Iowalaw's Post Game Analysis: Maryland

InGoodCo said:
When most people describe a “game manager” they are describing a QB that isn’t going to light you up or make your defense pay. They are good enough to handle the offense and can pull off what the staff needs them to do, but ultimately are not a weapon. Stanley’s about as far removed from a game manager as you can get.... though he is able to pull back and play within the confines of the game plan and throw high percentage passes when called upon.
Click to expand...

I don't know that we can say with any certainty that Stanley is a light em up QB. Like I said he has shown flashes, but there is just as much film pointing the other direction.

I love the kid and all, but I am just being realistic. Right now...game manager: check
Gunslinger: Unknown.

Lastly I know that some people use game manager to describe sub par QB's but that is ignorant. Most NFL GM's are looking for game managers with gunslinger potential. Right now Stanley fits the bill.
 
NFL GM’s are looking for the next Rodgers or Brady not necessarily the next Joe Flaco. If GM’s view Stanley as a “game manager” then he’s probably not going to stick in the NFL.
 
Adam said:
I don't know that we can say with any certainty that Stanley is a light em up QB. Like I said he has shown flashes, but there is just as much film pointing the other direction.

I love the kid and all, but I am just being realistic. Right now...game manager: check
Gunslinger: Unknown.

Lastly I know that some people use game manager to describe sub par QB's but that is ignorant. Most NFL GM's are looking for game managers with gunslinger potential. Right now Stanley fits the bill.
Click to expand...

in 6 out of 20 games he's thrown 3 or more TD's - in 3 of those games it was 5 or more. That's lighting people up, especially in a ball control, typically run first offense that is coached by a guy who has been as conservative as it comes on offense the last 20 years. I'm not saying you're hating on Stanley cause I know you're not, but you're selling him at least a little short.
 
ssckelley said:
NFL GM’s are looking for the next Rodgers or Brady not necessarily the next Joe Flaco. If GM’s view Stanley as a “game manager” then he’s probably not going to stick in the NFL.
Click to expand...
I know its already in a short time become a cliche, but the kid is almost identical in size, measureables, and style of play to Ben Roethlisberger. It's uncanny even down to how he's always getting hit or grabbed by D-lineman, stays on his feet, and can make throws.

If he can clean up some of the bad decisions leading to picks, and improve accuracy I see him sticking in the NFL as a starter somewhere. Both of those areas can be dealt with through coaching and experience and he's got a year and a half to do it.
 
Fryowa said:
I know its already in a short time become a cliche, but the kid is almost identical in size, measureables, and style of play to Ben Roethlisberger. It's uncanny even down to how he's always getting hit or grabbed by D-lineman, stays on his feet, and can make throws.

If he can clean up some of the bad decisions leading to picks, and improve accuracy I see him sticking in the NFL as a starter somewhere. Both of those areas can be dealt with through coaching and experience and he's got a year and a half to do it.
Click to expand...

I've notice the similarities as well, he moves around the pocket just like Big Ben.
 
No one on here is bashing Stanley.

The simple fact is, his stats and his win/loss record at Iowa are inconsistent with the narrative that he's a super star.

He has still lost most of the big games he's played in (remember, Iowa lost 5 Big 10 games last year and lost the only Big 10 game this year against a team with a pulse). His stats are good, but do not even put him in the conversation for all-Big Ten. The media and coaches look at far more factor than the number of touchdown passes from the 3 yardline to tight ends.

Fryowa's newly discovered "Big Ben" comparisons are due to ONE game against Maryland where he shrugged off potential sacks. Those moves were awesome, but the resulting comparisons are insanely premature. One game and tall height do not equal NFL Hall of Fame comparisons. Being a clutch QB at the end of close games against good opponents does.
 
Last edited:
InGoodCo said:
in 6 out of 20 games he's thrown 3 or more TD's - in 3 of those games it was 5 or more. That's lighting people up, especially in a ball control, typically run first offense that is coached by a guy who has been as conservative as it comes on offense the last 20 years. I'm not saying you're hating on Stanley cause I know you're not, but you're selling him at least a little short.
Click to expand...

I still call that a game manager lol. He's had some stupendous games. That is what I refer to as flashes. The thing for me though is can he pass for 4 TD's against a team that has completely shut down the run game? Can he lead a 2 minute drill when you're down? These are things I would not be confident in saying are anywhere close to guarantees.
 
ssckelley said:
NFL GM’s are looking for the next Rodgers or Brady not necessarily the next Joe Flaco. If GM’s view Stanley as a “game manager” then he’s probably not going to stick in the NFL.
Click to expand...

Everyone is looking for a Brees or Rodgers sure, but there are only ever a handful of guys alive that fit that bill. What do the other 28 teams do for a QB? Just forfeit the season because you don't have a HOF QB? The majority of GM's in the NFL will take the game manager over some project with gunslinger potential because it's a safer bet. They will draft projects with lower round picks and stash them until they know or not if the guy has that special thing. A game manager QB with gunslinger potential is relative gold. I can't even think of a QB drafted in rounds 1 or 2 from the last few years who was anything other than that.
 
He's going to break Iowa's Career TD record, I don't know many game managers who aren't superstars that do that. It's so damn hard for Iowa fans to appreciate what they have when they have it.
 
InGoodCo said:
He's going to break Iowa's Career TD record, I don't know many game managers who aren't superstars that do that. It's so damn hard for Iowa fans to appreciate what they have when they have it.
Click to expand...

He's breaking Chuck Long's record maybe. Chuck Long was a helluva hawk, but a NFL gunslinger he was not. He was viewed as a really good game manager.

Drew Tate was a true gunslinger, but he didn't have the size or the head for managing the game, but all be damned if you needed a late bomb there is noone else in Iowa history that I would feel better having chucking it up there.

P.S. I am very appreciative for Stanley. I have nothing but love for the kid, but I don't need to over inflate his potential vs actual production to be happy about having the kid here.
 
Adam said:
He's breaking Chuck Long's record maybe. Chuck Long was a helluva hawk, but a NFL gunslinger he was not. He was viewed as a really good game manager.

Drew Tate was a true gunslinger, but he didn't have the size or the head for managing the game, but all be damned if you needed a late bomb there is noone else in Iowa history that I would feel better having chucking it up there.

P.S. I am very appreciative for Stanley. I have nothing but love for the kid, but I don't need to over inflate his potential vs actual production to be happy about having the kid here.
Click to expand...

I get that you’re not ragging on him, but his actual production is what I am touting. I’m not over inflating anything. 42 TD’s in 20 games and an NFL future means he’s a game manager and Drew Tate is a true gun slinger? I think that’s an incredibly flawed logic. I’m not debating per say, just giving you my thoughts on your take. I know we’re both Hawks here :)

To give @Fryowa a break, everyone else is comparing Stanley to Big Ben. He said it was cliche. Every broadcast or podcast now it gets brought up.
 
InGoodCo said:
I get that you’re not ragging on him, but his actual production is what I am touting. I’m not over inflating anything. 42 TD’s in 20 games and an NFL future means he’s a game manager and Drew Tate is a true gun slinger? I think that’s an incredibly flawed logic. I’m not debating per say, just giving you my thoughts on your take. I know we’re both Hawks here :)

To give @Fryowa a break, everyone else is comparing Stanley to Big Ben. He said it was cliche. Every broadcast or podcast now it gets brought up.
Click to expand...
I do think it's getting brought up because there's a lot to it. He moves like a wookie in ankle weights, doesn't go down, and he can make some "how the hell did he do that plays" once in a while. Identical college height/weight, it's cliche for a reason.
 
IowaLawWasRight said:
No one on here is bashing Stanley.

The simple fact is, his stats and his win/loss record at Iowa are inconsistent with the narrative that he's a super star.

He has still lost most of the big games he's played in (remember, Iowa lost 5 Big 10 games last year and lost the only Big 10 game this year against a team with a pulse). His stats are good, but do not even put him in the conversation for all-Big Ten. The media and coaches look at far more factor than the number of touchdown passes from the 3 yardline to tight ends.

Fryowa's newly discovered "Big Ben" comparisons are due to ONE game against Maryland where he shrugged off potential sacks. Those moves were awesome, but the resulting comparisons are insanely premature. One game and tall height do not equal NFL Hall of Fame comparisons. Being a clutch QB at the end of close games against good opponents does.
Click to expand...
I mentioned in an earlier post that you don't actually watch games, and you're doing your damnedest to prove it.

You literally sound like a low rent cable access version of Colin Cowherd.

Speaking in broad generalities is a good way to make yourself look passable in front of idiots who know nothing about the subject, but, misfit toys and all...most of us actually follow each game and player closely.

To put it another way, F. Lee Bailey, the drivel you write would be like me going into a room full of mechanics and telling them how to pull an engine out of a pickup. I could bluff it by doing a little googling, but it would take all of 30 seconds for them to see through my bullshit and realize I had no clue.

^^^That's your character in this story.
 
Last edited:
Fryowa said:
I do think it's getting brought up because there's a lot to it. He moves like a wookie in ankle weights, doesn't go down, and he can make some "how the hell did he do that plays" once in a while. Identical college height/weight, it's cliche for a reason.
Click to expand...

A wookie in ankle weights is how I am going to describe so many things now.
 
Fryowa said:
I mentioned in an earlier post that you don't actually watch games, and you're doing your damnedest to prove it.

You literally sound like a low rent cable access version of Colin Cowherd.

Speaking in broad generalities is a good way to make yourself look passable in front of idiots who know nothing about the subject, but, misfit toys and all...most of us actually follow each game and player closely.

To put it another way, F. Lee Bailey, the drivel you write would be like me going into a room full of mechanics and telling them how to pull an engine out of a pickup. I could bluff it by doing a little googling, but it would take all of 30 seconds for them to see through my bullshit and realize I had no clue.

^^^That's your character in this story.
Click to expand...

The more I read IowaLaw's posts the more I'm inclined to believe that he never played football past either Pop Warner league or 7th grade. He doesn't understand that the elements can affect how a game will be called from the offensive side or defensive side or special teams perspectives. He doesn't understand that when you can run the ball down a team's throat, you don't waste your time passing the ball. He doesn't understand that passing the ball in 30mph winds with 50mph gusts is extremely difficult.
 
InGoodCo said:
I get that you’re not ragging on him, but his actual production is what I am touting. I’m not over inflating anything. 42 TD’s in 20 games and an NFL future means he’s a game manager and Drew Tate is a true gun slinger? I think that’s an incredibly flawed logic. I’m not debating per say, just giving you my thoughts on your take. I know we’re both Hawks here :)

To give @Fryowa a break, everyone else is comparing Stanley to Big Ben. He said it was cliche. Every broadcast or podcast now it gets brought up.
Click to expand...

The reason the it seems like flawed logic to you is probably because you can not seperate your thinking of a game manager QB as being an insult. It isn't an insult. The term is meant to describe a QB that makes the smart throws and controls the chains. Keeping an offense on track. The least of anything it was ever meant to mean was someone who didn't possess flawless throwing skill.

Case in point. Aaron Rodgers vs Tom Brady. Rodgers might be the most exceptional talent of any QB to have played in my lifetime. He can make every throw with a consistent tight spiral and can wedge the tip of a football into a drinking glass at 25 yards. Aaron Rodgers is exceptional. However he is not a game manager. Rodgers efficiency numbers go way down when a defense can keep coverage over the deeper routes. He oddly enough doesn't excel at moving the ball in the longer 10 to 15 play drives. He literally gets impatient with taking all the underneath stuff. He would much rather chuck it 20+.

Tom Brady on the other hand is also an exceptional arm talent. Not quite as strong with deep throws as Rodgers, but every bit as accurate. Tom Brady is actually more of a game manager then a gun slinger. He definitely possess the arm to be a gun slinger, but not the mentality. No single QB playing is more efficient than Brady in the 10+ play drives. Brady excels at taking the underneath stuff. He keeps drives on track with smart high percentage throws. He is perfectly fine throwing 4 yard passes and does not get impatient.

The theme here is that both are amazing talented QB's but they approach the game a different way. I believe Stanley has a game manager mentality because that is what Iowa teaches. It really has nothing to do with talent. Maybe that perspective will clear this matter up.
 
Adam said:
The reason the it seems like flawed logic to you is probably because you can not seperate your thinking of a game manager QB as being an insult. It isn't an insult. The term is meant to describe a QB that makes the smart throws and controls the chains. Keeping an offense on track. The least of anything it was ever meant to mean was someone who didn't possess flawless throwing skill.

Case in point. Aaron Rodgers vs Tom Brady. Rodgers might be the most exceptional talent of any QB to have played in my lifetime. He can make every throw with a consistent tight spiral and can wedge the tip of a football into a drinking glass at 25 yards. Aaron Rodgers is exceptional. However he is not a game manager. Rodgers efficiency numbers go way down when a defense can keep coverage over the deeper routes. He oddly enough doesn't excel at moving the ball in the longer 10 to 15 play drives. He literally gets impatient with taking all the underneath stuff. He would much rather chuck it 20+.

Tom Brady on the other hand is also an exceptional arm talent. Not quite as strong with deep throws as Rodgers, but every bit as accurate. Tom Brady is actually more of a game manager then a gun slinger. He definitely possess the arm to be a gun slinger, but not the mentality. No single QB playing is more efficient than Brady in the 10+ play drives. Brady excels at taking the underneath stuff. He keeps drives on track with smart high percentage throws. He is perfectly fine throwing 4 yard passes and does not get impatient.

The theme here is that both are amazing talented QB's but they approach the game a different way. I believe Stanley has a game manager mentality because that is what Iowa teaches. It really has nothing to do with talent. Maybe that perspective will clear this matter up.
Click to expand...
Ok, I definitely see your point, and I guess I think he has at least a little bit of that in him. He knows how to sling it in the end zone. What would you consider Big Ben?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top