miller-jon

B

bubbadunk

Well-Known Member
Just made the statement that stanzi was the 2nd best qb in iowa history behind long. what a statement. he's the guy that said Jake christensen was a good qb for 2 years. I have to ? wether Jon Miller knows anything about Football with statements like that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As you can tell i'm not a fan of his but i do love the sound off program and a website like this! We've had numerous qb's that have led the hawks to this kind of a season. like i've said before stanzi's a good kid and a average QB. If he was the best QB since long we'd be 10-1, 9-2 or at least 8-3 not 7-4. All teams depend basically on their Qb to carry them and stanzi's not getting it done!
 




bubbadunk said:
Just made the statement that stanzi was the 2nd best qb in iowa history behind long. what a statement. he's the guy that said Jake christensen was a good qb for 2 years. I have to ? wether Jon Miller knows anything about Football with statements like that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As you can tell i'm not a fan of his but i do love the sound off program and a website like this! We've had numerous qb's that have led the hawks to this kind of a season. like i've said before stanzi's a good kid and a average QB. If he was the best QB since long we'd be 10-1, 9-2 or at least 8-3 not 7-4. All teams depend basically on their Qb to carry them and stanzi's not getting it done!
Click to expand...

In my opinion, he's the second best. You disagree. The world keeps spinning.
 




Definetly not a high standard of QBs at Iowa. Long was great.

I'd put Tate up there until they forced him under center, but he had the best mind since Long.

Stanzi isn't accurate, and picks primary route and sticks with it.

he's had the luxury of playing with Shonn Greene, and last year's defense
 


I'd still take Banks over Stanzi. At least he could run a good two minute offense (i.e Purdue '02).
 


I agree with Jon in terms of ability to play QB, he's the best since Long.

Problem for Rick is that he does not have much help on the sideline. He is only as good as he makes himself. Nobody is there to help him develop or to tailor the offense around his strengths.
 


There is no way in hell that he is better than brad banks was. Banks only got one year and Stanzi was in a position to get multiple years because of our quarterback situation.

I highly respect Jon's opinion and he is rarely this off base except when it comes to quarterbacks. Remember how good you thought JC was. Stanzi is top 5 but not 2.
 




Picking nits, re: Stanzi isn't accurate...his completion % is 66.2 for the season so far. As of right now, that would be the 8th best mark for a season in the history of Big Ten football.

Proceed
 






JonDMiller said:
Love Banks. He also had the best offensive line in school history.
Click to expand...

Agreed but his feet made him a dual threat AND he isn't any worse of a passer than stanzi. Stanzi has a great completion % because most of our plays are 10 yards or less, he misses too many deep balls like missing McNutt tonight for a touchdown by 10 yards
 


smoot27 said:
I'd still take Banks over Stanzi. At least he could run a good two minute offense (i.e Purdue '02).
Click to expand...

Considering what happened with Tate after his first season as a starter, and what has happened with Stanzi after his first full season as a starter, it's probably best that Banks only had that one year.
 




I'll buy arguements about Stanzi's locking on to WRs or taking bad sacks but accuracy, can't do it.

Jon cited his completion percentage but if you watch the games his accuracy is not the issue.

Does his miss throws, sometimes big throws down the field? Absolutely.

At the college level, who doesn't?
 






I don't think the o-line last year was much worse than the 2002 line. Banks had Clark, but Stanzi has two better wide receivers.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top