Canzeri transfer rumblings????

tm3308 said:
Lets not forget that fullbacks at Air Force get used quite differently than at most places. They run the same triple offense that Navy and Georgia Tech do, where the fullback is the feature back (see: Jonathan Dwyer at GT a few years ago).

Is Weisman a special back? No. But he's more than serviceable behind a line of this caliber, and he's currently our best option.
Click to expand...

Jonathan Dwyer was a big tailback used as a fullback, where as Weisman is a fullback being used as a tailback. And Dwyer is now playing tailback in the NFL (though he is now injured and with my favorite team-Steelers.) But Air Force does use the fullback as a featured back, but they are still fullbacks.

Now, I do not agree with you that Weisman is our best option (I believe Daniels is); but even if he is, that would be a bigger problem than not playing someone who actually is a tailback.
 
theboat said:
878522_you-mad-bro_jpg396131ba2a284a9cda2a704c44a5aa26
Click to expand...

3oybsh.jpg
 
ArvadaHawk said:
Let's not forget that not one BIG coach (including Ferentz) recruited Weisman out of high school as a tailback (Ferentz didn't even recruit him as a fullback, that I'm aware of.) That would be because he is not a BIG caliber tailback. He doesn't have the speed or lateral quickness/ability to be a tailback. In fact, he went to Air Force as a Fullback; but now he is Iowa's best tailback? I am talking about having a tailback with the speed to turn those gash block holes into touchdown runs instead of 25 to 30 yard runs and being caught from behind. This just cost's Iowa points on plays that should be scoring plays.

If you were a tailback being recruited by Iowa and you saw a fullback getting all of the tailback carries, would you really consider Iowa? I wouldn't. There is a part of me that thinks KF used MW so much yesterday because he know the fans like him.
Click to expand...

ArvadaHawk said:
Jonathan Dwyer was a big tailback used as a fullback, where as Weisman is a fullback being used as a tailback. And Dwyer is now playing tailback in the NFL (though he is now injured and with my favorite team-Steelers.) But Air Force does use the fullback as a featured back, but they are still fullbacks.

Now, I do not agree with you that Weisman is our best option (I believe Daniels is); but even if he is, that would be a bigger problem than not playing someone who actually is a tailback.
Click to expand...

You believe Daniels is our best option based off what??? The one game he played in which Weisman had a much better game and better stats.

You can argue potential all you want but based on results and actual stats, Weisman is our best option right now.
 
ibahawkeye said:
You believe Daniels is our best option based off what??? The one game he played in which Weisman had a much better game and better stats.

You can argue potential all you want but based on results and actual stats, Weisman is our best option right now.
Click to expand...

One could also question if he can pass block as well. I don't think he had to do that, but maybe once; and he didn't really do much blocking (he didn't have to I that particular play).
 
Eda said:
What's your gripe here? That they ran him 30 times, and much more than the other backs; or they ran him 30 times vs a FCS team? Your hatred towards KirFer is making you run in circles.

And the Hebrew Hammer got so many runs because he was the only guy consistently getting the needed yards. He was used so much late in the game to grind it out and run the clock.

I just have to ask... Did you even watch the game?
Click to expand...

Both, how in the world are those two things contradictory in your mind? They go hand in hand genius.

To say he was the only one getting consistent yards is nonsense. Daniels was averaging 5ypc too and Im sure Bullock wasn't far behind.

Im not against Weisman at all, but they absolutely did not need to run anyone 30 times against an FCS team, period. Its stupid.
 
This is was a tweet from BCCanzeri (his father???) today:

RT @BCCanzeri
if anyone paid attention to JC's FB, he loves it at Iowa and has no plans on leaving. I love Iowa!

Good to hear! Now let's hope Jordan gets some more touches!
 
ArvadaHawk said:
Well, he is being featured, by the only coach in the BIG that would feature, as a tailback...he just shouldn't be. We shall see. I believe you'll see Daniels as the #1 tailback by season's end. Unless Ferentz still thinks playing the less talented players is the way to win games.
Click to expand...

Let it go man...or let it bother you...not changing most opinions...which are to the contrary
 
Billso said:
Weird, I didn't know sharing facts that contradict your position are "knee jerk reactions protecting Ferentz".

Weisman had 30 of the 51 RB carries, or 59%. Meaning 41% of the carries weren't Weisman, so your accusation of not "splitting up the carries" is factually nonsense. But in all fairness, isn't 59% high? Let's look around at some other teams yesterday:

Ohio State: Hall had 13 of the 30 RB carries (43%)
Wisconsin: White 22-47 (47%)
Nebraska: Abdullah 17-39 (44%)
Northwestern: Green 14-32 (44%)

Definitely spread the ball around more. But those games were blowouts, with more opportunities for backups. Iowa's, unfortunately, was not; so let's look at more comparable games, close contests where the starters played longer:

Michigan: Toussaint 22-26 (85%)
Notre Dame: Carlisle 12-18 (66%)
Arkansas: Collins 24-47 (51%)
Texas: Gray 13-21 (62%)
BYU: Williams 30-54 (56%)
WSU: Mason 11-15 (73%)
USC: Madden 32-38 (84%)
Georgia: Gurley 30-48 (63%)
South Carolina: Davis 16-20 (80%)

Interesting. Do these coaches seriously not grasp the numerouse benefits of splitting up the carries?
Click to expand...

LOL what other teams did is absolutely irrelevant unless they happen to have the same running back situation as Iowa.

When you have 4 fairly good but no great backs one guy with 30 and the next closest with 10 is not the way to go IMO.

Disagree if you want but your numbers don't contradict my point in the slightest.
 
RocknRollface said:
LOL what other teams did is absolutely irrelevant unless they happen to have the same running back situation as Iowa.

When you have 4 fairly good but no great backs one guy with 30 and the next closest with 10 is not the way to go IMO.

Disagree if you want but your numbers don't contradict my point in the slightest.
Click to expand...

implied-facepalm1.jpg
 
imported_ankle23 said:
i had a fact behind my post. Weisman leads the RBs in carries, yards and YPC. That is rare that the leader carrier also has the leading YPC if he is sharing carries. Because, if one guy has 5 carries, and has one long one, it skews the YPC up. (i thought i'd better explain that to you, given you think a factual post is a 'knee jerk reax).

what i think is stupid is calling a guy out as a knee jerk reactionary when he is posting fact. especially when the guy calling another guys post as stupid and then not posting any fact to back it up, only subjectivity i.e. knee jerk emotion.
Click to expand...

That can just as easily work the other way. The more opportunities a back gets the more chances to break long gains which greatly increase YPC. I thought I would explain that to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top