B10 Qb's

[MelroseHawkins]

I don't know if Hornibrook or Stanley fall in the category, but, at any level, most coaches would argue that "game manager" is not an pejorative label at all.

QBs that make good decisions and keep the chains moving are the ones that win. We all like a little moxie and gun slinger in our QBs, but coaches go gray early with those guys. NW has killed us over the years with "game managers."

Agree. It is not a bad thing. Many coaches/teams go with a game manager just to steer the boat and get the ball to the play makers while taking care of the ball not turning it over. This is what some offenses require and coaches are fine with that, or as you state, prefer that.

There are other teams whose offense is designed to have the QB be the play maker. I.E. Vick in the day.

 

[Unknownbadger]

This is true, but you can't be scared to let it fly now and again either.
The thing in my mind is how the great ones are able to pick you apart with 8-15 yarders, but also have some gun slinger in them.
If you get one on one on the outside and never try to exploit it, then you need some help on the edges.

This is just one of the reasons why I say that Hornibrook IS NO more a game manager than Wilson was. Tolzien was more of a game manager but with his offense he didn't need to be anything else. That was not the case with Wisconsin's last year. As good as Taylor and our running game was, we needed a guy who could throw the ball downfield to pull people out of the box. Our OL was very good but not to the level of great yet. That said, there's substantial risk associated with throwing deep. Much easier to complete passes in the 15-20 yard range. And safer if you are not a gunslinger who may occasionally ignore his own fallibility .

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

Yes, ideally, you have QBs that do both. You don't want a QB that can't keep the defense honest.

The important thing for QBs to understand is that the "slice you up" game management skills actually are what allows you to hit the big plays. The defense starts to squat on those shorter routes, then - similar to play-action with a good rushing attack - things open up deep. But, if you can't take advantage of those situations, the defense can make you one-dimensional. What Iowa needs to understand is that if teams such as Wisconsin are selling out to stop the zone running scheme, Brian Ferentz and Stanley have to adapt and start hitting targets behind the LBs to make them pay.

QBs that do both combined with an OC making the right calls can completely demoralize a defense.

 

[4thngoal]

Agree. It is not a bad thing. Many coaches/teams go with a game manager just to steer the boat and get the ball to the play makers while taking care of the ball not turning it over. This is what some offenses require and coaches are fine with that, or as you state, prefer that.

There are other teams whose offense is designed to have the QB be the play maker. I.E. Vick in the day.

I'm just saying our avg receiving yards is low.
In 2010 2 guys had 99 receptions and avg over 16
I'm not saying bomb it, I'm saying that even our passing game sort of put us in a phone booth last year.
Look I get the whole djk thing and how that apprehensive subconscious behavior has bode badly on the wr room, but we also had McNutt and that's a good one. So whatever get over it and get us some darn guys who can play wr.

 

[ChosenChildren]

Iowa v Wisconsin this year will be a great game. I hope it is a night game, to give Iowa the maximum chance at an upset. Wisconsin is very good, but Kinnick at night is special.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I'm just saying our avg receiving yards is low.
In 2010 2 guys had 99 receptions and avg over 16
I'm not saying bomb it, I'm saying that even our passing game sort of put us in a phone booth last year.
Look I get the whole djk thing and how that apprehensive subconscious behavior has bode badly on the wr room, but we also had McNutt and that's a good one. So whatever get over it and get us some darn guys who can play wr.

Pretty telling about he WR position when your team's TE's have a better yards per reception stat than the WR's.

 

[4thngoal]

Pretty telling about he WR position when your team's TE's have a better yards per reception stat than the WR's.

In 15 we had several who were around the 15 avg mark.
Unless you are going to line those TE's clear out on the edges... again our lack of wr, caused our passing game to tighten the field up. Maybe not phone booth size, but it certainly didn't help either.

 

[Unknownbadger]

I'm just saying our avg receiving yards is low.
In 2010 2 guys had 99 receptions and avg over 16
I'm not saying bomb it, I'm saying that even our passing game sort of put us in a phone booth last year.
Look I get the whole djk thing and how that apprehensive subconscious behavior has bode badly on the wr room, but we also had McNutt and that's a good one. So whatever get over it and get us some darn guys who can play wr.

Wisconsin had many years with WRs that SHOULDN'T be able to get deep. In those cases Chryst has always found ways to get them or a TE deep even if that deep route is only 20- 25 yards. And really hasn't been by trickery but more of the result of setting the opponent up and play calling. It certainly helps to have a good dependable running game. Perhaps that's been more of a problem for Iowa but in the games I saw of Iowa last year (besides the Wisconsin game), I was reasonably impressed with it's pass game.

 

[4thngoal]

I know I started this thread about qb' and it has hit on several different areas, but let me break it down for you.
I don't think anyone is worried about our qb's. Our lines, even our secondary. Our TE's or our rb's.
The two positions that will determine how far we go are can we reload at lb and can we get some 15-20 avg yard wr's. Everytime we get a couple of those, we tend to have very good years.
Copeland had an enormous job to do, that whole room had an enormous job to do.
Basically if we can improve our 20 yard passing and our rush D. I think we can play with anyone. How much those areas improve........ that's going to make the difference.

 

[Unknownbadger]

Basically if we can improve our 20 yard passing and our rush D. I think we can play with anyone. How much those areas improve........ that's going to make the difference.[/QUOTE]

For me, unlike many Badger fans, I'm not TOO worried about our front 3 as long as Sagapolu stays healthy. I am concerned about our relatively young and inexperienced CBs. On the other hand, if they have a smidgen of talent which I think they do I doubt there's many better than Leonhard in getting them ready to do a credible job. No worries at all on O, we're loaded for bear everywhere.

 

[4thngoal]

Basically if we can improve our 20 yard passing and our rush D. I think we can play with anyone. How much those areas improve........ that's going to make the difference.

For me, unlike many Badger fans, I'm not TOO worried about our front 3 as long as Sagapolu stays healthy. I am concerned about our relatively young and inexperienced CBs. On the other hand, if they have a smidgen of talent which I think they do I doubt there's many better than Leonhard in getting them ready to do a credible job. No worries at all on O, we're loaded for bear everywhere.[/QUOTE]

This is why I like our chances early in the season. Nobody knows how much we have improved in the areas I mentioned. Plus with Wisconsin replacing quite a bit of D and doing a little shuffling on ol, hopefully getting them early works to our advantage.
Because once you get that O clicking, it's going to be tough to slow down.
Basically you could probably run 80% of the time and still beat most teams in the west.
I fully expect Nebraska to at best split Northwestern and Minnesota with it going Wisconsin, Northwestern, Minnesota, OSU.
That's where I get hung up with many writers predictions, because they think they can win the "winnable" games, I think they lost to Michigan, win Purdue, lose Wisconsin, lose Northwestern, toss up with Minnesota, lose OSU, then if they are not to beat up possibly win Illinois (Illinois got a ton of youth some pt) lose to MSU and lose to Iowa.
That's brutal, but I'm just saying.
I don't think it reflects on Frost as a coach, but more of a dumpster fire he walked into.
I'm not sold he is a football God like some think, but this year, they are going to have a fight just to get 6 wins.
Which leaves Wisconsin, Iowa and Northwestern.
I heard and I agree that Northwestern/Purdue game will say a lot. Then the Iowa Wisconsin game.
It's weird that some important games are so early in the year, but it's kind of cool also because nothing makes someone run faster than having someone right on your arse.