Is there another Weisman sitting down right now?

[LGEND24]

You do realize he transferred in and showed up on campus a month before the season and you expect him to learn the whole offence top to bottom in like 14 practices. Very do able in 10 months but not in limited practice time. Didn't look like superman in the Wisconsin game.

If he plays that whole game, Iowa wins. Michigan and Purdue too.

 

[bitmap]

The clock is winding down before half time. I can see it now....

KF: Now Opie, they're going to punt and we are going to get the ball back.
JVB: I'm ready to go in coach!
KF: I know that son, but I am going to put JR in for this series.
JVB: Coach! I'm better than he is
KF: We know that, but you have to execute. I need you to see why I can't depend on him to get it done. You're a smart guy, watch him and figure out what you have to do to beat these Gophers.
JVB: But Coach!...
KF: Listen to what I am telling you - Watch him, learn, and then when you get back out there execute. This game is here and now and I can't wait for you to see the film later to figure out how they are beating us! We have another 30 minutes of football after the half and the team needs you to focus and execute...

If JR chokes, nothing really lost as long as time runs out. If JR takes us in for a score in 52 seconds as the clock expires then we are better.

KF starts JVB in the second half. If he has a half like the Pitt game last year great. If he tanks, throws a couple ints and we are going to get burried anyway then put JR back in the 2nd half of the 4th quarter. After all, you don't want your starting QB to go down w/ an injury in game we are going to loose anyway. It's the conservative thing to do.

 

[LGEND24]

When Iowa starts its B1G schedule, you'll see the same kind of degradation in Weisman's performance as you've seen with Shonn Greene in the pros. Three words: lacking in speed. Probably an injury.

When everyone's healed, airbhg willing, he'll go back to the position most suited to his talents: FB. Just give him the ball every now and then.

Which B1G defenses are going to stop him? I see Michigan State as the only team capable of shutting Weisman down completely. Possibly Purdue if they get better throughout the year.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Except for Canzeri who rushed for a whopping 2.5 YPC last year in the bowl game, and incidently, the one player everyone is orgasming over.

I guess the world IS flat, given you how you just leaped off the edge...

"This" season. "This" season. For the record, Canzeri has not played "this" season.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

I don't think day in and day out should be the point. but if a player is out playing a starter some days they should be seeing the field so they can develop further. Definitely not saying they should start over the starter.

I feel that is far more likely that there is another "Weisman" type not seeing the field then not. That could also be the fact I feel that when KF says "We are trying to win", I don't believe he is doing that. I think what he actually is saying "We are trying to win with these selected players and I wont use anyone else even if they might give us a spark unless injuries force me to".

To name a few couple Big misses by Kirk,
-Not wanting to open up the QB competition between JC and Stanzi despite how bad JC was
++(KOK convinced him which is why I haven't given KOK any crap after that became known).
-Wanting Greene to move to Defense.
++I have little doubt Greene's time moving furniture didn't get him more dedicated during practice (never heard he wasn't dedicated) but he wouldn't just one day wake up and have these skills after not playing football for a year.

Sometimes what makes a player special is what they can do on the field rather then in practice.

SOME urban legends never die. Greene was only being thought about for defense early in his tenure. He was NEVER slated for defense when he returned.

The "KOK wanted Stanzi" has been confirmed, exactly, by who? NObody from the Iowa staff or athletic department has ever said this publicly. What WAS said was that JC was given "every chance" to maintain the starting position.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Are you sure I'm not better than Kyle McCann?

Signed,
Brad Banks

Some have made the argument that just giving the back-ups reps is what they want, not necessarily replacing the starters.

In the case of Banks, he was used exactly the way he should have been: in an off-the-bench-bring-a-spark-and-a-different-look role.

He wasn't ready to be the starter. Even in the 2002 spring game, many wondered whether he could handle the lead, though nobody doubted his potential.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Actually i took it Jon's response on Banks was Iowa only had 10 plays he could perform in 2001 and was no where near capable of being the starter at Iowa. Then Banks tossed on his superman cape and 10 months later went from not capable to a Heisman Contender.. ..

Not to mention winner of the Davey O' Brien Award.. Amazing to think!! The Davey O'Brien Award - National Quarterback Award

There is precedent for those too ignorant or closed-minded: Oklahoma State, mid-to-late 1980s.

Thurman Thomas starting RB, graduates, Barry Sanders appears and reels off the single greatest season of any major college RB.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

KOK made the call to go to Stanzi. Stop being an apologist

I'm confused. KF "makes" staff run the schemes/plays/etc. Wait, it's the incompetent KOK. But, no, it's KF who makes him run the offense the way he wants. But KOK chose Stanzi.

This IS confusing...

 

[hawkeyebob62]

First off, not everyone can practice great, because for the most competitive people, having real competition lets them take it to another level that can't be simulated.

Secondly, let's decide that Bullock doesn't get hurt. They say that Mossad is tearing it up in practice, but yet it takes our top two RB's to get hurt for him to see a meaningful snap? We're not even running many two back sets to feature two backs that are "practicing well."

It's not that I doubt that Mossad eventually gets in, it's that I doubt that he becomes the starter or the feature back, when it is apparent to anyone watching that is exactly what he should be, and if he does, it is sometime in the next few weeks.

Look at Biels. Do you think a freshman is practicing better than Danny O'Brien? Do you think he has a better command of the offense, or is a better leader? Probably not, but he made the change.

I don't doubt Kirk is putting players out there that in his mind gives them the best chance, it's that I doubt he will actually bench a player that isn't getting it done.

And no where is it more apparent than at QB. Does James give us the best chance to win? Maybe he does, but he is also not winning. He is the QB - the captain of the offense and the single player most able to affect the game.

I realize I am coming from a place of ignorance, but I have a hard time believing that any of our other QB's could be worse.

Here's a question for you: WHY would they have been looking at Weisman at RB when...since high school, at Air Force, and by his own admission...he has played FB?

They went to him in practice because we are thin at RB. He started at FB because Rogers has been dinged up since camp.

It has worked out great, but to say everyone on staff "missed" is nuts. He has played FB his entire career. His move to RB, fortuitous though it has been, was necessitated by injuries.

 

[FCAS]

If he plays that whole game, Iowa wins. Michigan and Purdue too.

Michigan? In that game, Banks made one of the dumbest plays I've ever seen from an Iowa QB. If he would have had more snaps in that game, isn't it possible that there would have been more bad, costly decisions?

 

[GhostofBTT]

There is precedent for those too ignorant or closed-minded: Oklahoma State, mid-to-late 1980s.

Thurman Thomas starting RB, graduates, Barry Sanders appears and reels off the single greatest season of any major college RB.

You mean Thurman Thomas, two time All-American at OSU and NFL Hall of Famer? Yeah, what an apt example.

 

[SpiderRico]

Michigan? In that game, Banks made one of the dumbest plays I've ever seen from an Iowa QB. If he would have had more snaps in that game, isn't it possible that there would have been more bad, costly decisions?

Or the argument could be made that if he had actually got more snaps and more experience that some of those mistakes could have been alleviated. I was at that Michigan game in person and there was only one QB that was making plays and keeping us in the game and it wasn't McCann.

Which would you rather have? A dynamic playmaker that sometimes, because of inexperience, makes mistakes but can also make the big play or a guy that is steady but unspectacular. In my opinion, the risk/reward with Banks was much better than the risk/reward with McCann.

 

[PCHawk]

Or the argument could be made that if he had actually got more snaps and more experience that some of those mistakes could have been alleviated. I was at that Michigan game in person and there was only one QB that was making plays and keeping us in the game and it wasn't McCann.

Which would you rather have? A dynamic playmaker that sometimes, because of inexperience, makes mistakes but can also make the big play or a guy that is steady but unspectacular. In my opinion, the risk/reward with Banks was much better than the risk/reward with McCann.

It would be a tough decision had McCann actually been steady but unspectacular. The choice was actually between a dynamic playmaker that sometimes, because of inexperience, makes mistakes but can also make the big play and a guy that is not a dynamic playmaker that sometimes, even tho he is experienced, makes mistakes but also has no ability to make a big play. Those were the choices that year.

 

[bitmap]

Here's a question for you: WHY would they have been looking at Weisman at RB when...since high school, at Air Force, and by his own admission...he has played FB?

They went to him in practice because we are thin at RB. He started at FB because Rogers has been dinged up since camp.

It has worked out great, but to say everyone on staff "missed" is nuts. He has played FB his entire career. His move to RB, fortuitous though it has been, was necessitated by injuries.

I'm pretty sure at the first Fall open practice Weisman took the majority of the carries at running back. He looked competent but not spectacular. I took about 500 photos and made an audio commentary w/ my son discussing what we saw as it happened. "Nothing but positive yardage", "Put him in for short yardage situations" and the like were our comments. He is in a lot of the pictures. We didn't even recognize the name at the time and commented that he was listed as a FB several times. The second Fall open practice we saw a lot of Bullock and Garmon and Weisman was back at fullback. Seems like they saw him as the third option at RB then too. Same situation as last week - the other two couldn't play so they ran Weisman at RB.

 

[SamBrownlee48]

You are out over your ski tips here. He had the best offensive line in Iowa football history and the best in the nation that year. He had the best tight end in the nation that year and best in school history. Teams had to throw everything at stopping Iowa's running game, which made the play action game unstoppable, like what we saw from Wisconsin last year. Banks threw to more wide open receivers than any Iowa QB has since the forward pass became vogue.

Iowa probably ran the same core 12-15 plays each game in 2002, because no one could stop them. You think Iowa all of the sudden got crazy in 2002 and Banks had 80 plays in his repertoire? No.

Wait. . . you say they didn't play Banks in '01 because he only knew a few of the plays. But in '02, he had like 12-15 plays.

What were the 2-5 plays that made the difference?

 

[SamBrownlee48]

Here's a question for you: WHY would they have been looking at Weisman at RB when...since high school, at Air Force, and by his own admission...he has played FB?

Because he was the best RB we got. It wasn't very hard to see from the carries he was getting at FB that there might be something special there. Would it have been an easy call? No . . . it would have taken some guts and the eye to see a diamond in the rough.

 

[SeventhSon]

I havn't read this entire thread so excuse me if this has been addressed, but I looked the roster over and didn't see any more Weismans listed.

 

[PJHawk]

I havn't read this entire thread so excuse me if this has been addressed, but I looked the roster over and didn't see any more Weismans listed.

14 pages of bullsh8t and we finally get an answer to the question

 

[HomerChampless]

Originally Posted by Duffman
Fail. The ten yard burst is the single most important "speed" trait of a RB. Its been reported hes got the fastest time on the team.


Weisman won't fare well when safeties move into the box.
NO moves. His willingness to 'mix it up' with the other's defense will land him on the training table.
NO speed to outrun. Really, how good is he reading holes? I don't recall him ever cutting it back.

I admit, Weisman's the type of running back Ferentz likes.
Coker might have been more to Ferentz's liking because he also read the holes and occasionally cut it back. They both caught the ball well.

Fred Russell is not the type of back Ferentz falls in love with.

 

[KCRC]

Jordan Cotton is quickly becoming a featured WR...3 targets already today, 2 catches, including the TD reception on the flea flicker. He's never appeared on an Iowa two deep as far as I remember. He must be a terrible practice player.

Weisman caliber....not yet.