HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
Billso, you do good work man.
I have a tendency to lean a little too black and gold homerish and optimistic...you are logic incarnate.
Well played sir.
If CJ would have played most of this game......
- Thread starter HaydenHawk56
- Start date
Billso, you do good work man.
I have a tendency to lean a little too black and gold homerish and optimistic...you are logic incarnate.
Well played sir.
SheagleHawk
Well-Known Member
That's hardly an accurate way to look at it. CJ had to come into the middle of games against Wisconsin, Nebraska and LSU after not even getting close to the number of reps with the 1's as Jake got in practice, and obviously games. How many sisters of the poor did Jake get before he actually faced a decent team?
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
If this I true, then that is a valid point. However, I'm okay with a touchdown pass on 3rd down. If not for Powell juggling a perfect pass, it was a touchdown.
RocknRollface
Well-Known Member
I have been watching Iowa FB for 40 years and this scenario is the same every year by "knowledgeable fans". Every year is the same, we need start the backup QB or WR or RB because these morons know more that all of the coaches. Jake has a QB rating of 134.7 and has no picks in two games, he has completed 68.8 percent of his passes and has a 50 yard TD pass. He is in the top 25 QB's in the country of which only 5 have no picks. He has been sacked only 1 time. Just like every year, Hawk fans will complain if their ice cream is too cold. Jake will get better and better and his dismal 6.2 completion yards per reception will get better and better. CJ has a lot of talent but he won't be starting anytime soon barring a JR injury. It's nice to have a quality backup waiting in the wings.
If and butts were candy and nuts. Don't get me wrong ... I would love to see CJ emerge but sometimes life isn't fair and when you are 11-30 with 1 TD and 2 INT you are probably not going to be the #1 QB.
Rudock underthrowing wide open recievers usually cost us 4 points last year. This year it looks like it will cost us 7. He missed Vandeberg deep twice when he was no more open than Powell was with Beathard. I made Canzeri turn around to catch it when he would have scored. If Beathard can make those throws he would have to screw up everywhere else pretty bad to counter all those points scored. That doesn't even take into account all the times we have to punt after 3 strait completions.
One thing for sure is it's allot better to want to see the backup because you think he's really good then it was in 08 when we wanted to see the backup because the starter is really bad. Imagine all the broken toes our recievers would have if we ran this offense when JC was at the helm.
One thing for sure is it's allot better to want to see the backup because you think he's really good then it was in 08 when we wanted to see the backup because the starter is really bad. Imagine all the broken toes our recievers would have if we ran this offense when JC was at the helm.
WinOneThisCentury
Well-Known Member
Responding to the inspired football comment...
1) If you don't think the defense played inspired football for the last 57 minutes, you didn't watch the freaking game. The first drive they were a little flat footed, but after that, they held Ball State in check the whole game. Ball State got the two field goals because of a fumble at our 20, and a horrible roughing the punter call. That should have been a three and out and helped change the game a bit. Then right behind that, you get the fumble and the other field goal. Our defense played great football. The defense really gave up just 3 points against Ball State...how can you say that wasn't inspired.
2) Our offense just makes too many mistakes right now. Whether it's a missed block, missed seam by the RB, dropped pass (Kreiger-Coble this game, Hamilton against UNI), or missed receivers deep when they are open. Then the fumble killed us too (their touchdown)...you can't be this inconsistent and win against good competition. Kreiger-Coble needs to make that play at the two yard line for a first down...a must. We needed a touchdown there and first and ten at the 2 gets us there. It was a huge play to have that knocked out of his hands...put the ball away.
3) Whether we like it or not, teams are saying you aren't going to run against us. Ball State's safeties were moving forward at the snap and they had 8 there most of the game when we still had time to actually be balanced. They had their corners in man most of the game and their safeties supported the run. We have to throw the ball and I don't care if Rudock has to throw 60 times...if that is what the defense is giving us. Everyone knows Iowa wants to be physical and run the ball...so that's what they are taking away.
4) I'm not sure at this point whether we have one true Division 1 running back on our team. After watching other backs yesterday, our backs don't play anything like a top RB. Who has created anything? Who has made a sharp cut against the grain or made guys miss. No one...
That being said, I think Canzeri and Daniels give us the best chance. Get out of this RB by Committee and give guys a quarter to demonstrate what they can do. That's what we did with Wegher and Robinson...and it worked well. This rotation is terrible. Pick your top two and give them opportunities to solidify what you have...if they don't get it done...bring in the next two.
1) If you don't think the defense played inspired football for the last 57 minutes, you didn't watch the freaking game. The first drive they were a little flat footed, but after that, they held Ball State in check the whole game. Ball State got the two field goals because of a fumble at our 20, and a horrible roughing the punter call. That should have been a three and out and helped change the game a bit. Then right behind that, you get the fumble and the other field goal. Our defense played great football. The defense really gave up just 3 points against Ball State...how can you say that wasn't inspired.
2) Our offense just makes too many mistakes right now. Whether it's a missed block, missed seam by the RB, dropped pass (Kreiger-Coble this game, Hamilton against UNI), or missed receivers deep when they are open. Then the fumble killed us too (their touchdown)...you can't be this inconsistent and win against good competition. Kreiger-Coble needs to make that play at the two yard line for a first down...a must. We needed a touchdown there and first and ten at the 2 gets us there. It was a huge play to have that knocked out of his hands...put the ball away.
3) Whether we like it or not, teams are saying you aren't going to run against us. Ball State's safeties were moving forward at the snap and they had 8 there most of the game when we still had time to actually be balanced. They had their corners in man most of the game and their safeties supported the run. We have to throw the ball and I don't care if Rudock has to throw 60 times...if that is what the defense is giving us. Everyone knows Iowa wants to be physical and run the ball...so that's what they are taking away.
4) I'm not sure at this point whether we have one true Division 1 running back on our team. After watching other backs yesterday, our backs don't play anything like a top RB. Who has created anything? Who has made a sharp cut against the grain or made guys miss. No one...
That being said, I think Canzeri and Daniels give us the best chance. Get out of this RB by Committee and give guys a quarter to demonstrate what they can do. That's what we did with Wegher and Robinson...and it worked well. This rotation is terrible. Pick your top two and give them opportunities to solidify what you have...if they don't get it done...bring in the next two.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Like I've posted before: IMO, the speedy wide receivers Iowa now have came for Davis' philosophy and the potential of being thrown to by Beathard. Not because of KF's offensive philosophy nor Rudock's arm strength and confidence.
Some of these receivers who have been turned into intermediate route runners and run blockers will jump ship. And Iowa will, again, have a dearth of quality WRs.
Some of these receivers who have been turned into intermediate route runners and run blockers will jump ship. And Iowa will, again, have a dearth of quality WRs.
Last edited:
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
<<a guy who can make every throw>>
His career completion flies in the face of that.
I would "like" to CJ get several series of downs per game. The problem is you then expose TWO QBs to injury.
QB isn't the problem, anyway. The "problem" is up in the booth...
I would be allot more optimistic about his yards per attempt improving after playing UNI and Ball State if he was a first year starter instead of a second year starter.
I'm really hoping his game turns around after that comeback because I highly doubt those last two drives were the only times we had recievers open downfield. I also think the things he does well is more than enough to make up for his inaccuracy on the deep ball as long as he is actually throwing the ball downfield.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
nm.....
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
You mean the guy on the sidelines chewing the gum, don't you?
Your "exposing two qbs to injury" theory only works if they are on the field at the same time. We would still be exposing one qb to injury per play which is all that matters.
BlindDogScooter
Well-Known Member
BlindDogScooter
Well-Known Member
So, you've talked to these guys, then... you have the inside skinny.
Good to know we have someone here who has an inside
track and keeps us all informed.
SheagleHawk
Well-Known Member
You act like we were playing Alabama. This was Ball State. Maybe more series with Beathard and we wouldn't be down 2 scores at home to an avg MAC opponent. Your problem is you want to give Jake all the credit in the world for coming from behind against a vastly inferior opponent but won't fault whatsoever for putting Iowa in that position to begin with.
seepig
Well-Known Member
Actually the problem may not even be in the booth but on the field. I know several Hawkeye Football alum that I've talked to in recent weeks they are all consistent in stating that KF runs the offense with help from the OC. It's KF's issue...and it doesn't help that the line is opening 0 holes.
HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
I get what your saying Sheagle, without a doubt most would agree Jake should need to check down a little less, throw mid to deep a little more...and maybe throw away or tuck and run rather than check to a 1 yard route. No one can argue we need to see 150+ yards rushing as we go forward, and a vert passing game will help that.
With that said, the reason we needed the comeback was from 3 missed feildgoals and 2 awful turnovers inside our own 20. That's, at minimum, a 12 to 19 point differential..roughly what Vegas and extremely knowledgeable odd makers had us winning by.
Does Jake need to improve, absolutely. Does CJ show some promise, without question. Is the right guy getting most of the snaps, the overall stats (the only thing us internet experts have to go by, other than our infallible "eyeball test" from a tiny sample size, has to go by.
Until I see more tangible proof, Jake is the guy, with CJ being a great backup option.
HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
There are holes, the rbs aren't seeing them and they close quickly when safeties are playing up. The Hawkeye Alum I talk to say the philosophy is KFs, which everyone already knows, but he doesn't run the offense.
There are routes down field, watch the game again, JR simply needs to be a little more aggressive, or give the wrs a tiny more time.
Cripes on a crutch!
