158 yards rushing. Wadley has 119 carries for 483 yards rushing and already has 15 catches for 258 yards receiving vs 36 catches for 315 yards receiving, Wadley has 741 yards of total offense thru 6 games vs 1396 total yards thru 13 games,

Wadley is already on pace to surpass last years total offense

 

[RedAgentRadar]

I don' think anyone should anoint him just yet. Stanley gets a grade of C and Brian Ferentz gets an A.

BF has made him look good. Most of his throws are flairs, outs, bubbles - all out of harms way. When BF asks him to go long, he hits very few. Brian should be commended for the way he has called the games for this kid; quick throws, 3 step, etc. Yea, yea, I know you'll say but what about the drop in the bucket throw to Easley or the seam to Fant? We'll he's had a bunch of help from wide receiver circus catches too and several flair passes to Wadley that go 50+ yards for TDs.

Secondly, we have played four weak teams and his stats and against those teams his production look really good (10 TDs, 1 int). However, if you look at his production in the Big10 thus far (and I'll even throw in Illinois who we all know if the worst team in the conference) his 46/90 (51%) for 635 yards, 5 TDs and 1 Int with a couple fumbles and 1-2 record. Very pedestrian.

It's not unreasonable to ask for a QB that is athletic and can make plays, be dynamic, etc. Yes, a dual threat is way more exciting and in my opinion, I think it makes college football more exciting. Stanley has 21 rushes for -30 yards and no TDs on the season. I know I'm asking for something that isn't even in the realm of the Hawkeye offensive scheme. Stanley is doing what he's asked. Yawn.

 

[hawkeyeinmo]

I don' think anyone should anoint him just yet. Stanley gets a grade of C and Brian Ferentz gets an A.

BF has made him look good. Most of his throws are flairs, outs, bubbles - all out of harms way. When BF asks him to go long, he hits very few. Brian should be commended for the way he has called the games for this kid; quick throws, 3 step, etc. Yea, yea, I know you'll say but what about the drop in the bucket throw to Easley or the seam to Fant? We'll he's had a bunch of help from wide receiver circus catches too and several flair passes to Wadley that go 50+ yards for TDs.

Secondly, we have played four weak teams and his stats and against those teams his production look really good (10 TDs, 1 int). However, if you look at his production in the Big10 thus far (and I'll even throw in Illinois who we all know if the worst team in the conference) his 46/90 (51%) for 635 yards, 5 TDs and 1 Int with a couple fumbles and 1-2 record. Very pedestrian.

It's not unreasonable to ask for a QB that is athletic and can make plays, be dynamic, etc. Yes, a dual threat is way more exciting and in my opinion, I think it makes college football more exciting. Stanley has 21 rushes for -30 yards and no TDs on the season. I know I'm asking for something that isn't even in the realm of the Hawkeye offensive scheme. Stanley is doing what he's asked. Yawn.

Shocking, Stanley has better stats against weaker teams. I guess Wadley gets a C also because his stats are better against the weaker teams than stronger teams. Also, where are all these "circus catches" you speak of? I'm not sure I give Brian and A, I have been happy with his play calling in every game outside of MSU. I know field position was poor but still thought he needed to throw more on 1st down. He put Stanley in some REAL tough situations that game. I'm probably giving both Stanley and Brian B's or B+ at this point. Now, if Stanley was in his 2nd or 3rd year as a starter I would tend to grade him closer to a C also.

 

[wcbtee]

For those who are not satisfied. Could you enlighten me on what you expected? If you wanted him to be perfect at everything, then I understand your displeasure.

You really think he would be playing this well without the practice reps from last year? Really?

 

[Birky]

You really think he would be playing this well without the practice reps from last year? Really?

Did you quote the wrong post? I had no problem with him playing last year. Assuming you did quote the correct post, what in my post suggested anything about Stanley playing last year?

 

[wcbtee]

Yeah Birky, wrong post.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

I don' think anyone should anoint him just yet. Stanley gets a grade of C and Brian Ferentz gets an A.

BF has made him look good. Most of his throws are flairs, outs, bubbles - all out of harms way. When BF asks him to go long, he hits very few. Brian should be commended for the way he has called the games for this kid; quick throws, 3 step, etc. Yea, yea, I know you'll say but what about the drop in the bucket throw to Easley or the seam to Fant? We'll he's had a bunch of help from wide receiver circus catches too and several flair passes to Wadley that go 50+ yards for TDs.

Secondly, we have played four weak teams and his stats and against those teams his production look really good (10 TDs, 1 int). However, if you look at his production in the Big10 thus far (and I'll even throw in Illinois who we all know if the worst team in the conference) his 46/90 (51%) for 635 yards, 5 TDs and 1 Int with a couple fumbles and 1-2 record. Very pedestrian.

It's not unreasonable to ask for a QB that is athletic and can make plays, be dynamic, etc. Yes, a dual threat is way more exciting and in my opinion, I think it makes college football more exciting. Stanley has 21 rushes for -30 yards and no TDs on the season. I know I'm asking for something that isn't even in the realm of the Hawkeye offensive scheme. Stanley is doing what he's asked. Yawn.

If a veteran QB were playing like Stanley ... then yeah, I'd probably give him around a C. However, if we're going to us an academic analogy here ... I'd say that Stanley is still in the stage where he's in the large lecture-hall weed-out classes. Performances by such young, immature students tends to be low anyhow. Thus, instructors are forced to have curve the class ... usually based off of an analysis where we assume that our data should be normally distributed. Consequently, the mean score defines a "C." In this context, I'd definitely contend that Stanley's performances have been above average ... arguably a standard deviation or two about average. Thus, in my eyes, Stanley is pretty solidly in B to B+ territory. If his ball-security had been better (referring to fumbles) - I'd probably have him pegged in B+ to A- territory. All-in-all ... that's still pretty good.

Sure, Brian is being smart enough to have him primarily be working between the hashes ... because those throws are easier. But there's no lucking into 15 TD passes ... particularly when he's also thrown only 2 INTs. I've seen Tanner Lee throw more pickable balls in single game than Stanley has thrown all season ... that is an illustration of a Stanley mostly making good decisions, but still taking chances that can help us score. However, it goes beyond what Brian has called ... it also speaks to how Ken has prepped Stanley too. Ken is deserving of some pretty massive props here!

Anyhow, were I to grade Brian, I'd probably put him in C+ to B- territory ... but, to his great credit, I think that he's shown great promise ... and, more importantly, he's shown that he's learning and improving. In the past, I've seen Iowa teams that have failed to make good half-time adjustments. Even when Brian "screws up" and comes up with poor strategies to attack our opposition initially .... once he sees how the Ds are choosing to defend us ... the second-half adjustments have mostly been pretty good.

 

[kceasthawk]

I guess.

But, I guess you'd be cool if our running back had 100 yards on 56 carries. I mean they got 100 yards so its totally cool, right? Stats don't always show the whole picture. And I don't think he's having that great of a season. He can complete short passes just fine but lacks on the deep ball which pulls defenses back, excited the crowd, swings momentum, etc. He also has had issue with ball security and when to throw it away. But, hey at the end of the day his completion percentage is high from some short 3 yards passes so he must be the bestest ever!

Really not sure where your coming up with the ball security "ISSUES". I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong, but since the first quarter of his first game, Stanley has 1 fumble and 1 interception. KF even said, you have to take in to account in game one, it was the first time Stanley has played against live hits since high school, the better part of 2 years! His pick against Illinois ended a streak of something like 120 passes without a turnover. Thats pretty solid in my book for a first year starter. and hardly constitutes ball security "ISSUES". As others have attempted to point out, Stanley is not the only one responsible for the lack of completions on long throws. Timing with wideouts, and their adjustments during routes play a factor as well. As these young pups grow together we'll most likely see better results.

 

[ichawk24]

Stanley does have a fumble issue, but I expect he'll correct it.

His INT ptg is very low for a first year starter.

Overall, his play as been very good.

 

[relishingwinning18]

No joke.

The analogy would be a guy who had 203 yards on 30 carries, but got caught from behind on some long runs...clearly some of our fans would want that running back benched.

I actually think I remember some good Weisman games, where people said this.

 

[Birky]

I actually think I remember some good Weisman games, where people said this.

...this is true.