Has Any Quarterback Improved Under Ferentz?

Tate improved, too. His numbers as a senior we're affected by his injury, but to say he wasn't better as a junior than he was as a sophomore, then I don't know what to tell you. More yards, touchdowns, slightly better completion%, fewer interceptions (cut them in half). By no statistical standard was Tate's best year his sophomore year. His slight dip as a senior can easily be explained by two things: injury and the lack of Ed Hinkel and Clinton Solomon.
 
GhostofBTT said:
Banks, Chandler, Stanzi. That's the list. It took about three seconds of mind wrestling to come up with that one.

It was not a good question by the OP, because it has an easy answer.
Click to expand...

I agree that Banks & Stanzi improved. But I might argue Chandler since he only started one season. I guess that doesn't mean that he didn't improve, just that I think the evidence for Chandler may be inconclusive due to a small sample. How would he have played in 2004 if he had another year of eligibility? We'll never know. Chandler didn't play a whole lot in 2002.
 
People who quote win loss as a way of rating a QB miss the big point. He needs people around him. For Stanzi in 2010 he was a few plays away from having a similar record as 2009, and in 2009 he was a few plays away from being 7-5 as a starter. A lot had to do with the defense in both seasons.

Stanzi was a better QB in 2010 than 2009. In 2009 of the 11 games that Stanzi played the entire game the offense scored 25.5 points. In 2010 of all the games Stanzi played the entire game the hawks averaged 28.9 points per game. The offense improved and scored more points because of Stanzi.

The defenses actually gave up only 1 point more in 2010 than 2009 (200-201), but they lost the close games instead of winning them. Also, how many pick sixes did STanzi have? 3 or 4, so there is 18 or 24 points that the D did not give up technically.

You can't use wins and losses.

I would also argue that Tate's supporting cast was much weaker each year, and he was the same if not better QB, and had he not been injured I think his senior year would have been much different.
 
hawkfan33 said:
He was less of a winner as a senior therefore worse QB. Maybe he had better stats but his intangibles rating definitely fell. And you need a QB with good intangibles, his clutch rating also fell about 50%. He couldn't finish games.
Click to expand...

OFFS.
 
GhostofBTT said:
Neither do I. That wasn't the question though. Nor is it breaking news or a worthy topic to discuss now. We already know Kyle McCann sucked, and we already know JVB is spiraling. I have no desire to discuss 8 year old topics. We can sit here pondering the meaning of righteous suffering like Bildad, Zophar, and that other guy, or we can go back to talking about Kurt's paycheck.
Click to expand...

Fine. Fire Kurt! We pay him too much. He doesn't show enough emotion on the sideline. There is that better? ;)
 
Dutch said:
Okay Ghost, so that leaves the other half of QBs who have not improved (JC, Tate, Vandenberg, and can we throw in McCann while are at it?). It still begs the question why haven't half of the the QBs regressed statistically. I don't know the answer.

OK4P - I don't get too worked up over Iowa football. I don't profess to have a narrow view of Iowa football. I only admit I don't know everything and if there is an interesting point it is worth following up. In terms if wins and losses during Stanzi's senior year, there were notable changes to the defense. The same could be said for Tate, in terms of wins and losses during his senior year. I'll accept the wins an loss stat is a team stat, not a QB stat.
So, OK4P then your conclusion or this year, so far is a total team failure? Yes?
Click to expand...

This year is simply Kurt giving the moron fans what they wanted - a replacement for O'Keefe. O'Keefe was the glue that held the team together. He had massive talent deficiencies to deal with every year because, newsflash, good ball players generally don't want to move to Iowa City. But at least O'Keefe knew the macro gameplan, which was to convert some first downs, control the clock and give the team good field position. O'Keefe dealt with adversity/injuries/suspensions/attrition pretty well and even when faced with the worst possible situations, found ways to control the clock, field position and occasionally score. Davis is terrible at each of those facets and when confronted with the talent deficiencies we have at Iowa he looks utterly clueless. If O'Keefe was still here, this team would have at most one loss.

This year is not a total team failure, it is a total coaching failure. The other coaching changes have generally been decent, but that OC change has been nothing short of an unmitigated disaster. O'Keefe, for all of his faults, understood that simplicity, repitition and execution were the keys to overcoming our offensive deficiencies. Davis has thrown that out the window and now has 16 pre snap reads that his team simply cannot execute.
 
hawkfarmer said:
People who quote win loss as a way of rating a QB miss the big point. He needs people around him. For Stanzi in 2010 he was a few plays away from having a similar record as 2009, and in 2009 he was a few plays away from being 7-5 as a starter. A lot had to do with the defense in both seasons.

Stanzi was a better QB in 2010 than 2009. In 2009 of the 11 games that Stanzi played the entire game the offense scored 25.5 points. In 2010 of all the games Stanzi played the entire game the hawks averaged 28.9 points per game. The offense improved and scored more points because of Stanzi.

The defenses actually gave up only 1 point more in 2010 than 2009 (200-201), but they lost the close games instead of winning them. Also, how many pick sixes did STanzi have? 3 or 4, so there is 18 or 24 points that the D did not give up technically.

You can't use wins and losses.

I would also argue that Tate's supporting cast was much weaker each year, and he was the same if not better QB, and had he not been injured I think his senior year would have been much different.
Click to expand...

And the opposing defenses scored fewer points in 2010 because of Stanzi than they did in 2009. Stanzi was better in 2010 than he was in 2009. The problem in 2010 was that the defense couldn't get stops in the 4th quarter, and Iowa lost a boatload of close games that they were usually winning in '09.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
And the opposing defenses scored fewer points in 2010 because of Stanzi than they did in 2009. Stanzi was better in 2010 than he was in 2009. The problem in 2010 was that the defense couldn't get stops in the 4th quarter, and Iowa lost a boatload of close games that they were usually winning in '09.
Click to expand...


As stated in the very next paragraph
 
The legendary Randy Reiners improved under Ferentz. He is responsible for KF's first win as a coach.
 
2009: Won 11 games by avg of 10.09 pts/game (Take out the anomoly of the 35-3 drubbing of ISU, and that drops to an average of 7.9 pts over 10 games)
2010: Lost 5 games by an average of 3.6 pts/game.

You can't credit 2009 or blame 2010 on Stanzi. That's a play or two per game making the difference. The stats are clear that he improved between his Junior & Senior seasons. Just because the W/L column doesn't reflect an improvement doesn't mean it's not true.
 
Dutch said:
Is it possible he was more effective at making plays, even though he turned the ball over, versus managing the game and not turning the ball over.
You can say what you want Ghost but it is still a valid question ... Do QBs improve under Ferentz?
Do you have the answer Ghost? If so please share. Provide stats to support your contribution.
Thanks!
Click to expand...

He threw for more yards, more td's and fewer ints as a senior, yet you think his jr year was better....
 
GhostofBTT said:
Are you kidding me?
Click to expand...

The teams record was better his junior year and his stats were better his senior year. I'd rather have his junior year back as wins and losses are the bottom line.

It has been said in different conversations whether true or not, that Stanzi took less chances his senior year then his junior year and the result was fewer interceptions. However, can playing it safe be argued this may have cost Iowa a few wins? I don't have the answer to that. But it's a fair question.

But QB's have as a whole, it seems, have not improved under KF's tenure as head coach. Although we'll never know, I would have loved to have seen a 2nd Brad Banks year to see how would have done.
 
SirJamaLot said:
Banks had one fabulous season and almost didn't get the chance. Tate was incredible as a sophomore, decent as a junior, and disappointing as a senior. Stanzi was awesome as a junior and only so-so as a senior. Vandy has definately regressed this season. Ferentz is incredible for developing lineman (both ways), tight ends, running backs (if they stay healthy or out of jail), and defensive backfield players, but I need someone to convince me that quarterbacks get better under his coaching staff.
Click to expand...



A short list of QBs KF developed...

Banks went from unheralded juco to AP player of the year.
Tate went from an undersized unheralded HS QB to an all big ten performer.
Chandler went from having cerebal paulsy to being an effective B10 QB.
Stanzi went from an unheralded HS QB to win three college bowl games including a BCS game and eventually the NFL.

But no, other than those four guys we havent developed any qbs at all.

Iowa has had as good or better qb play than any team in the B10 over the last dozen years.
 
Last edited:
DuffMan said:
He threw for more yards, more td's and fewer ints as a senior, yet you think his jr year was better....
Click to expand...

Aww yeah, Duff's weighing in. Only kidding big fella.
I was saying I didn't know the answer, but Ghost kindly refreshed the stats for me.
What I was saying was whether QBs in the Ferentz era improved generally. I think if you look back in this thread it has been said that Chandler, Banks and Stanzi improved. I think Tate, JC6, Vandenberg, and McCann did not. I left out Beutjer because honestly I can't remember what he did. I am not a rolling stat machine unfortunately.
But I still think it is an interesting question - while others would disagree and that is fine. Why is it that some Iowa QBs improve and others do not under Ferentz - to the tune of 50% or less.
I don't know the answer.
But I can't argue Stanzi's senior year was worse than his junior year at this point . . .
 
brhawks18 said:
The teams record was better his junior year and his stats were better his senior year. I'd rather have his junior year back as wins and losses are the bottom line.

It has been said in different conversations whether true or not, that Stanzi took less chances his senior year then his junior year and the result was fewer interceptions. However, can playing it safe be argued this may have cost Iowa a few wins? I don't have the answer to that. But it's a fair question.

But QB's have as a whole, it seems, have not improved under KF's tenure as head coach. Although we'll never know, I would have loved to have seen a 2nd Brad Banks year to see how would have done.
Click to expand...

Of course everyone would have loved to have the wins of 2009, that's obvious, but if you put the stats up without the win loss numbers and said which QB would you want? You'd take the guy with the better completion percentage, more yards, more TDS, less INTs, and a better QB rating at all times. There are 84 other scholarship players that are also responsible for wins and losses, you can't just say well because Iowa lost more games in 2010 Stanzi degressed. Iowa's offense scored more points per game in 2010 than 2009, that alone says he was better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top