Iowa fans need to start being realistic.

[dahlhawk]

I don't mean to single you out, as really I'm just using your post as a response to a common theme on this board. You state up above, "Stanley's fear or reluctance of throwing the ball...." I disagree 100%, and I've disagreed every time I see someone bag on one of our QB's throughout their time here, for a number of reasons that I'll detail below.
1. Doesn't anyone find it odd that the only players that get singled out for being scared, conservative, etc. are our QB's. Why aren't our other players ever labeled that? It doesn't make sense to me. I've seen our lineman miss blocks, I've seen running backs miss holes, I've seen receivers run bad routes and drop the ball. Why don't we label them as scared, conservative, etc?
2. QB's do/run what they're told. So do other players, for that matter. Did any of you on this board ever play football, or any sport for that matter? How many of your coaches let you override their coaching decisions on a weekly basis and keep your jobs? Nate Stanley runs what the coaches call. If he didn't, he would be replaced by someone who did. It's as simple as that.
3. What I do see are plenty of times where Nate misses open guys, overthrows, etc. There are other times where I perceive that guys are open, Nate sees them, but doesn't throw it. I have to assume as a QB, Nate knows the throws he can and cannot make. Now, call him conservative in some of those cases, and I will agree. But don't call him scared. I doubt Nate Stanley, or any Big Ten QB is scared of too much. They wouldn't be playing football if they were.
4. Iowa proved on Saturday that when they are forced to go away from their conservative, ball control offense, things work just fine. Nate Stanley fired plenty of nice shots during the 4th quarter. He does have an NFL arm. He has consistently made some throws this year that were absolute darts.
5. We will be sitting here next year hearing the same thing about our new QB. Folks, it's not the QB, they are doing what they are taught/practiced to do. It's our offensive approach. Power football, zone blocking work. Take a look around plenty of teams do both. They just don't look like Iowa when they do it. We need to update our looks and formations. How many times do we come out in I formation, and you know where the ball is going? When we run play action there, it almost always works. Problem is, we only run play action from that formation once or twice a game. Needs to be more.

Again, I wasn't singling you out, It just gets old hearing people blame Nate Stanley for our woes. Sure, all the players contribute to it, but mainly it comes down to our conservative offensive scheme, and as time has proven as coordinators have come and gone, our head coach is responsible for our conservative offense.

 

[dahlhawk]

I am not trying to dump on Stanley but he made some terrible reads in the first three quarters. Unfortunately the QB position in football is goat or glory. Some of it was playcalling but some was Stanley. Iowa didn't throw a pass longer than 20 yards until they went 4 receiver sets in the 4th. Put Stanley in shotgun and he is one dangerous QB. You would think Brian and Kirk would realize that by now. Nate was very good in the 4th. I just wonder how good he could be if they opened up the offense. I would love to see Iowa come out with some of those 4 receiver sets on Saturday.

 

[Robowe]

I am not trying to dump on Stanley but he made some terrible reads in the first three quarters. Unfortunately the QB position in football is goat or glory. Some of it was playcalling but some was Stanley. Iowa didn't throw a pass longer than 20 yards until they went 4 receiver sets in the 4th. Put Stanley in shotgun and he is one dangerous QB. You would think Brian and Kirk would realize that by now. Nate was very good in the 4th. I just wonder how good he could be if they opened up the offense. I would love to see Iowa come out with some of those 4 receiver sets on Saturday.

 

[kicker22]

For F sakes any competent offense at all Iowa beats Michigan, Penn State and possibly Wisconsin. I don’t wanna hear the poor Iowa sob story. All 3 games there for the taking with just an average offense. Absolutely no reason better offensive football can’t be played at Iowa. So f’n old

Agree 100%. Why is it unrealistic to think that all three of those games were winnable. In my opinion the realistic approach is to see how close this program is to being special and being frustrated that we can't get there on a more consistent basis.

It's not like were the "realistic" Nebraska fans that are on the verge of reliving the glory years. We have a program that is capable of winning the west but continually find ways to hold themselves back. I simply don't see how that's anything but being realistic.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

. Lute brought blue chip kids to Iowa City . There is no doubt in my mind there are other coaches who could do the same . This notion that you can’t get those players to IC is ridiculous

And Lute left, "why", again? Psst. It wasn't lack of facilities...or money...