To be fair to Cade he was pretty hurt when he was playing. He really shouldn't have been playing but we forced him out there because well Hill was our other option. He was a total shell of himself out there. Watch his Michigan highlights and look at how he looked his first game with us. QBs need their legs and he was one legged out there.
Joe Labas
- Thread starter Teddy
- Start date
That's what I'm concerned with too... I mean will he be close to 100% this summer? And how good is his 100% compared to when he first got here even? We just gotta have a backup that can play. Hill doesn't cut it that's pretty obvious. My hope is the Lainez kid can but he's green yet so who knows
To laugh or cry that is the question....
Imagine thinking Hill is the answer to any question about playing QB at D1.
Anyone betting against him coming back and being #2 to Cade next yr? He wouldn't have anywhere to go so we are as stuck as it gets with him. Cade being damaged goods probably won't be able to play every meaningful snap next yr either. We'll see more of Hill I bet... Just wild that in the portal world and everything that's our option.
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
Although you may be proved right down the road, I think there is enough history with Cade that he could be effective. Players get hurt all the time. If he comes back healthy, I still think he can be that guy.
And yet KF keeps saying Hill's the best option Iowa has.
Does KF truly believe most Iowa fans are this stupid? We are not and neither are the national pundits who know this game well.
KF, you've done a lot of good at Iowa and for the community. But it's time to move on. 25 years was a good ride. But leave before you damage your legacy any further.
How do they know when they've never given anyone else a shot?
And only using practices as a meter is just being stubborn as his best QBs weren't the best practice QBs in his eyes
Exactly.
Larry Legend
Well-Known Member
Agreed, with the Cade at Michigan, my point is physically and maybe even mentally (concerned about another injury) he is not the same. Allot of his game and effectiveness at Michigan was movement, extending plays he can't do that anymore, when he tried another knee issue, real big concern, that was a non-contact injury. typical, Ferentz MO, just like with Bethard, putting a lame duck on the field, and saying good luck kid, I hope it all works out. Allot of ifs and butts on this thread, if he is 100% healthy, if he can go through Spring ball, if he can do the pre-season drills, if he be upright for more than 4 games next year. Sorry folks, not laying a bet down on any of that, Iowa get 2nd stringer ready and proven or get your ass in the portal.
We got a little taste of timing and accuracy over those first few games that stood out. I would be very optimistic with Cade and a new OC if we thought he could be healthy.
If All and Lachey come back (or at least 1 of them) and with Kaleb Brown and the RBs along with hopefully a decent OLine and I'm optimistic that they can score a lot more next year.
HawkPowerlifter
Well-Known Member
KF is my guy and he is heckuva coach. He will always get my respect, but I think it's very clear that what quarterback plays is directly linked to his philosophy. He prefers a game manager to a playmaker. Very few times in the 25 years I have seen an athletic or mobile quarterback besides Brad Banks.
I think guys like Stanzi and Tate were gunslingers and probably actually were more out of the the KF mold. We know what KF likes, ball control, field position and defense. It's nothing new. And as mentioned, a "comfort level" with whomever starts.
I will still say that the coaching staff sees these players day in and day out and I do trust their evaluation of their talent. The question is do we see a difference in philosophy with a new OC?
I think you also have potentially take into consideration some of the predictability was directly related to talent and the woes on the offensive line. While frustrating to watch, you cannot run if you can't open lanes and you can't throw if there is little to now pass protection.
Some (not all) of what we have seen is a drop in talent and skill coupled with injuries and upper classmen leaving or retiring.
I liked our utilization of Kaleb Brown later in the season. From the sounds of what is being said, it was some personal matters that was taken care of. Maybe there is hope. Our O-line has another year of experience, and if we can keep guys like Brown, Vines, and Anderson, I do believe we have to tools to have a better showing next year. Still, it starts with the O-line.
We have always been a football team that does the basics correct. It's about technique and execution. We often do not surprise teams with our playbook. Maybe a few wrinkles will be in the future. I saw some five wide this year. Maybe there is hope.
I think guys like Stanzi and Tate were gunslingers and probably actually were more out of the the KF mold. We know what KF likes, ball control, field position and defense. It's nothing new. And as mentioned, a "comfort level" with whomever starts.
I will still say that the coaching staff sees these players day in and day out and I do trust their evaluation of their talent. The question is do we see a difference in philosophy with a new OC?
I think you also have potentially take into consideration some of the predictability was directly related to talent and the woes on the offensive line. While frustrating to watch, you cannot run if you can't open lanes and you can't throw if there is little to now pass protection.
Some (not all) of what we have seen is a drop in talent and skill coupled with injuries and upper classmen leaving or retiring.
I liked our utilization of Kaleb Brown later in the season. From the sounds of what is being said, it was some personal matters that was taken care of. Maybe there is hope. Our O-line has another year of experience, and if we can keep guys like Brown, Vines, and Anderson, I do believe we have to tools to have a better showing next year. Still, it starts with the O-line.
We have always been a football team that does the basics correct. It's about technique and execution. We often do not surprise teams with our playbook. Maybe a few wrinkles will be in the future. I saw some five wide this year. Maybe there is hope.
Larry Legend
Well-Known Member
Agreed with all of that, however, there is that "IF" word in both comments. Here's a what if for you all, what if the new OC is an outsider coming in, and he doesn't like the McNamara situation? He wants his own guy, who has two good legs and talent.
Both Alabama and Michigan also prefer game managers to playmakers in their QB rooms. But they both have infinitely better gameplans to put their game managers into more manageable 3rd downs or avoid them altogether.
HawkPowerlifter
Well-Known Member
You are not wrong, but I would still say their talent at that position is infinitely better than anyone we have on our roster at quarterback. I would argue they have a bit better luck at obtaining the talent to execute those gameplans. But point taken.
Fryowa
Administrator
He had a season ender at Michigan, then came up lame in the spring game (non-contact), and then a separate season ender (also non-contact) a couple games into the season.
How many other people have come back successfully from a chain of events like that, and why would McNamara be different than anyone else?
It's really kind of a chicken-or-egg question. With an offensive line whose pass pro is suspect, and receivers who cannot get open or create any separation (or even catch the ball in some cases), an average QB will look awful, and a good QB will look mediocre at best.
And when this becomes a multi-season phenomenon, how do you recruit good players at any of these positions?
And when this becomes a multi-season phenomenon, how do you recruit good players at any of these positions?
Teddy
Well-Known Member
McNamara's career has shown he is fragile. Only one healthy season. Fryiowa is spot on that we should not expect him to suddenly deviate from not only his personal history but the typical injury trajectory of a fragile player.
If Lainz is the long term guy, play him now. We know even Iowa's defense cannot survive a 2-4 TO game by the QB. As with Labas we don't have literal knowledge of his superiority but we do have literal knowledge of the Hill disaster. Labas wasn't the turnover and mistake factory Hill is and I doubt Lainz is either. We already have a pretty good idea of Hill's response to pressure.
If Lainz is the long term guy, play him now. We know even Iowa's defense cannot survive a 2-4 TO game by the QB. As with Labas we don't have literal knowledge of his superiority but we do have literal knowledge of the Hill disaster. Labas wasn't the turnover and mistake factory Hill is and I doubt Lainz is either. We already have a pretty good idea of Hill's response to pressure.
Larry Legend
Well-Known Member
Amen, brothers, you're spot on regarding the McNamara injury history, not his fault, football is a hitting sport. Be that as it may, 100% agree, work this Lainz guy into the rotation, Hill is not the answer, oh boy is he not the answer, don't forget the portal new OC!
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
Deacon needs a w couple of words from Kirk. “Move on.”
