Is there another Weisman sitting down right now?

SpiderRico said:
There have been posts ad-nauseum over the past 14 years concerning fan opinion of whether KF tends to err on the side of experience more than talent, so I don't want this to devolve into a pi$$ing match about whether or not he does this.

What I do want to know is whether we have more Mark Weisman's sitting on the pine right now. I think it's pretty obvious that if Bullock doesn't get hurt that there's no way Weisman sniffs playing time as a tailback.

Given that, can it not be inferred that there may be other players who, if just given the chance, could have a Weisman-type breakout? Could Melvin Spears provide speed off the edge and provide some much needed sacks or qb hurries? Could Alston provide more run stuffing ability and more ability to not get dominated at the point of attack? Could Nico Law provide some much needed aggressiveness on defense? Could Ruddock provide some ability to look off the primary if he's covered or provide the ability to know when to throw a rocket and when to throw a touch pass? Could Tevaun Smith or Maurice Flemming provide some much needed speed and play-making ability on the outside?

Maybe they could and maybe they couldn't. However, given the fact that our resume absolutely stinks right now, I'm not sure we could do much worse. Doesn't matter to me if we lose by 3 or by 30, it's still a loss. And if we're going to lose, I'd rather lose giving the "new guard" some game experience than trying to ride, for example, a 5th year senior qb all the way to a 4-8 record with no snaps to the backup.

Odds say that if there's one Weisman out there, then there's probably more.
Click to expand...

It's likely that there are a couple more Weisman's sitting on our bench.
 
NickM said:
For good measure - here is the recap of Iowa vs. Mich from 2001. Can someone explain why Chris Oliver was in on the last play ahead of both Hill and CJ Jones? If I recall correctly Iowa was in a one receiver set.

Big chance slips by: Michigan claws from hole, Iowa QBs struggle | TheGazette
Click to expand...

Didn't read the article. Does it mention the 3rd down where Banks ran out of bounds under his own power because he wasn't even aware of what down it was?

No one's arguing he wasn't talented. He absolutely was however he wasn't near the product he was his senior year. You guys like to go off potential similar to Al Davis. Other people, including those whose continued employment depends on their results, rather go with those who give them the best chance to win.
 
JonDMiller said:
Kirk said he is glad JVB is their QB and is glad he will be for the next eight games
Click to expand...

I'm NOT saying there is a better option and am not calling for a benching, but Kirk is the kind of coach that I would expect him to say that no matter what. I couldn't picture him saying anything different.
 
WhitUp said:
11-23 165 yards is the reason we didn't get blown out of the water?
Click to expand...

Um, did you read the recap? He led all four scoring drives after coming in with us down 14-0, in his first road game at a tough stadium. Yes he kept Iowa in the game. He missed his last 8 passes which accounts for the low completion percentage. The game is a route if he doesn't play.
 
NickM said:
... I have zero, ZERO doubt KF plays the players he thinks gives the team the best chance to win. But coaches are all different in terms of how they make that determination. It seems to me (and the Banks/McCann debate appears to be an example), if KF has 2 players, one really athletic, but only knows where to go 6-7 times out of 10, and a marginal/lessor athlete that knows were to be 10 times out of 10, he goes with the lessor athlete b/c KF believes (and many coaches do) that knowing where to be is as important as being able to make the play once you are there. BUT there are absolutely just as many coaches that feel you need to get your athletes on the field and coach them up from there - you can live with the mistakes b/c they will make up for it with big plays.
Click to expand...
Remember that KF has a track record of missing the obvious during in game situations - fake punt against Wisc, onside kick vs. MN etc.. - could be he is missing the obvious during practice as well. If we end up in a game that isn't close (either way) why not play against that determination when it doesn't matter and see if the obvious has been missed?
 
NickM said:
Um, did you read the recap? He led all four scoring drives after coming in with us down 14-0, in his first road game at a tough stadium. Yes he kept Iowa in the game. He missed his last 8 passes which accounts for the low completion percentage. The game is a route if he doesn't play.
Click to expand...

I don't need to read the recap I remember the game, he played pretty mediocre and choked at the end. Ladel Betts was the reason we didn't get blown out of that game.

Look I wanted Banks over McCann and Stanzi over Jake too, but just don't think it was the dumbest coaching decision to play the others when he did thats all.
 
I've been to some closed football practices. They cover a lot of ground down there between games. So much, it's very difficult for me to follow. I don't have much doubt they are putting the guys on the field that they think they have the best shot to win with.

I'm no expert. Not even close. But what I have seen this year is dramatic improvement. Even this Central Michigan loss. When Iowa has two weeks to prepare, they are always dangerous. Central Michigan had two weeks to prepare. If you don't think teams like Central Michigan are recruiting serious athletes, you'd be wrong. We'll see these kinds of upsets more frequently. To Iowa, and others.

Back to point. The experts never really pick the top 25 teams correctly. At least 3-4 teams fall off of the map, and at least 3-4 teams that no one expected climb the hill. Are there some more buried gems on Iowa's bench, or for that matter everyone else's bench? Possibly, maybe even probably, but I don't think you can fault the coach. An argument could be made that more 2-3 deeps should get game reps, I'll agree to that.
 
WhitUp said:
I don't need to read the recap I remember the game, he played pretty mediocre and choked at the end. Ladel Betts was the reason we didn't get blown out of that game.

Look I wanted Banks over McCann and Stanzi over Jake too, but just don't think it was the dumbest coaching decision to play the others when he did thats all.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but just to recap, Banks playing in his first road game and only his second game against legit competition came in at one of the toughest stadiums in the country down 14-0 and led us on 4 touchdown drives. At one point he was 11-16 for about 130 yards with 2 td passes and one rushing touchdown. He played poorly down the stretch, no question. Too bad he didn't get the reps he needed earlier in the year to get him ready for that situation. McCann had several possessions leading to no points and a turnover. I am not talking about 2002 Banks, only 2001 Banks vs. 2001 McCann. If Banks played "mediocre" than I presume you conclude McCann played horrendous? Also, Betts had a key fumble that led to a Wisky TD. Love Betts, but he wasn't the reason Iowa stayed in the game. If Betts is the reason we stayed in the game than why didn't we score any points when McCann was the QB?

2001 Banks vs. 2001 McCann: games against Michigan and at Wisky - same opponents, same conditions, and Banks outplayed McCann in every single objective measure with which you can compare QBs. Banks made a mistake against Michigan stalling a drive, but it was his first game in a key situation. What was McCann's excuse for the mistakes he made?

Even the staff felt Banks was a true talent, because they had not before, nor have they since just subbed out the starting QB in key parts of a game. Point of all this? KF's personnel decisions are fair game - not because anyone thinks he doesn't play the players he feels gives the team the best chance to win; but rather because people question the emphasis he places on experience perhaps over raw talent..
 
Last edited:
JonDMiller said:
None of us has access to practice. None. If you feel the players who are not practicing the best each week are not playing, you are fooling yourself.
Click to expand...

IDK Jon. That comes down to what your opinion of "practicing the best" is, now doesnt it? A million coaches and a million different opinions. I lived and breathed HEART. I was not the biggest or fastest but being told I couldnt, lit a fire in me no one could put out.
I have to say I dont know why Law has not seen more time. When people start mentioning him in the same sentence as Bob, you really have to wonder WTF and who is seeing what.
Look at Mark, he either pushes them down or runs them over, and is pretty darn good at it.
Then again I start to wonder just how much of this is not just more mind games. Rex= run Forest run, Ball got his bell rung pretty good and by the look I saw, maybe some neck in there.
As the lines and back go, so goes the season. Our OL and Mark seem to be doing ok. I would say if they all stay healthy, and work on some things, by the time somebody bends Rex's brace, and Ball takes another shot to the head/neck, we may just be alright when the season is over. Our D really needs some one ANYONE to step up and demand better. I mean make a massive hit and pump everyone up. DO something to get excited about and AS A WHOLE D UNIT GET EXCITED ABOUT IT!
 
JonDMiller said:
Quite frankly, I feel the annual 'Play the backup!' argument we see every year is one of the dumbest things on the message boards. None of us has access to how these guys perform on the practice field.

I guarantee you if someone is clearly outplaying the starter day in and day out on the practice field, he's gonna play.
Click to expand...

I am not concerned about who looks good in practice. I want to see who looks good in the game. Give some others a shot at it. Some of the starters are not cutting it on the field. They make look good in practice but not in the game.

What is there to lose? You mean we could possibly lose to Minnesota again for the 3rd straight year? We can do that with the current players who look good in practice.
 
JonDMiller said:
Quite frankly, I feel the annual 'Play the backup!' argument we see every year is one of the dumbest things on the message boards. None of us has access to how these guys perform on the practice field.

I guarantee you if someone is clearly outplaying the starter day in and day out on the practice field, he's gonna play.
Click to expand...


If you or anyone else is never there then how do you know that KF only plays the best and has doesn't play the experienced kid.
 
BSpringsteen said:
So JD - you put yourself in a corner here...

The limitation with Brad Banks was that he only knew about 10 plays, despite the fact that it was apparent to everyone watching that he was able to do things that McCann wasn't. And then the next year, with 12-15 plays in his repotoirs he finishes a runner up to the Heisman Trophy.

Am I following your logic correctly here?
Click to expand...

the 2001 personnel group was not at the level of the 2002 personnel group. There were things that they could do in 2002 from a dominance perspective, that other teams could not stop, which mean they didn't have to go too deep into the playbook, the way they needed to do the year before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top