Howe: Top 5 Questions Following Hawkeye Spring Ball
- Thread starter RobHowe
- Start date
AreWeThereYet
Well-Known Member
We lost our top three "go to" receiving targets. I'll go with that as the top concern. Nick Easley was underrated. Like Ed Hinklel, he had knack for finding the open spot and holding onto the ball in traffic.
On the positive side, there doesn't seem to be a lack of guys ready to step it up. Stanley is a senior quarterback and should be able to spread the ball around until the next go to guys emerge.
There have been years in the past when the number of potential receiving targets was pretty thin. 2016 comes to mind as one of the more recent.
On the positive side, there doesn't seem to be a lack of guys ready to step it up. Stanley is a senior quarterback and should be able to spread the ball around until the next go to guys emerge.
There have been years in the past when the number of potential receiving targets was pretty thin. 2016 comes to mind as one of the more recent.
RobHowe
Administrator
He played it in HS. I saw him play it live.
I think he’s going to be very good at it in time.
1) WR seems the obvious biggest question mark. It has to have improvement for the team to improve. But it hasn’t really shined for quite a while. So, even though there are positive rumblings, it’s a wait and see category.
2) RB. Surprised this wasn’t one of the 5. It’s an OK group, but the upside is questionable. And in Iowa’s offense, that could be a problem.
3) Safety depth. Satisfied with the starters. But the 2-deeps are the question marks.
4) The interior defensive line. The D-line is a solid group, but could be an elite one, and may need to be given the above questions. Nixon staking a firm claim in the 2-deeps would make me feel so much better about that potential.
5) For linebackers and cash I feel no concern about the talent. The only question marks are the specific names in the 2-deeps.
6) I’m strangely confident about the O line. Kirk doesn’t often play up a new starter at Center like he has Linderbaum, so I’m thinking he’s going to be pretty solid, with a solid backup in Banwart. As upperclassmen, the Paulsens are likely to be capable at filling in the gaps. Add 2 future pros in their 3rd year starting at tackle and an able apprentice in Kallenberger and that looks to be a solid 7-man rotation. Barring injury and early chemistry adjustments, this could be the mildest question mark.
7) TE and QB. TE is a position we’ve come to take for granted as having a certain level of competence. Think that will be there but we all know not at a level to carry the team as it has been for a few years. Stanley has also had a level of competence. Find it difficult to make this position a question mark even though it’s important that his production improves. WR and RB will be big factors in Stanley’s statistical improvement.
2) RB. Surprised this wasn’t one of the 5. It’s an OK group, but the upside is questionable. And in Iowa’s offense, that could be a problem.
3) Safety depth. Satisfied with the starters. But the 2-deeps are the question marks.
4) The interior defensive line. The D-line is a solid group, but could be an elite one, and may need to be given the above questions. Nixon staking a firm claim in the 2-deeps would make me feel so much better about that potential.
5) For linebackers and cash I feel no concern about the talent. The only question marks are the specific names in the 2-deeps.
6) I’m strangely confident about the O line. Kirk doesn’t often play up a new starter at Center like he has Linderbaum, so I’m thinking he’s going to be pretty solid, with a solid backup in Banwart. As upperclassmen, the Paulsens are likely to be capable at filling in the gaps. Add 2 future pros in their 3rd year starting at tackle and an able apprentice in Kallenberger and that looks to be a solid 7-man rotation. Barring injury and early chemistry adjustments, this could be the mildest question mark.
7) TE and QB. TE is a position we’ve come to take for granted as having a certain level of competence. Think that will be there but we all know not at a level to carry the team as it has been for a few years. Stanley has also had a level of competence. Find it difficult to make this position a question mark even though it’s important that his production improves. WR and RB will be big factors in Stanley’s statistical improvement.
Last edited:
DeanMarshall
Well-Known Member
Well, I guess I have to stand up for the Wide receiver group.
Both Brandon Smith and ISM were improving, almost every game, last year.
ISM made some great catches, lead the B10 in Kick returns and Brandon also was coming on, big time.
Nico R will be just what the Doctor ordered, as a replacement for Nick Easley.
Perhaps more speed, at WR, than in recent memory. WIth a very good QB to get them the ball.
Both Brandon Smith and ISM were improving, almost every game, last year.
ISM made some great catches, lead the B10 in Kick returns and Brandon also was coming on, big time.
Nico R will be just what the Doctor ordered, as a replacement for Nick Easley.
Perhaps more speed, at WR, than in recent memory. WIth a very good QB to get them the ball.
karras
Well-Known Member
I think fans have consistently under-rated the backups. All-pro Kittle's backups drafted higher than himself. KF called Hesse his most complete football player yet his backup will prove himself a superior game-changer. etc etc
A 5 year trend of improved recruiting will either show dividends or the coaches will have squandered their own achievements.
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
Oddly, I'd have to put QB #1. I think the other positions will shake themselves out over the spring and summer, but, this team will only go as far as its senior QB takes it.
Nate's stat line from last season is stellar, but, its also deceiving. The big question is, will we see a new Stanley that steps up for the big games and elevates the players around him, or, will we see the same Stanley that appears reluctant and uncomfortable as a take-charge leader, and struggles to adapt when the pressure's on?
Nate's stat line from last season is stellar, but, its also deceiving. The big question is, will we see a new Stanley that steps up for the big games and elevates the players around him, or, will we see the same Stanley that appears reluctant and uncomfortable as a take-charge leader, and struggles to adapt when the pressure's on?
Good list. I would add finding a capable place kicker as no. 8
AreWeThereYet
Well-Known Member
I also tend to think Linderbomb is going to be the real deal, rather than Banwart lacking the talent to be center. It looks like a seven man rotation with redshirt freshmen Plumb, Ince, and Jenkins knocking at the door.
RobHowe
Administrator
I thought about running back. No doubt the running game must improve. I just saw it being an OL problem more than a RB issue. But there definitely were times when the RBs lost their way when holes were there.
I think this RB group will be much improved. They had like zero experience going into last season. The top three guys all saw time and improved. Geil even got his feet wet. Byrd was broken in a bit during this spring. Goodson gets here next month.
I'm pretty encouraged by this RB group.
Will QB be show time in the games that matter most?
Will Kirk be able to show up big in the games that matter most, out coaching, rather than wilting to 8-4, 7-5? Fumbling away opportunities?
Will Iowa's punting game be a +?
Will the running game be able to take pressure off NS, KF, BF?
Will Kirk be able to show up big in the games that matter most, out coaching, rather than wilting to 8-4, 7-5? Fumbling away opportunities?
Will Iowa's punting game be a +?
Will the running game be able to take pressure off NS, KF, BF?
Like what I’ve seen of Byrd. Goodson is an X factor. Is he good enough to break through the experience barrier?
