Is there another Weisman sitting down right now?

[CFHawk]

I am going to agree with OK4P here. I am not ready to abandon this season or any of the players yet, but if we slide past bowl eligibility I think we need to start getting some these back-ups some reps for next year.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Stanzi wasn't ready in 2007 and Brad Banks was not close to being ready in 2001. Not close. I've talked to more than a dozen players who were on that 2001 team and they have all told me the same thing. When Banks played in 2001, he had about a 10 play package.

Jon, you're wasting your time. Half the people in "HawkeyeLand" have no idea that Banks started his JC career as a WR, or that he was nowhere on the radar to succeed Culpepper at UCF, in spite of the folks in Orlando retro-fitting history.

 

[JonDMiller]

When you're 2-2 with a loss to one of the 10 worst teams in the country, it MIGHT be time to mix it up a little....just a thought. But hey, let's ride this all the way to 4-8...no problem. In the meantime, that light at the end of the tunnel is really an oncoming train.

Give me your list of how you would mix it up.

 

[SpiderRico]

All cred gone with Gaglione argument. That last penalty killed us, and the QB was able to run to FG range past Gaglione's spot. I like Gaglione, but he is as "green", at times, as any of the DL.

What game were you watching? The WRs got plenty of separation.

You must not read well...I said ability to get to the qb and get pressure. Last I looked, he was our leader in sacks, tackles for loss and qb hurries.

As for the WRs, apparently you only started watching last week....we couldn't get separation against NIU, UNI or ISU. THe only reason we could in CMU game was because they were committing 9 guys to stop the run....

 

[SwirlinLingerie]

I've always thought a coach has to go with the players who give the team the best chance to win that week. If he doesn't, it sends the wrong message and chemistry problems can emerge. The players generally know who the best players are at each position. If a player thinks he's better than a guy ahead of him, prove it in practice.

Improvement occurs when an athlete understands what he needs to do to become a more effective player, is able to repetitively demonstrate that in practice, and is ultimately awarded playing time (and then demonstrates the behavior in a game).

 

[eveningnewsteam]

None of us has access to how these guys perform on the practice field.

Youre right. We see what happens on the game field when it actually counts and people are watching. Some are gamers and some are practice all americans.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

<<The only reason we could in CMU game...>>

Duh. That's how it usually happens, a good run game opens up passing lanes. Against NIU, we were working with, essentially, 2011's 8th-string RB (counting transfers, injuries, etc.)

Gags is not the only DL to get pressure. But even if he is, that penalty killed us. That is part of the "greene-ness" Jon has talked about since February...

 

[hawkeyebob62]

See Jordan Cotton, Jacob Hillyer and Tevaun Smith or, in the reverse, the person(s) they passed on the depth chart.

 

[SpiderRico]

Give me your list of how you would mix it up.

1. Additional speed on the edge. I'd like to see what Spears could do on obvious passing downs (3rd & medium/long).
2. Aggressiveness on defense. If you look at the offensive side, there's a reason that it looks like the offensive line is opening up bigger holes and sustaining blocks longer. Part of it is competition, sure, but part of it is that college players feed off of aggressiveness. I'd like to see Law get a chance. I know he can't cover worth a $hit, but neither could Bob. My wheelchair bound grandmother could have gotten open against him his first year.
3. Speed at the WR position. We need guys that can A)get open and B)get some YAC....especially in GDs system.
4. Of course, the ever popular backup QB. Look, I know Ruddock isn't the savior, but it's also obvious to anyone that, with 1/3 of the season gone already, a 5th year qb is what he is. He ain't getting better, so why not put a package in for Ruddock to see what he can do. At worst, he lock onto his primary, throw darts at receivers feet and get jumpy in the pocket....but how is that different than we've already seen?

 

[hawkeyebob62]

1. Additional speed on the edge. I'd like to see what Spears could do on obvious passing downs (3rd & medium/long).
2. Aggressiveness on defense. If you look at the offensive side, there's a reason that it looks like the offensive line is opening up bigger holes and sustaining blocks longer. Part of it is competition, sure, but part of it is that college players feed off of aggressiveness. I'd like to see Law get a chance. I know he can't cover worth a $hit, but neither could Bob. My wheelchair bound grandmother could have gotten open against him his first year.
3. Speed at the WR position. We need guys that can A)get open and B)get some YAC....especially in GDs system.
4. Of course, the ever popular backup QB. Look, I know Ruddock isn't the savior, but it's also obvious to anyone that, with 1/3 of the season gone already, a 5th year qb is what he is. He ain't getting better, so why not put a package in for Ruddock to see what he can do. At worst, he lock onto his primary, throw darts at receivers feet and get jumpy in the pocket....but how is that different than we've already seen?

Again, what haas/have this/these guys shown in practice to warrant it? Great in theory...

As to Law, Donatell isn't a problem. In fact, he has, at times, been a pleasant surprise. Not saying Law hasn't earned a chance, just saying it apparently hasn't translated to the DB coach and D-coordinator.

 

[JonDMiller]

1. Additional speed on the edge. I'd like to see what Spears could do on obvious passing downs (3rd & medium/long). JM: Why would you like to see what Spears can do? Have you seen something of him in practice that makes you think that just because he has good lateral quickness, that won't sacrifice containment awareness? Iowa's scheme is predicated on maintaining contain in the pass rush game. From your observations of Spears, do you think he has that part down?
2. Aggressiveness on defense. If you look at the offensive side, there's a reason that it looks like the offensive line is opening up bigger holes and sustaining blocks longer. Part of it is competition, sure, but part of it is that college players feed off of aggressiveness. I'd like to see Law get a chance. I know he can't cover worth a $hit, but neither could Bob. My wheelchair bound grandmother could have gotten open against him his first year. JM: My guess is that Law is not outperforming Donatell on a daily basis in practice, otherwise he would be playing.
3. Speed at the WR position. We need guys that can A)get open and B)get some YAC....especially in GDs system. JM: Thats going to come with recruiting. Reece Fleming has speed, but he's still less than a year remove from ACL surgery and the new offensive scheme seems less friendly to first year players. Aside from Fleming what 'jets' are on the bench?
4. Of course, the ever popular backup QB. Look, I know Ruddock isn't the savior, but it's also obvious to anyone that, with 1/3 of the season gone already, a 5th year qb is what he is. He ain't getting better, so why not put a package in for Ruddock to see what he can do. At worst, he lock onto his primary, throw darts at receivers feet and get jumpy in the pocket....but how is that different than we've already seen? JM: Based on folks I have spoken with you are at practice, the drop off to Rudock or Sokol is precipitous. JVB gives you a chance...the backups, it sounds like that would be the white flag of surrender right now. If only everything were traceable to Vandenberg. But that's not reality.

 

[SpiderRico]

Again, what haas/have this/these guys shown in practice to warrant it? Great in theory...

As to Law, Donatell isn't a problem. In fact, he has, at times, been a pleasant surprise. Not saying Law hasn't earned a chance, just saying it apparently hasn't translated to the DB coach and D-coordinator.

I understand it's great in theory, and that's all I have to go off of with them. However, as I said to Jon earlier, I have cold, hard data on the starters and what they're contributing and, frankly, that data blows. So you take Alvis out on 3rd downs as it's still apparent he's dealing with a bum knee and you put Spears in for a few obvious passing plays....what does that hurt? If he doesn't get to the QB, no biggie, Alvis hasn't either. Or you put Law in there and a WR/TE is open down the seam....no biggie, Donnatel has been doing that all year.

In all the years I've followed college football, I've never run across a staff that was as unwilling to play backups for meaningful snaps as this one. And people wonder why our wins run in cycles....it's because we end up playing guys until they drop dead (see 2010) and then have nothing behind them experience-wise when they graduate.

I haven't advocated anywhere in my posts for guys to take starting jobs.....what I am advocating for is getting others some reps.

 

[10sec5oh]

Stanzi wasn't ready in 2007 and Brad Banks was not close to being ready in 2001. Not close. I've talked to more than a dozen players who were on that 2001 team and they have all told me the same thing. When Banks played in 2001, he had about a 10 play package.

It would be nice to have a QB with a 10 play package now.

 

[bighawkeyedaddy]

Give me your list of how you would mix it up.

If JVB continues to struggle I want to see Rudock get a chance. If he is worse, so be it. It amazes me that our program, one of the few that still goes with pretty much a pro style quarterback, hasn't had one season in the Ferentz era where we even had a serviceable backup QB (with the exception being Stanzi his sophomore year, but we didn't have a serviceable starter the first games of that season).

 

[hawkfarmer]

I think the scary thing for next year or the year after, is that if Rudock or Sokol are so far behind Vandy, can they really improve that much to be equal to his performance this year/ I'm not saying it is all on Vandy, but some of it is, especially his transgressions and starring down WR.


Also, side note is that Tevaun Smith played on Saturday, but was only targeted once. I saw him in on 2 plays total.

 

[JonDMiller]

If JVB continues to struggle I want to see Rudock get a chance. If he is worse, so be it.

Do you realize how easy it is for you to say that, since there are no repercussions on you if it gets much worse and significantly limits the team's chance to win? This isn't EA Sports XBox Dynasty mode.

 

[WhitUp]

I have had lots of salesmen that worked for me in the past that did an awesome job in making practice sales presentations. Then some of them would do it for real in front of a client and absolutely suck at it. They weren't "gamers"....when the "lights" came on, they froze, stumbled, etc. Sometimes you have to say, we can't deal in potential anymore, but in reality. KF puts a lot of emphasis on Sunday-Friday, as well he should, but sometimes at the detriment of what he's actually seeing on Saturdays when it counts.

Fire Kirk I want a true leader that knows how to make tough decisions. And has "gamer" salesmen

 

[JonDMiller]

I think the scary thing for next year or the year after, is that if Rudock or Sokol are so far behind Vandy, can they really improve that much to be equal to his performance this year/

Of course they can. Stanzi made huge leaps after his third year in the program.

 

[SpiderRico]

Do you realize how easy it is for you to say that, since there are no repercussions on you if it gets much worse and significantly limits the team's chance to win? This isn't EA Sports XBox Dynasty mode.

You're absolutely right Jon. No arguments from me there.

On the other hand, as you have pointed out, Kirk essentially has a lifetime contract and the administration certainly isn't going to pay $35M to buy him out plus buy a new one. So why stay with the same starters and personnel that got beat by the 116th ranked team in the country? How are you building for the long haul by not giving backups any meaningful minutes? Supposedly they are our future starters. How do you think the 2002 offensive line got so good? Because they got their a$$es kicked for 3 years. Sometimes you just have to admit that this year ain't your year and start building for the future. He doesn't owe the seniors anything. If they aren't good enough to beat CMU, that's a them problem. They got 4 years of free college.

 

[bighawkeyedaddy]

Do you realize how easy it is for you to say that, since there are no repercussions on you if it gets much worse and significantly limits the team's chance to win? This isn't EA Sports XBox Dynasty mode.

What the hell are the repercussions to the coaching staff? They aren't going anywhere. If we are at such a low point that putting the backup QB in for a drive or two to see what they can do limits your chance of winning, and the backup QB's can't read a defense or look off a receiver better than JVB does, then this season has no chance of being a success anyway. I would say the next 2 games will tell us exactly where this season is going, and if I am our opponent I am putting 9 or 10 in the box and daring JVB to beat me. We shall see if he can do it.