Change the Narrative on Stanley

[HuckFinn]

Don't confuse me with the other guy who posted repeat negative stuff

I certainly do not see you as a negative poster. If I implied that, I apologize. I am just personally curious about comparisons among Nate’s errors and what we may routinely see from many other QB’s.

 

[HuckFinn]

How does this make it acceptable for our qb though? Doesn't matter what other qb are doing, and Nate is supposedly high on the draft board, which makes it even worse. Shouldn't someone that is supposedly getting drafted high have consistent accuracy? Another thing that is hard to see on TV, but very easy to see at the games is that he often locks on to a guy, and fails to see another receiver that is breaking wide open. He will not throw into tight windows, and anticipate the receiver breaking open. This could be a result of the coaching staff preaching no turnovers, but a qb has to be able to thread the needle. Hell the freshman for Miami of Ohio did it. The pass Nate threw to Smith-Marsette that he dropped when he was held, was a great pass. He has got to have that accuracy consistently though, and by this point in his career you either have it or you don't.

But you are missing the point. I am fully aware that Nate makes mistakes, Duh. I just view most of his errors as pretty common among Power 5 QB’s. I am not making excuses for him. I guess I am convinced that he is human and maybe we expect too much from him and condemn him beyond what is reasonable.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Until Stanley completes 80% of his passes and does a State Farm commercial better than Aaron Rogers, there are haters on this board who will just humm the same stupid shit. We are currently watching a QB who has the chance to statistically be right there with Chuck Long, gents. And, prob will be the highest draft pick since Chuck. For Christ sake, can we have some perspective and appreciation? Is he perfect? No. Is he one of the greatest QBs in Iowa history? Likely yes. Appreciate that.

 

[HuckFinn]

Also doesn't show how many of those passes are dump offs, which he does a lot. Who isn't accurate while dumping the ball off, or throwing less than 10 yards? 7 completions Saturday were at or behind the line of scrimmage. He is not accurate. Especially over 10 yards, and this isn't even debatable. He simply cannot stretch the field, and this is going to kill us against a decent defense. Watch on almost every completion the receiver has to slow down, stop, or adjust his route to catch the ball. Rarely do they catch the ball in stride so they can get the most yards after the catch. His deep ball is not good, nor has it ever been. Perfect example the pass to Ragaini that was a sure td that he had to slow down and wait on.

Did you see the average yards per catch for Iowa in this game? Google it. Talked about it on post game show with Dolph and Eddie. Again, you make claims that are patently false.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Also doesn't show how many of those passes are dump offs, which he does a lot. Who isn't accurate while dumping the ball off, or throwing less than 10 yards? 7 completions Saturday were at or behind the line of scrimmage. He is not accurate. Especially over 10 yards, and this isn't even debatable. He simply cannot stretch the field, and this is going to kill us against a decent defense. Watch on almost every completion the receiver has to slow down, stop, or adjust his route to catch the ball. Rarely do they catch the ball in stride so they can get the most yards after the catch. His deep ball is not good, nor has it ever been. Perfect example the pass to Ragaini that was a sure td that he had to slow down and wait on.

<<Perfect example the pass to Ragaini that was a sure TD that he had to slow down and wait on>>

This--perfectly--reveals how little you know, and how unibservant you are. If he leads on that pass, the safety--the one that ran into and helped tackle Ragaini-- would have taken his head off at the shoulders.

 

[Seth53]

I'm old school I guess and being a 21-year Navy career guy, our favorite saying was:

"It takes 100 atta-boys to make up for one ahh-shitter.

He's had nice games but the PSU and Wisconsin games, which he blew, still bother me.
It's not his physical attributes that worry me....it's the mental ones.

 

[CP87]

The pass to reganni (sp?) would have been a TD.
.

People keeping saying that as if it is fact, but I don't see it. Ragaini barely broke stride, if at all. He was tackled by the high safety coming over (had to put a move on that guy at the

I'm old school I guess and being a 21-year Navy career guy, our favorite saying was:

"It takes 100 atta-boys to make up for one ahh-shitter.

He's had nice games but the PSU and Wisconsin games, which he blew, still bother me.
It's not his physical attributes that worry me....it's the mental ones.

He did struggle mightily in the PSU game, and he had the goal-line int.

The Wisconsin game was one of his highest QBRs last year, and he was pretty good throughout. He missed a wide-open Hock on a cross in the 4Q with a lead, and that would have really helped keep the ball away from Wisc. But Stanley didn't blow that game. Two ghastly TOs by the punt return team, some shaky play-calls in the red zone, and an inability to stop Taylor cost us that game.

 

[HawkPrdatr40]

Sometimes old narratives have a tough time changing. It could be because people are lazy thinkers, talking heads don't do their research, or people just live and die by the same narrative so they can say, "I told you so".

Well, Stanley critics, the old narrative that Stanley is "not accurate" needs a little fact check and update.

Below are the facts for the past 6 games. 119-182 for 65% completion rate, 1340 yards passing, 13 TD and only 2 INTs. Awesome numbers for what amounts to a half of a season. Sure he may overthrow or under throw on occasion but what QB does not? The fact that he is clicking at 65% completion rate and has only thrown 2 INTs in this time period should change the narrative by now. I like a QB who completes it to the right color jersey.

View attachment 5539

He does some of the most ridiculous things, In game. Saturday night on his intentional grounding he had Smith Wide Open not a opponent in SIGHT, which obviously he didn’t see but elects to fire the ball to nobody. Still have no clue how he didn’t see Smith???? It’s these things that concern me. One play can cost you.. He needs to be smarter!!!

 

[Hawk1960]

He does some of the most ridiculous things, In game. Saturday night on his intentional grounding he had Smith Wide Open not a opponent in SIGHT, which obviously he didn’t see but elects to fire the ball to nobody. Still have no clue how he didn’t see Smith???? It’s these things that concern me. One play can cost you.. He needs to be smarter!!!

30 rows up in the stands you can see those things easily. It's the same reason the OC and DC often sit in the press box, you can see so much more. At ground level, with 10 guys in front of you that are averaging 300 lbs and just as tall as you are you are not going to see it the same way.

 

[NikeHawk21]

I'm old school I guess and being a 21-year Navy career guy, our favorite saying was:

"It takes 100 atta-boys to make up for one ahh-shitter.

He's had nice games but the PSU and Wisconsin games, which he blew, still bother me.
It's not his physical attributes that worry me....it's the mental ones.

If you are implying that he lost us the Wisconsin game last year you are dead wrong. Two special teams turnovers, one that gifted UW a TD are what costed us that game.

 

[InGoodCo]

If you are implying that he lost us the Wisconsin game last year you are dead wrong. Two special teams turnovers, one that gifted UW a TD are what costed us that game.

Yeah, hard to lay that on him, but as a huge Stanley fan, even I can say he didn't win us the game either and I think that's what a lot of people want to see, the gamer in him, coming up in the clutch and taking Iowa to another level...but IMO, we've seen it quite a bit, they just chose to ignore those games. You can't. Just like we can't ignore the WI performances either.

IMO, if you are disappointed with Stanley after Saturday you're nuts, I thought he looked really sharp.

 

[SteveGarvey1]

Also looks like Nate's lost 5 or 10 lbs. His feet looked quicker and faster on those runs and, though he'll never be Brad Banks, the threat to take off and run for 10 yards or whatever adds another dimension to his game.

 

[InGoodCo]

Also looks like Nate's lost 5 or 10 lbs. His feet looked quicker and faster on those runs and, though he'll never be Brad Banks, the threat to take off and run for 10 yards or whatever adds another dimension to his game.

He had more yards on the ground then Heisman hopeful Adrian Martinez.

 

[pythagoras]

He had more yards on the ground then Heisman hopeful Adrian Martinez.

*Former Heisman hopeful. That ended on Saturday

 

[cincyhawk]

Until Stanley completes 80% of his passes and does a State Farm commercial better than Aaron Rogers, there are haters on this board who will just humm the same stupid shit. We are currently watching a QB who has the chance to statistically be right there with Chuck Long, gents. And, prob will be the highest draft pick since Chuck. For Christ sake, can we have some perspective and appreciation? Is he perfect? No. Is he one of the greatest QBs in Iowa history? Likely yes. Appreciate that.

I think he may be the best QB in Iowa history. He threw 26 tds to probably the worst receiving corps Iowa has had, ever. Thank goodness we had good TEs.

 

[NikeHawk21]

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

Hey...if he's ahead of Brock Purdy than he's really doing something.

 

[Northside Hawk]

I keep looking for Gabbert on this list.

Looking, looking.....

.. Maybe Nate was the better QB on the field Saturday night.

As if there was ever a doubt. And that Miami secondary had a player with both inside information and extra motivation to do well.

 

[Hawk1960]

Good stuff. Nothing better than facts to flip the narrative. You'll get crickets from the critics on this.

 

[deanvogs]

Good stuff. Nothing better than facts to flip the narrative. You'll get crickets from the critics on this.

It is hard to take people serious when they do nothing but bash when it is really not even debatable that Nate had a decent game. Did he miss some throws? Of course he did. Did he do better than most other college QB's week 1? Yep, he sure did.