Jon's Podcast on Iowa Qbs and regression

[JonDMiller]

Jon had an agenda and the result is self-confirming bias.

1. He “doesn’t count” Tate’s senior season. Even though Tate played almost the entire year, Jon tells us his stats don’t matter because he was also hurt the entire year. This is a convenient omission to support the hypothesis. If a player plays, the stats count—and that’s assuming Tate was as damaged as much as Jon now claims he was.

2. Christeson was a 5 star recruit and in the program over 2 years. Jon barely mentions him.

3. If a QB is the most or second most important player on a team, then there should be a positive correlation between experience and wins. I don’t care about stats—did the QB lead Iowa to victory?

4. If the defense and/or other units take a big dip from year to year, and you want to blame those dips for the negative correlation, then I look forward to the podcast on recruiting and/or developmental failures.

Tate had an oblique issue. Those take a long time to heal, with complete rest. Tate didn't have that. He missed one game. So yeah, it impacts it.

Jake was not a multi-year starter. He started the opener in 2008, then Stanzi started, then Jake, then Stanzi the rest of the way. Seems silly to include him in the discussion when he wasn't good enough to be a multi-year starter. As for 3&4, teams change from year to year. I've hammered Iowa on WR recruiting. Not going to keep chasing my tail on this.

 

[JonDMiller]

I don't understand the "injury doesn't count argument". If my car's engine gets damaged its performance regresses. I don't get the argument regarding injuries don't count as regression. And just because we have a coaching change doesn't mean that cannot affect the performance of a quarterback. Vandenberg regressed badly. Just because a horrible coach caused his regression doesn't mean he didn't regress.

Because people want to say Iowa doesn't coach up QB's as they get older...so yeah, if an injury is responsible for regression, it doesn't count, to me, as evidence that Iowa's coaches can't develop quarterbacks as they age

 

[Xerxes]

QB's get better. They just get more and more cautious to the point where they don't even try to make plays. When you have a team of playmakers like the 2010 team had, it makes more sense to let them make plays instead of trying to win close games against inferior teams. That goes for offense and defense.

When you have a guy like Clayborn, play tighter coverage so he has a couple seconds to make a play. It had to be so frustrating for him to get to the qb fast, only to be a split second late because a guy was wide open for a 8 yard gain on 3rd and 7.

On offense you have two of the better receivers ever at Iowa and a borderline NFL qb. Coach your guy to take some chances and don't be afraid to let DJK and McNutt try to make some plays. Turnovers don't kill you when you have a great defense and an offense that can score points. If you make too many of them, you end up in a close game and you might lose. If you don't make too many of them, you win with ease. Better that than to just concede a close game before kickoff.

I've read this before about Iowa's QBs growing too careful as they get older. Yet in 2010 it was Stanzi being way too aggressive in the 4th quarter against NW, up 17-7, trying to hit a deep ball that got intercepted and was the turning point in that game and the season. NW scored on 2 long TD drives and Iowa lost the next 3 games.

 

[ferentz4life]

Tate had an oblique issue. Those take a long time to heal, with complete rest. Tate didn't have that. He missed one game. So yeah, it impacts it.

Jake was not a multi-year starter. He started the opener in 2008, then Stanzi started, then Jake, then Stanzi the rest of the way. Seems silly to include him in the discussion when he wasn't good enough to be a multi-year starter. As for 3&4, teams change from year to year. I've hammered Iowa on WR recruiting. Not going to keep chasing my tail on this.

Just so everyone is clear, we aren’t counting:

1. Drew Tate’s entire senior year.

2. JVB’s entire senior year.

3. A 5 star recruit who started the 2007 and 2008 seasons.

4. We are discounting W/L from the 2005 and 2010 teams because of the defense.

5. I stopped listening before 2016 CJB.

Other than 1-4., the hypothesis holds up.

 

[NCHawker]

Nope. It wasn't. Deace brings this up often, over the years...and I tell him I do not agree.

I don't remember it that way. I think you are misremembering - maybe its not an "all or nothing thing". I'll bet you have contributed to the narrative - and I'll grant you that a few times you probably also disagreed with Dace as well.

 

[pythagoras]

OK

 

[mopkins]

I still wish Iowa would go after more QB's who aren't statues. Probably the two most successful Iowa seasons under KF were 2002 with Brad Banks and 2015 with CJB. 2002 Banks had 5 rushing TDs and 423 yards. 2015 CJB had 6 rushing TD's and 237 yards.

I'm not asking for Lamar Jackson, but a mobile QB in college can destroy defenses. No team is worried about Stanley scrambling for anything. It especially hurts when Iowa doesn't have the most athletic receivers and virtually no deep completions to speak of this year.

 

[DBAHawkFan]

How about just rolling the QB's out more than twice a year? Instead of keeping them in a pocket that collapses after 3 seconds (to be fair the pass protection has been better this year)

 

[JonDMiller]

I don't remember it that way. I think you are misremembering - maybe its not an "all or nothing thing". I'll bet you have contributed to the narrative - and I'll grant you that a few times you probably also disagreed with Dace as well.

Can you find a link or specific reference point? Because this topic has irritated me for years, and I finally got around to podding about it.

 

[hwk23]

It seemed like Stanzi played much more conservatively in 2010 although his stats were definitely better. In the AZ game we had the ball at the end with a chance to win and Stanzi took 3 or 4 sacks to end the game, if I remember correctly. The 2009 Stanzi probably would have evaded the rush and thrown it downfield into coverage.

 

[JonDMiller]

Just so everyone is clear, we aren’t counting:

1. Drew Tate’s entire senior year.

2. JVB’s entire senior year.

3. A 5 star recruit who started the 2007 and 2008 seasons.

4. We are discounting W/L from the 2005 and 2010 teams because of the defense.

5. I stopped listening before 2016 CJB.

Other than 1-4., the hypothesis holds up.

I'll agree to disagree with you on the topic. Take care

 

[HaydenHawk56]

Just so everyone is clear, we aren’t counting:

1. Drew Tate’s entire senior year.

2. JVB’s entire senior year.

3. A 5 star recruit who started the 2007 and 2008 seasons.

4. We are discounting W/L from the 2005 and 2010 teams because of the defense.

5. I stopped listening before 2016 CJB.

Other than 1-4., the hypothesis holds up.

I will add, that although there may be a lot of reasons why things did not work out results wise for Iowa Qbs in their senior years.....the total net result was a regression stat wise in some of these cases. Probably safe to say there is a fair share of blame to go around to explain for it.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Because people want to say Iowa doesn't coach up QB's as they get older...so yeah, if an injury is responsible for regression, it doesn't count, to me, as evidence that Iowa's coaches can't develop quarterbacks as they age

As true as that is the results were what they were... Not just individually but team wise. How about backup QBs? Other then the JR/CJ back and forth has Iowa ever had a backup QB decent enough to put in if the other was hurt as in Tates and Beathards cases their SR years? Other schools seem to be able to put backup QBs in there and keep going but Iowa is too scared to ever take their starters out. If it's costing the team wins (which I think it may have anyway) how is that justifiable? Teams can't be giving 100% of their reps to the starters and not developing the others as they go either. There's a middle ground there someplace that needs to be found too.

 

[PCHawk]

Just so everyone is clear, we aren’t counting:

1. Drew Tate’s entire senior year.

2. JVB’s entire senior year.

3. A 5 star recruit who started the 2007 and 2008 seasons.

4. We are discounting W/L from the 2005 and 2010 teams because of the defense.

5. I stopped listening before 2016 CJB.

Other than 1-4., the hypothesis holds up.

Why would a qb who was injured his whole year be relevant in a topic about whether or not QB's regress or not under a coaching staff? Why would a qb who sucked the whole time he was here and never even played his senior year be relevant in this topic?

 

[PCHawk]

As true as that is the results were what they were... Not just individually but team wise. How about backup QBs? Other then the JR/CJ back and forth has Iowa ever had a backup QB decent enough to put in if the other was hurt as in Tates and Beathards cases their SR years? Other schools seem to be able to put backup QBs in there and keep going but Iowa is too scared to ever take their starters out. If it's costing the team wins (which I think it may have anyway) how is that justifiable? Teams can't be giving 100% of their reps to the starters and not developing the others as they go either. There's a middle ground there someplace that needs to be found too.

Beathard's backup was busy starting for Michigan.

 

[PCHawk]

My opinion is there is a line between trying to make plays and being too conservative. Kirk has always been way off that line on the too conservative side. It only makes sense that the position that is most like a coach on the field falls farther and farther away from that line the longer they play.

Kirk thinks its the right way to play so he teaches that way. That logic only makes sense. I think his over conservative coaching has cost us games in the past and i think qb's over conservative playing has cost us games their senior years.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Beathard's backup was busy starting for Michigan.

Well aware but Stanley was his backup right with Weigers and Cook. The staff had either no confidence in putting any of them or they were just being 'loyal' to CJ. CJ who was operating at what 50% of himself couldn't run? Is that being generous? I mean he couldn't hardly move out there sometimes and he just wasn't able to be effective. Granted there's the Oline, running game and receivers that factor too but my overarching point is that if your QB was playing as poorly as he was hurt how can you not have a second qb regardless of who it is coached up enough to play?

 

[PCHawk]

I've read this before about Iowa's QBs growing too careful as they get older. Yet in 2010 it was Stanzi being way too aggressive in the 4th quarter against NW, up 17-7, trying to hit a deep ball that got intercepted and was the turning point in that game and the season. NW scored on 2 long TD drives and Iowa lost the next 3 games.

I remember that play and I hated it as soon as I saw the play was meant to go deep. We owned that game and there was no need to call it. It was also dumb of Stanzi to throw the pass but that is one example over an entire year.

 

[PCHawk]

Well aware but Stanley was his backup right with Weigers and Cook. The staff had either no confidence in putting any of them or they were just being 'loyal' to CJ. CJ who was operating at what 50% of himself couldn't run? Is that being generous? I mean he couldn't hardly move out there sometimes and he just wasn't able to be effective. Granted there's the Oline, running game and receivers that factor too but my overarching point is that if your QB was playing as poorly as he was hurt how can you not have a second qb regardless of who it is coached up enough to play?

I think that says more about Kirk's fear of playing inexperienced players than it does about the ability of the backups. He could have Tom Brady on the sideline and if he hasn't played a snap yet, he ain't coming into an undecided game.

 

[ferentz4life]

Why would a qb who was injured his whole year be relevant in a topic about whether or not QB's regress or not under a coaching staff? Why would a qb who sucked the whole time he was here and never even played his senior year be relevant in this topic?

Gosh, I don’t know.

The hypothesis is that Iowa develops QBs. Apparently you don’t find it “relevant” that one of them “sucked the whole time he was here.” Interesting.

As for Tate, he played, the stats count—especially when Jon built his entire hypothesis around stats.

You may also find it relevant that Tate managed to rush for more yards in 2006 than 2005 even though he was “injured the whole time.” Not what you’d expect from such an injured player.