A second look at Christensen vs. Stanzi 2008

I need to save this post and use it every time someone says "you think Kirk wants to lose? He's obviously going to play the best players!" Choosing the best players isn't black and white. No coach is right every time. Once people understand that, it only makes sense that some coaches are better at it than others.

True...but if you have to go back to 1971 for your textbook example...
 
If someone brings up 2008, I rarely try to remember the first 4 games and anything to do with JC. When you have Shonn Greene, Wisconsin, Penn State, Minnesota, and South Carolina to remember...that fiasco is something I try to forget in 2008.
 
Hypothetical, let's just say the '07 season goes a little bit different. James Cleveland catches the ball on the goal line and they beat Iowa St. and they beat a 4-7 Western Michigan team at the end of the year.

My question is: Is there even a qb competition if Iowa ended the '07 year 8-4?
 
Honest question here. How did Iowa so badly miss (mess up) with the JC recruiting? Did JC peak in high school (inferior competition)? Lack of QB development doom JC? There's hundreds of QB yearly with gawdy HS stats who aren't D-I talent....thoughts?
Everybody bought the HS-hype and thought he was the next Chuck Long.
 
Honest question here. How did Iowa so badly miss (mess up) with the JC recruiting? Did JC peak in high school (inferior competition)? Lack of QB development doom JC? There's hundreds of QB yearly with gawdy HS stats who aren't D-I talent....thoughts?


I honestly believe often times it's the team around the QB in HS. If there is top talent on the team such as a stud WR, RB or line play, they can really make a QB look good, and maybe better than they really are. I always wondered if this is what happened with JC and him being a 4* recruit. Was he worthy of that or did his HS team make him looks spectacular?

I suppose then you have to also throw in having to understand and know a much more dynamic playbook. Maybe some have difficulty with that. Who knows.
 
I think I remember JM on the radio going on and on about how great JC was going to be because he squat like 1,200 pounds in the Doyleization chamber. Then he got so Doyleized that the muscles in his shoulders and neck and lower body changed his trowing motion and it went from Colt Brennan/Dan Marino style super smooth quick release to the Tim Tebow wild duck overhand passes when he finally got playing time.


This made me laugh. Funny chit!
 
JC got pretty screwed in 2007 when Douglas didn't return, and Brodell and Moeaki got hurt early in the year. He was stuck with Cleveland and DJK as first year starters also, and Brandon Myers (who obviously ended up being really good but wasn't supposed to play all that much himself). Even if he was a great QB, no way he was going to be on the same page with three receivers that were just finding themselves also. Add in the young line that had to take their lumps before becoming the line that won the Orange Bowl. It wasn't much different than the same 1999 guys that looked awful growing into 2002 and being awesome. And 2007 we still ended the Big Ten on a three game winning streak, and if the defense wouldn't have gotten the team in a hole against Western Michigan so quickly, probably make and maybe even win a bowl (since it'd have been a lower team we played instead of the usual play up a tier against the SEC in all the Outback bowls).

^^Solid^^
 
Honest question here. How did Iowa so badly miss (mess up) with the JC recruiting? Did JC peak in high school (inferior competition)? Lack of QB development doom JC? There's hundreds of QB yearly with gawdy HS stats who aren't D-I talent....thoughts?

A few friends of mine and I were talking awhile back about LSU. LSU always seems to have elite level WR talent, but almost never seem to have capable QB play. We asked ourselves, "why can't LSU land a high level QB?" Well, the thing is, LSU does land QB's that are well regarded coming out of high school. The problem is either through lack of development or the bad evaluation, they don't perform well. We started looking at the top 20-25 QB's of each class in the last 10 years and what we found is that the majority of these guys don't perform up to those expectations. So if Jake was to have had a good college career at Iowa, he would have actually been apart of the minority. Simply put, I think that Jake Christensen just belongs in that majority of guys that didn't perform well.
 
Christensen should've never seen the field again after Stanzi's performance against FIU. It was blatantly obvious who the better player was. Sure Stanzi had some struggles after that, but he should've been named the starter point blank and we're living/dying with Stanzi.

Learn The Game.

Stanzi threw balls that would have been INTs against a defense with even mediocre talent. His performance against ISU was almost as mediocre. Jake actually saved that game by NOT trying to turn it into a throw-fest in a sloppy game on a rain-soaked field.
 
Learn The Game.

Stanzi threw balls that would have been INTs against a defense with even mediocre talent. His performance against ISU was almost as mediocre. Jake actually saved that game by NOT trying to turn it into a throw-fest in a sloppy game on a rain-soaked field.

If Jake would have been a little more accurate, he would have had a lot more interceptions. When you skip the ball to the receiver's feet half of the time, it's a pretty safe bet that no one will intercept it.
 
We fans evaluate a QB based on throwing. However at Iowa a big component of the QB position is how well you size up the D and adjust BEFORE the ball is snapped. In a nutshell they have to learn the game. Most fans can't evaluate that, most fans can't look at the D, and know what to call other than maybe run or pass. most fans are preoccupied with passing stats and the godam water tower, they need to learn the game.

I would softly disagree. I believe you're right about qb's at Iowa need to "learn" defenses and to get the audible right. But, we're talking about changing the play from run left to run right (or vice versa) or from pass to run. I don't know how difficult that should be. Regarding the evaluation of a qb (based on the qb knowing how to read defenses), I think fans can see when a qb moves the offense down the field. We don't necessarily need to know if the qb audibles or not, we just need to see first downs and touchdowns. As I recall, JC wasn't very good at it and RS was. I would also add that I don't think a qb who didn't play well the previous season is entitled to being the incumbent the following season. JC is an example of ferentz' line of succession theory that, at times, keeps the better player off the field due to seniority.

Lastly, I think it was KOK who essentially forced ferentz' hand in allowing RS to become the starter. And think about that...a HC that doesn't allow his OC to pick the starting qb?
 
ArvadaHawk, I agree with you with that the starter at any position the year before shouldn't be guaranteed to be the starter the following year just because. I think most people here would also agree. But as I pointed out in my OP I do think there was a legit competition for the QB spot going into the season so I don't think Ferentz used any sort of line of succession theory when it came to QB's in 2008. If anything, Christensen being the incumbent only gave him a shot to compete and hold the job. Christensen was never given the full time starting gig in 2008. After all, Stanzi did technically start in Weeks 2 and 3.
 
Lets not forget the critical role that current Arena League starter Arvell Nelson played in all this. If he doesn't get into trouble and lose his spot then Ricky Stanzi probably gives up football to join the Navy Seals and hunt for Bin Laden instead of going into Spring Football as the backup that year.
 

Latest posts

Top