ADVERTISEMENT

Two Deeps & Game Notes for Iowa vs. Minnesota

This must mean that Petras's injury is worse than thought because i just watched KF's post NW press conference and he as much as stated that once Petras is 100%, he will be starter.
But if Padilla is lights out the next game or two, KF might not have tehe luxury to follow through and Petras might be a wolverine next season :) If that happens possibly the first 13-2 starter (other than perhaps Jalen Hurts) to ever transfer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cincy_Hawk
So I'm getting some of the same vibes from the responses here that has been my pet peeve about the way this staff looks at the qb position.

Let's not put Padilla on a pedestal and say that he's untouchable and that it's now his era and his team from here forward. He deserves a fair shot to run the team. But that doesn't have to mean sticking with the same old "starter for life" mentality.
What's wrong with a position that is something less extreme than the KF set of expectations that a starting qb shall be named and he will get all meaningful snaps barring injury, illness or otherwise unavailability?
There's some middle ground between a hair trigger for pulling a qb for any mistake and tenure for the duration of eligibility once named starter.
 
usatsi_10375706.jpg
 
These depth charts are basically how the team ended last game. Rarely an indication of things to come.
It’s very interesting, based on Kirks comments that Petras isn’t listed at all though. Either this is his way of naming Padilla the starter, and the injury gives Kirk a graceful way to bench him without actually benching him, or they looked at Spencer again and the injury is more severe than first thought. Presser tomorrow will be interesting.
So I'm getting some of the same vibes from the responses here that has been my pet peeve about the way this staff looks at the qb position.

Let's not put Padilla on a pedestal and say that he's untouchable and that it's now his era and his team from here forward. He deserves a fair shot to run the team. But that doesn't have to mean sticking with the same old "starter for life" mentality.
What's wrong with a position that is something less extreme than the KF set of expectations that a starting qb shall be named and he will get all meaningful snaps barring injury, illness or otherwise unavailability?
There's some middle ground between a hair trigger for pulling a qb for any mistake and tenure for the duration of eligibility once named starter.
To be fair, I’m not sure there’s more than twice in 22 years that we’ve legit had a qb controversy, online fan griping aside. jc in ‘08 and obviously rudolf/CJB. Otherwise, we’ve had fairly solie quarterback play and this hasn’t been the issue people like to think it has been.
 
Glad to see Padilla starting. The disconcerting thing is staff now doesn’t feel in 5 days Petras is healthy to play. Ok I get that. But yet a few days ago they thought playing a less than 100% Petras over a healthy Padilla was a better option??? Play calling for his 3 series proved that they thought they could scheme around his injury and win like a Wisconsin by running it 50x and barely throwing. However our OL and power running game no where close to that level and Padilla playing coming in was option B. Petras should’ve never seen the field Saturday and speaks volumes of the coaches who thought it was good decision to try and play him as the first option with his injury. Did Petras or the team no favors.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT