A quick realization RE: Stanzi

alexzelada said:
If Stanzi doesn't get injured in 2009 - there is a real possibility Iowa plays for the national title that season.
Click to expand...

I still dont think a 12-0 Iowa would have jumped either a 13-0 Alabama or a 13-0 Texas. Delaney would have thrown a fit if an undefeated Big 10 team got left out of the National Championship but I think Iowa would have been on the outside looking in.

The computers loved us that year but I think the human polls would have hurt us enough to keep us off the 2 line.
 


Section136 said:
I still dont think a 12-0 Iowa would have jumped either a 13-0 Alabama or a 13-0 Texas. Delaney would have thrown a fit if an undefeated Big 10 team got left out of the National Championship but I think Iowa would have been on the outside looking in.

The computers loved us that year but I think the human polls would have hurt us enough to keep us off the 2 line.
Click to expand...

Given Iowa's schedule that year, I think that it is conceivable that we could have jumped Texas. You have to remember that the most brutal portion of Iowa's schedule that year were all AWAY games. Furthermore, the B12 wasn't viewed as being all that terribly strong that year.
 


homerHAWKeye777 said:
Given Iowa's schedule that year, I think that it is conceivable that we could have jumped Texas. You have to remember that the most brutal portion of Iowa's schedule that year were all AWAY games. Furthermore, the B12 wasn't viewed as being all that terribly strong that year.
Click to expand...


I know that we had a brutal road slate in 2009. We were not getting any love from human polls though after our close wins against UNI, Arkansas State and the comeback win against Indiana at Kinnick. This is when the Big 12 having a conference title game and the Big 10 not would have benefited the Big 12 immensely.

Iowa is done 2 weeks before the Big 12 Title Game and Texas would still have finished #2 after they beat Nebraska. Where I would have been irate was when Suh forced McCoy to throw the ball out of bounds as time expired and Mack Brown pretty much demanded that 1 second be put back on the clock and got his way. If that would have kept Iowa out of the National Championship that would have been crushing.
 


if human polls finished 1- Bama, 2 - texas, 3 - Iowa . Our computer ranking was supriorer to texas' enough to jump them. Only forcing iowa 4 or lower would texas have been in. It would have made teams realize there is a big risk scheduling cupcakes. I bet the non-conf schedules would improve because of it.
 


Also, I hope if the situation where to happen again (non-OSU, PSU, Neb, UM) the B1G coaches would drop said school in the rankings the weeks leading up to the final reg. Season poll. And jump them to were they feel the team is in the last one.
 


JonDMiller said:
He had one of the best touchdown to INT ratios in school history during his senior year, and also set the school record for passing efficiency in a single season.

I'll take a few more deers like that, thanks.
Click to expand...

Begone with you and your so-called "facts", Mister! :D
 


Ronco said:
Rick was Jeckyl and Hyde as a closer. Late in his SO year and his JR year he was money. His SR he looked like a deer in headlights. He won his bowl games, which is a plus. He didn't win a B10 championship; that's a minus. I value championships over stats and regular season performance. I'm also more of a Tom Brady fan than Manning. I like Rick, but he's never been 1st or 2nd team all conference or won a conference title. Top 3 in the last 30 years is ambitious. I'll see your top 1/2 dozen, but that's it.
Click to expand...

Stanzi's consisency, based on HIS play alone, was much better during his SR campaign than you seemingly realize.

You don't seem to be noting how a significant hunk of the "fade" in Iowa's O in the 2nd half of the season was attributable to our overall drop in production in the running game. And, a big reason why we had a drop in the running game was because we got hammered at LG .... having 3 very capable players all going down to injury (Gettis, MacMillan, and Boffeli). Ordinarily taking a hit at a single spot on the OL wouldn't be so significant ... however, it was also was COMPOUNDED by the fact that ARob also got injured. Furthermore, to make matters worse, James Ferentz was dinged AND Koeppel was an undersized OG.

When you combine all those latter factors ... and then rewatch Stanzi's play in the latter half of the seaosn ... all of a sudden things make A LOT more sense. Furthermore, the D got hit even harder by injury.
 




Stanzi will never get the credit he should have until he is long gone. His career record as a starter when he was healthy enough to finish was fantastic....somewhere around 26 - 9...and winning 3 straight bowl games is unprecedented in Iowa history.
And as pointed out,his leadership was almost unparalled in Iowa history,in a tumultous period. I have him right behind Long,overall,since the Duncan Era.
 


JonDMiller said:
I still stand by what I said last fall; I think Stanzi is a Top Three Iowa QB in my lifetime with Chuck and Chuck being 1-2.
Click to expand...

I was just about to bust your balls until I read "lifetime". I thought you were forgetting about a guy named Nile for a second. Kinda hard to have a list of all time great QB's at Iowa leaving him off the list.
 




DuffMan said:
You can add in that Stanzi was undefeated against PSU (3-0), scUM (2-0), ISU (3-0) and came within a special teams breakdown of going 3-0 against Wisconsin.
Click to expand...

He is the only QB ever to beat PSU 3 times.

I am going to miss the Americanzi. Nothing but love for that guy.
 


homerHAWKeye777 said:
Stanzi's consisency, based on HIS play alone, was much better during his SR campaign than you seemingly realize.
Click to expand...

It's easy for fans to blame the o-line, running game or WR's on poor QB play, but in the end a good QB takes the good with the bad and produces.

Stanzi had a significant drop in TD:INT ratio in the last two months of the season from the first half. 19:2 to 6:4. I don't care how you paint it, that's not all on the running game.

Stanzi's stats were noticeably worse in close games. When the final margin was 0 - 7 points he was 59.2%, 12TD, 5INT and took 14 sacks. When the margin was greater, he was approx. 71%, 13TD, 1INT and took 5 sacks.

When Stanzi was winning he was 65 - 73% completion rating. When he was losing he was 50 - 57%.

Stats are a funny thing, because they can be viewed multiple ways, and while he put up some good numbers this season, and throughout his career, there are stats to suggest that he did indeed struggle as a closer. In fact, arguably his inability to close was what kept us from having a great year. Outside of Indiana, who shouldn't have been a contest and Mizzou, who we had time to prepare for, he didn't win a close game all year.

That's a very critical component of a successful QB at any level. QB's with worse stats that can close and find a way to win are historically more highly regarded. Stanzi will have to be better than that at the next level to have any chance to survive in the league.
 


Scotttyd said:
I was just about to bust your balls until I read "lifetime". I thought you were forgetting about a guy named Nile for a second. Kinda hard to have a list of all time great QB's at Iowa leaving him off the list.
Click to expand...

Kinnick isn't listed as a QB though, he is listed as a HB even though he did most of the passing and was the offense.
 


Some people base decisions on how good somebody is or isn't based on stats, which is why early in his career people thought Brady was 'good', but not 'Manning good'. This despite Brady having 3 SB and Manning yet to win one. The last four or five years that has changed when Brady proved he could put up Manning-esque numbers.

I like winning. I like performance under pressure. More than that I like C'ships. No matter how it's sliced Stanzi, despite or D collapses, had numerous opportunities to lead us on game tying or winning drives and came up short this past year.

If he gets credit for performing in the clutch as a JR them he gets blame for falling short in that area as a SR.
 


hogeye said:
It's easy for fans to blame the o-line, running game or WR's on poor QB play, but in the end a good QB takes the good with the bad and produces.

Stanzi had a significant drop in TD:INT ratio in the last two months of the season from the first half. 19:2 to 6:4. I don't care how you paint it, that's not all on the running game.

Stanzi's stats were noticeably worse in close games. When the final margin was 0 - 7 points he was 59.2%, 12TD, 5INT and took 14 sacks. When the margin was greater, he was approx. 71%, 13TD, 1INT and took 5 sacks.

When Stanzi was winning he was 65 - 73% completion rating. When he was losing he was 50 - 57%.

Stats are a funny thing, because they can be viewed multiple ways, and while he put up some good numbers this season, and throughout his career, there are stats to suggest that he did indeed struggle as a closer. In fact, arguably his inability to close was what kept us from having a great year. Outside of Indiana, who shouldn't have been a contest and Mizzou, who we had time to prepare for, he didn't win a close game all year.

That's a very critical component of a successful QB at any level. QB's with worse stats that can close and find a way to win are historically more highly regarded. Stanzi will have to be better than that at the next level to have any chance to survive in the league.
Click to expand...

One issue there is that you also have to annotate your data. Without doing moreso, stats are veritably meaningless.

A critical element that you're not accounting for is the weather. For pro-style offenses ... there is a definite correlation between success in the passing game and the weather.

AND this further AMPLIFIES the impact of having a mediocre running game because when the weather gets colder and the cold winds are blowing ... a running game is the best friend of ANY QB.

To put it mildly, Stanzi hasn't had his "best friend" for much of the past 2 seasons. And, all the same, Iowa has still managed to score points and win games. Definitely a reasonable portion of that success is attributable to the D ... however, even a good D cannot win games on its own. To that end, Stanzi gave Iowa a presense that made the ENTIRE TEAM better! You cannot say that about EVERY QB.

A lot of folks like to point to Stanzi having to do very little in '08 ... however, those same folks seem to quickly forget what our O was like with Christensen at the helm. If you don't recognize what Stanzi did for our O ... then you simply are rather short-sighted and you don't fully evaluate all the data.
 


Homer, I appreciate yours or Jon's or anybody else and their respect and admiration for what Rick has accomplished. I share that same appreciation. However, in good conscience I can not share in the group think that Ricky is a 'Top 3 QB in the last 30 to 40 years of Iowa FB'. Just because I don't put him in the 'Top ......' of QB's that have played at Iowa in in the last 3 to 4 decades does not diminish what he accomplished.

What Rick and the team accomplished in '09 is nothing short of amazing and he's a large part of that. Despite what he may have done or not done in the first 3 quarters that year was all flushed away by finding ways to put drives and points on the board in clutch situations. That's huge. Who knows, if he hadn't gotten hurt we/he may have won that NW game or the OSU game. However, he did get hurt and we all know about "ifs and butts".

Ricky had a very, very nice SR year. I know what his TD:int ration is/was and it was impressive to be sure. However, those stats did us no good in the 4th quarter of tight games this year. Save for the IU game, and I give him credit there, he whiffed on 4 occasions leading us on game winning or game tying drives.

I don't care what kind of running game you have or the stye of offense your run, in the end you need your QB to make plays in clutch situations. The most important stat a QB can have is W's and L's. I know we have a lot of close games which magnified Ricky's inability to close even more.

As for our running game being 'mediocre', while that may or may not be true and somebody can dig up stats to prove about anything, isn't part of a QB's job to overcome a shortcoming like this? After all, you did say the "best friend" of ANY (in caps) QB is a running game. Just to illustrate my point since you brought it up-
Who won the SB last year and how was their running game?
Who won the B10 in 2004 and how was their running game?
I could bring up more, but my point is made.

Ricky was a very good QB for us the better part of 3 years. He got better each year. However, he was not great. Not winning a C'ship or even making a post season All B10 team bears this out.
 


Ronco said:
As for our running game being 'mediocre', while that may or may not be true and somebody can dig up stats to prove about anything, isn't part of a QB's job to overcome a shortcoming like this? After all, you did say the "best friend" of ANY (in caps) QB is a running game. Just to illustrate my point since you brought it up-
Who won the SB last year and how was their running game?
Who won the B10 in 2004 and how was their running game?
I could bring up more, but my point is made.
Click to expand...

The superbowl isn't really an applicable example because veteran pro-players are incredibly more refined than their college counterparts.

Also, as for Iowa's success in '04 ... do you also recall how much play action Tate did? Do you recall how our run to pass ratio was still surprisingly high? Besides, do you recall how relatively "weak" the Big 10 was back in '04? No offense to the '04 Hawks but Penn State was down, tOSU was down (relatively speaking), and Michigan wasn't even "all that." Don't get me wrong, I'm very proud of what the '04 Hawks accomplished, but not all of their success was due to simply being "clutch." Iowa beat Minny due to sheer luck ... and we also beat LSU due to luck too ... thank goodness for that blown coverage too (led to one of the most memorable bowl finishes in recent memory).
 






You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top