seepig
Well-Known Member
Game situation miscues are commonly a coaching + player bumble. You are correct Rob and you are sharp enough for me lol.
Calm down or Sit Down
- Thread starter NCHawker
- Start date
GotTimDodge
Well-Known Member
He's either gonna be better, the same, or worse.
I'm calling it right now, one of those three.
I'm calling it right now, one of those three.
BigD
Well-Known Member
Yep, and as was stated on BTN that Iowa had TWO tight ends go to the NFL in the same year which is a first for any school. Also, in most cases what you see in a quarterback’s junior year is what you get in their senior year. In fact more pressure will be on him because of the above mentioned players being in the NFL, and Stanley knowing that he choked in pressure and game changing situations. Stanley knew the cameras were there for the big show and he wanted to press to put on a good display and get the fan base excited. So you go back to what KF said in that he needs to relax and enjoy being out there. When he gets uptight things don’t usually work out. Some players are gamers and some are not. I hope Stanley is up to the task but I have serious doubts.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
I was thinking the same thing. Man...the leaps people make
kicker22
Well-Known Member
So just curious but NS get's a free pass put under fire, whether just or unjust, for his performance in his first 2 years, but BF who's learning a position as well, should get a free pass for our offense laying an absolute egg against Northwestern last year. I'm not pinning everything on Nate or Brian, but if one's going to be called out for underperforming and needing to step up I don't think its a stretch thinking the other should be held to similar standards.
WinOneThisCentury
Well-Known Member
And we won...and scored 27 points. We couldn't run the ball...that was clear...but that was the second best rushing defense in the country and they played a legit schedule. They also had 5 weeks to prepare for our running game...their objective was to shut down the running game and make Stanley beat you (basically everyone's defensive game plan). Stanley made enough plays to beat them. We win.
Damn, there are enough negatives when we lose games to keep us busy...can we just say...we beat a good team and move on?
It's so interesting to see folks hold up the Miss St. bowl game as a reason for optimism. Stanley played pretty well, but MSU handed that game to the Hawks. Both teams had turnovers, but I think MSU had six or seven 15-yard personal foul or holding penalties -- one of which wiped out a long pass play to the Iowa 1, a sure TD. They dropped 5 passes, including one in the EZ for another TD. Iowa had little or nothing to do with MSU blowing those 14 pts. The Hawks had MINUS rushing yards. KF and BF will look at those #s and say "we used the run to set up the passes for TDs". I look at that game and say "You won because of stupid penalties by MSU." Then they wonder why they can't score more than 10 pts for two years running using the same offensive strategy vs a team like NWestern -- who almost NEVER commits a penalty. Sigh. Iowa's team motto should be "We Count On The Other Team to Lose."
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
Oh look, another "Stanley doesn't have it" thread. I enjoyed Monday's version of this, Tuesdays version of this was next level, Wednesday's needed some work but Thursday's really got me engaged again. I get it - the QB man... they are rock stars. They take the credit, they take the blame, but this every day? The same thing? Same topic? It's almost as if there is 1 or 2 posters using different usernames to perpetuate the same narrative. The guys 17-9 as a starter, his 2 years starting have produced a top 25 finish, just outside the top 25 for a finish, he's thrown 52 touchdowns to 16 int's. Nate has bad days on the football field, that's not exclusive to him.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
I bet MSU wished that they had put more focus on execution and not making mistakes like Iowa does, sure Iowa didnt cause all of those mistakes but it's also true that we also didnt make our own, and that has to count for something. Penalties are part of football and our coaches and players deserve credit for limiting them.
seepig
Well-Known Member
Yes we certainly can and I was happy as S*(& that we pulled it off never hear me complain about a win. Having said that "taking away" the run usually doesn't mean NEGATIVE yards in the run game. That is pathetic.
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
If you are too slow to figure out that the team that makes the least mistakes typically wins the game, then I have no hope for you. Handed us the game? Are you kidding me? Iowa took advantage of some lack of discipline by MSU and beat them fair and square. MSU sold out on the run and got burned by a very good game plan. We knew darned well that we were not going to run the ball consistently on this team, so we lulled them to sleep running the ball and busted their balls in the passing game. And, our defense showed that we were, as the stats proved during the entire season, a really, really good defense. Good grief. Learn some football.
Yeah and minus rushing yards is not on the QB unless you are talking about changing out of the running play.
Thanks for posting this Rob. Nate has played great and also had a few poor outings. It is a head game position and look at all the busts there have been at QB in college and the pros. When some posters think it is time to pull Nate he turns around and drops in a beautiful pass.
Let's let it play out for a few games and see how things work out as it could be the hawk defense is just way ahead of the offense in August.
BigD
Well-Known Member
The run strategy was brilliant. It even lulled me to sleep also.
Any day a B1G team beats an SEC team it’s a great day. It’s meets the best level when we’re the ones beating them. The second half was pretty hard to bare though. Once we started using our NFL level of a tight end late in the fourth quarter the offense finally started to click.
I want to see on a game by game basis the same offensive coordinator that shredded the Buckeyes.
vork22
Well-Known Member
I find myself shaking my head at BF bonehead calls and the lack of a running game a hell of a lot more than at Nate. Nate is a good Iowa QB and I don’t think he will cost us games. This schedule is just too tough though. Give him the 2015 schedule and he likely wins 10 games. Those of you expecting 10 wins this year are going to have a stressful season.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
The improvement will come from somewhere. Like it always does.
The schedule is not "to tough". We have been playing these teams since forever. We are as if not more talented than we have ever been.
I get the disadvantage of road games, but it's really no different than any other year.
Certainly not going to start throwing excuses around before the season even starts.
Play. Win. At the end of the season we can see how tough it was.
seepig
Well-Known Member
Yeah I do not know enough about the prep discussion regarding what looks call for which audibles. It would be interesting to see his weekly scorecard with the comments about did he or didn't he audible in or out of the right play. That would certainly tell us how his pre-snap IQ is. I've seen Nate overthrow wide open guys enough to know he gets the yips back there from time to time. Then he has GREAT games like he did against OSU 2 years ago.
When the story last summer was the junior, returning starting QB was working on becoming less introverted and more vocal that was a bad sign. This spring when KF of all people says the now senior and soon to be 3 year starter needs to lighten up and laugh that is a serious problem. Maybe KF is finally ready to acknowledge a bit of arrogance and bravado at the QB position is a good thing. I hope Stanley has a great year but wouldn't be surprised either way.
