CJ Bethard?

okeefe4prez said:
I keep seeing the same thing with Jake - he locks on and his placement on intermediate or deep balls with coverage around is almost always off, just by a little, but it's off.

For instance, in the first quarter, Martin-Manley had his guy beat and Jake tossed it to him and hit KMM in the numbers. Pass was okay, as it was on the receiver and catchable, but the placement was around the breadbasket and its placement was such that the defender could have made a play, which he did and it went for an incompletion. Had it been thrown to the back shoulder, which is the proper placement, it would have been a TD. Contrast that to CJ's TD pass - it was thrown right into the perfect window.

I don't know what CJ's other faults are that Kurt gets to see, but it just seems to me that on intermediate and deep passes, his placement is just very, very solid. To my eye, it looks like the best I've seen out of an Iowa QB going back to maybe Mark Vlasic and being able to toss it through that window from 30+ yards away is an absolute necessity given the way the game has changed. Stanzi had decent accuracy, but a lot of his deep passes were a result of us just having someone wide open and they didn't require really perfect throws.

It is a small difference between the guys, but I've seen enough of Jake to know that he is never going to develop that touch and accuracy. CJ has a really special arm (but I'll be the first to admit that if his head isn't right or he doesn't stay within the playbook and system, that alone isn't enough to win games).
Click to expand...

This is correct.
 
FoolishFellow said:
This is correct.
Click to expand...

Do you agree with my take on the KMM pass? The announcers called it a good pass, and if there was no defender there, it would have certainly have been a perfect pass, but with a defender there, it struck me as questionable placement. It was just off by a few feet, but it seemed like that made the difference between a TD and an incompletion. It seems like every game we see CJ throw one pass that has NFL accuracy and touch.
 
STILLBUSTER said:
Of course it's not a debate -- debate means an open exchange of rational arguments, ideally, with the most logical, substantiated argument prevailing and being accepted as the better conclusion, resolution, or course of action.

This is an authoritarian autocracy that ignores evidence and reason.
Click to expand...

Time to dust off the dictionary.
 
okeefe4prez said:
I keep seeing the same thing with Jake - he locks on and his placement on intermediate or deep balls with coverage around is almost always off, just by a little, but it's off.

For instance, in the first quarter, Martin-Manley had his guy beat and Jake tossed it to him and hit KMM in the numbers. Pass was okay, as it was on the receiver and catchable, but the placement was around the breadbasket and its placement was such that the defender could have made a play, which he did and it went for an incompletion. Had it been thrown to the back shoulder, which is the proper placement, it would have been a TD. Contrast that to CJ's TD pass - it was thrown right into the perfect window.

I don't know what CJ's other faults are that Kurt gets to see, but it just seems to me that on intermediate and deep passes, his placement is just very, very solid. To my eye, it looks like the best I've seen out of an Iowa QB going back to maybe Mark Vlasic and being able to toss it through that window from 30+ yards away is an absolute necessity given the way the game has changed. Stanzi had decent accuracy, but a lot of his deep passes were a result of us just having someone wide open and they didn't require really perfect throws.

It is a small difference between the guys, but I've seen enough of Jake to know that he is never going to develop that touch and accuracy. CJ has a really special arm (but I'll be the first to admit that if his head isn't right or he doesn't stay within the playbook and system, that alone isn't enough to win games).
Click to expand...

you are exactly correct, ok4p. It's funny that some loon gave you a thumbs down, as you precisely describe the difference. A weak-armed qb cannot control their accuracy at the end of the throw because they must put all of their effort into distance. CJ not only has a much, much stronger arm (it's so not even close) he can pin point the ball on deeper throws. I'll give you a thumbs up, ok4p.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
you are exactly correct, ok4p. It's funny that some loon gave you a thumbs down, as you precisely describe the difference. A weak-armed qb cannot control their accuracy at the end of the throw because they must put all of their effort into distance. CJ not only has a much, much stronger arm (it's so not even close) he can pin point the ball on deeper throws. I'll give you a thumbs up, ok4p.
Click to expand...

I got a thumbs down for making fun of my own vocabulary. Either that or I was the victim of a fat finger for the 24th time.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
you are exactly correct, ok4p. It's funny that some loon gave you a thumbs down, as you precisely describe the difference. A weak-armed qb cannot control their accuracy at the end of the throw because they must put all of their effort into distance. CJ not only has a much, much stronger arm (it's so not even close) he can pin point the ball on deeper throws. I'll give you a thumbs up, ok4p.
Click to expand...

ICHawk24, a known member of the Delta Bravo Brigade along with Sparky, gave it to me. It makes him feel like a big man.
 
PCHawk said:
I got a thumbs down for making fun of my own vocabulary. Either that or I was the victim of a fat finger for the 24th time.
Click to expand...

The Sheldons around here keep giving me thumbs down when I use sarcasm. I wish I could hold up a sign.

94f0cb21bd56b93e42b4e712200eced6.jpg
 
Rudock is generally satisfactory. And when the rest of the team is ok, that is what the hawks are - Generally Satisfactory.

He can't change a game.
 
PCHawk said:
Yea I don't get it. Is it because they misunderstand the post or do they just really hate jokes?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I really don't know. I've given 5 thumbs down and they were all because I hit the wrong button on my tablet. One was for someone saying in a baseball thread something like, "Jeter was good and good for the game." Thumbs down from me. I'm sure that was a head-scratcher for the person that posted it.

I really don't see a reason for giving a thumbs down. I'm enough of an asthole that I can respond to idiots without hitting the thumbs down. If they want to respond to me, big deal. It's a message board. Not like anything serious.
 
NCHawker said:
Rudock is generally satisfactory. And when the rest of the team is ok, that is what the hawks are - Generally Satisfactory.

He can't change a game.
Click to expand...

I've honestly thought that he gives us the best chance to not lose to bad teams, because CJ's more of a risk taker and Jake can move the team between the 30's, and let our defense win it. I think he gives us less of a chance to beat anyone good. We'll see the next two weeks, I guess.
 
99topdawg said:
Yeah, I really don't know. I've given 5 thumbs down and they were all because I hit the wrong button on my tablet. One was for someone saying in a baseball thread something like, "Jeter was good and good for the game." Thumbs down from me. I'm sure that was a head-scratcher for the person that posted it.

I really don't see a reason for giving a thumbs down. I'm enough of an asthole that I can respond to idiots without hitting the thumbs down. If they want to respond to me, big deal. It's a message board. Not like anything serious.
Click to expand...

I think you can hit the thumbs up after and it changes it for you. I might be wrong though. I was kinda joking about the fat fingers but if you've done it 5 times, it's very possible other people are doing it too.
 
99topdawg said:
I've honestly thought that he gives us the best chance to not lose to bad teams, because CJ's more of a risk taker and Jake can move the team between the 30's, and let our defense win it. I think he gives us less of a chance to beat anyone good. We'll see the next two weeks, I guess.
Click to expand...

I would argue the opposite. By having a QB not be a risk taker our margin of victory is very small and that is one reason why Kirk has far and away the worst record as double digit favorites then any HC in college football, ever. He doesn't have his teams play to win but play not to lose. Which is why he doesn't play the most talented players but the players he feels like has the least amount of risk which shrinks your Marin for error. What I see is that he would rather have a RB who fumbles 3 times a season an has no chance of breaking a long run for a TD, then one that fumbles once a game but is good for 2 long TD runs a game.
 
PCHawk said:
I think you can hit the thumbs up after and it changes it for you. I might be wrong though. I was kinda joking about the fat fingers but if you've done it 5 times, it's very possible other people are doing it too.
Click to expand...

Nope. There is a cabal of Delta Bravos who hit me with a slew of thumbs downs.
 
There is a reason Kirk wanted to keep Jake C, over Stanzi. Stanzi was good to a pick 6 every other game his 1st year.
 
pmchawk said:
I would argue the opposite. By having a QB not be a risk taker our margin of victory is very small and that is one reason why Kirk has far and away the worst record as double digit favorites then any HC in college football, ever. He doesn't have his teams play to win but play not to lose. Which is why he doesn't play the most talented players but the players he feels like has the least amount of risk which shrinks your Marin for error. What I see is that he would rather have a RB who fumbles 3 times a season an has no chance of breaking a long run for a TD, then one that fumbles once a game but is good for 2 long TD runs a game.
Click to expand...

I gave this guy a thumbs up
 
pmchawk said:
I would argue the opposite. By having a QB not be a risk taker our margin of victory is very small and that is one reason why Kirk has far and away the worst record as double digit favorites then any HC in college football, ever. He doesn't have his teams play to win but play not to lose. Which is why he doesn't play the most talented players but the players he feels like has the least amount of risk which shrinks your Marin for error. What I see is that he would rather have a RB who fumbles 3 times a season an has no chance of breaking a long run for a TD, then one that fumbles once a game but is good for 2 long TD runs a game.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I'm not sure you understood what I was saying. When a player doesn't throw picks, makes the safe pass, and moves the ball to a degree, he's not going to LOSE the game. I said nothing about winning the game. This is why I have always thought that Ferentz was playing Jake. He wants someone to play safe in the passing game, hand the ball off, stick to the plan, and let the defense win it. If my post led you to believe that this is who I think should be playing (and after I reread what I posted, I can see where you got that idea), just why I thought Ferentz was playing Jake.
 
99topdawg said:
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I'm not sure you understood what I was saying. When a player doesn't throw picks, makes the safe pass, and moves the ball to a degree, he's not going to LOSE the game. I said nothing about winning the game. This is why I have always thought that Ferentz was playing Jake. He wants someone to play safe in the passing game, hand the ball off, stick to the plan, and let the defense win it. If my post led you to believe that this is who I think should be playing (and after I reread what I posted, I can see where you got that idea), just why I thought Ferentz was playing Jake.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with this. In Kirk's world if you don't do anything to lose the game, you will win. That's just not the case.
 
99topdawg said:
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I'm not sure you understood what I was saying. When a player doesn't throw picks, makes the safe pass, and moves the ball to a degree, he's not going to LOSE the game. I said nothing about winning the game. This is why I have always thought that Ferentz was playing Jake. He wants someone to play safe in the passing game, hand the ball off, stick to the plan, and let the defense win it. If my post led you to believe that this is who I think should be playing (and after I reread what I posted, I can see where you got that idea), just why I thought Ferentz was playing Jake.
Click to expand...
I did word my response badly. I was meaning to argue the thought process for playing Jake over CJ. I agree with that being a big factor why Kirk sticks with Jake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top