Matt VandeBerg - WR

LASBUR said:
I think your wrong, A position reciver is very important. I understand so is a long ball threat. But what has been missing since Soup came to Iowa was a good posation reciver. You need both. The reason Vandeburg got on the field as a true frosh was because he learned to run good routes and block downfield quickly. All the talk about Willies not getting playing time is bogas. He was playing behind our best reciver, Smith, Very few guy know all three positions. In fact I would be surprised If an do. Maybe KMM. Im not dissing anyone of our guys just saying we need a Vandeburg on the team
Click to expand...

I'm not talking at all about a deep threat receiver vs. a possession receiver.

When I say Iowa hitching its wagon to the Matt Vandebergs of the world will not be the recipe for success in major college football, I mean this: Iowa cannot expect nor intend to thrive as a major conference or national contender by giving extended minutes/repetitions to skinny, walk-on white kids from small town South Dakota.

Like I said before, I don't know this kid and I'm sure he's great. But, a kid like this shouldn't be in a position to get meaningful playing time as a freshman at a place like the University of Iowa, where expectations are supposed to be high. Argue all you want about him being this, him being that, how hard he works and all that, but it's a major error in recruiting if a walk-on who can't be much more than a buck 60 is put in a position where he's expected to make an impact at a skill position as a freshman.

I'm sorry (not sorry) if you don't like to hear a bit of truth or a bit of realism, but I stand by it. And, I don't wanna hear the BS from the rose colored glasses crowd. Just go find me a team in the Top 15 with a player like this logging meaningful repetitions and then we'll talk.
 
I just think your wrong, He got the job done where a more gifted player such as Willies didn't. But thanks for our opinion anyway
 
LASBUR said:
I just think your wrong, He got the job done where a more gifted player such as Willies didn't. But thanks for our opinion anyway
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you would say that Vandeberg "got the job done" and Willies "didn't". Up to the Purdue game (Willies didn't play after that and redshirted last year, so games 1-5 this year are the game where we can best compare Willies and Vandeberg), Willies had more catches, yards, and touchdowns than Vandeberg did.
 
I dont want to argue this, its a moot point. Vandeberg must have done something in practice to get him so many more reps over the past year and a half. In Willies Defense he was playing behind Smith our best WR, witch is where this discussion started. OK ?
 
People wouldn't even be saying these things if he wasn't a white WR. He also wasn't a walk on. He is a skilled and versatile receiver. He would be playing on a lot of teams.
 
DDStretch said:
When I say Iowa hitching its wagon to the Matt Vandebergs of the world will not be the recipe for success in major college football, I mean this: Iowa cannot expect nor intend to thrive as a major conference or national contender by giving extended minutes/repetitions to skinny, walk-on white kids from small town South Dakota.
Click to expand...

I think one of the big problems we make in society is pretending that race does not exist, or pretending you do not notice certain trends in racial differences (such as the fact that a large majority of skill position players at the highest level of football happen to be of African-American descent). However, when you choose to make broad generalizations about an individual based upon his race, that is the very definition of racism. I suppose you could argue that your evaluation does not hinge upon his skin color, but it was notable that you included that as one of the characteristics indicating he is not worthy of Power5 playing time.

VandeBerg is certainly not big, but he is a good athlete. With regards to top-end speed, he is just so-so (4.5 40m, not great, not bad; 11.42 FAT 100m in high school). But he has great acceleration and short-area power. He is a 45 foot triple-jumper, and a 22.5 foot long jumper, which is a great indication of his overall athleticism. We have seen that on the field as well; he has displayed good quickness in route-running, in his punt/kick returns, and with the ball in his hands. The smoke route that Beathard almost skipped to him on the last drive vs. NW should have gone for a loss, but he turned it into 4 yards by making the first guy miss.

So while no one is arguing he is a dominant receiver, and Iowa is certainly not "hitching its wagon" to him (i.e. building their passing game around him), he seems to be a valuable player with some strengths and weaknesses. It would be interesting to hear from a professional such as HawkeyeGameFilm regarding his ability and his place at a BigTen school.

In the same vein, it is frustrating when analysts seem to believe that only white players can be smart, hard-working guys. Someone earlier in this thread, when writing about hard-working Hawkeyes, mentioned 5 or 6 white players; I was nice to see someone respond with the names of other players on the team who also display those characteristics, while having a different skin color.

Sorry, this comes off as very "high-horseish", but just a pet-peave of mine that I wanted to air.
 
Im not argueing but I don't understand when you say we pretend Race doesn't exsist then you say it is racism when someone uses a broad reference about abuility. Not saying your wrong just don't follow. Its kinda like saying most men are stronger than most women is sexist. Im doing a terrible job of laying out what you said. But it was kinda hard to follow
 
LASBUR said:
Im not argueing but I don't understand when you say we pretend Race doesn't exsist then you say it is racism when someone uses a broad reference about abuility. Not saying your wrong just don't follow. Its kinda like saying most men are stronger than most women is sexist. Im doing a terrible job of laying out what you said. But it was kinda hard to follow
Click to expand...

It is fair, and I would even say healthy, to notice racial trends. But they are just that, trends that emerge when we look at the averages of an entire population. But it is racism when we assume that a certain trend applies to everyone within that population.

For example, decades of data from the world of track & field tell us that on average, people descended from West Africa are faster than people descended from other places on earth. There is nothing wrong with noticing that trend or acknowledging that it exists. What is wrong is looking a person, noticing that there skin is black, and automatically assuming they are fast. Or looking at a person with white skin and automatically assuming they are slow.

In short, population-wide trends do exist, but we cannot use those trends to broadly characterize everyone within that population. It is wrong statistically because it does not acknowledge the huge inter-population variability that exists within any population of people; and it is wrong morally, because it ignores a person's uniqueness and individuality, all of the things that make each of us great.

Or to use your analogy, it is fine to say on average men are stronger than women. It is not okay to assume any given man is stronger than any given woman (I know lots of women who could kick my ***).
 
A couple things, 1 positive, 1 negative...

I think VandeBerg is more athletic than he gets credit for.... Not sure of the game but he made a heck of a catch in a 1-1 scenario and out jumped the defender to secure the catch.

I'm not sure VandeBerg is the next Ed Hinkel. I'd be interested to see his stats for dropped passes but I can recall a couple and one I believe would have been a 3rd down conversion in the ISU game.
 
Or to move from abstract to concrete, I do not have a problem with people saying that on average, black players have had a greater degree of success playing the skill positions at the highest level of football.

I have a problem with people saying that Matt VandeBerg is not worthy of playing time because he is white.
 
ibahawkeye said:
A couple things, 1 positive, 1 negative...

I think VandeBerg is more athletic than he gets credit for.... Not sure of the game but he made a heck of a catch in a 1-1 scenario and out jumped the defender to secure the catch.

I'm not sure VandeBerg is the next Ed Hinkel. I'd be interested to see his stats for dropped passes but I can recall a couple and one I believe would have been a 3rd down conversion in the ISU game.
Click to expand...

Do you think KMM is a good comp for Hinkel? They seem pretty similar to me, both in their style and production.

Career stats comparison:
Hinkel: 135 for 1588 (11.7 ypc), 15 TDs
KMM to date: 158 for 1618 (10.2 ypc), 11 TDs
 
CP87 said:
Do you think KMM is a good comp for Hinkel? They seem pretty similar to me, both in their style and production.

Career stats comparison:
Hinkel: 135 for 1588 (11.7 ypc), 15 TDs
KMM to date: 158 for 1618 (10.2 ypc), 11 TDs
Click to expand...

Hinkel's style was to catch everything that was thrown to him. The stats may be similar but I've yet to see somebody wearing black and gold get close to mimicking that style.
 
KMM has very good hands as well. We can probably all think of a few KMM drops, but they are few, and far between; I am sure Hinkel had drops as well, but being further away in time, we only remember the amazing catches. I will leave the final word on this one to those who are better Hawkeye historians than me.

For those with a better memory than me: can you think of examples of KMM making amazing catches, catches that make you marvel at his hands? I can think of the Nebraska TD last year (after having dropped a much easier one earlier in the game), and his TD catch at Purdue this year. Any others?
 
Thanks CP87. Tough subject to discuss without catching someones rath. The big difference to me in Hinkle and KMM is how long it took KMM to learn the position. It seemed JV was always having to tell him where to line up, He had a terrible time early on. I blame that on Soup for the most part his recivers were slow to learn good routes. I know that is generalizing, but is true
 
LASBUR said:
Thanks CP87. Tough subject to discuss without catching someones rath. The big difference to me in Hinkle and KMM is how long it took KMM to learn the position. It seemed JV was always having to tell him where to line up, He had a terrible time early on. I blame that on Soup for the most part his recivers were slow to learn good routes. I know that is generalizing, but is true
Click to expand...

To KMM defense, he had to learn a new offense his 2nd year under GDGD. An offense that wasn't so much about running set routes, but one where routes are adjusted based upon defense.

And to an earlier post asking about KMM's hands/ability... Could we toss in the adjustment he made in the air on the TD pass against Pitt during that incredible comeback in 2011? I'd vote yes.
 
Eda said:
To KMM defense, he had to learn a new offense his 2nd year under GDGD. An offense that wasn't so much about running set routes, but one where routes are adjusted based upon defense.

And to an earlier post asking about KMM's hands/ability... Could we toss in the adjustment he made in the air on the TD pass against Pitt during that incredible comeback in 2011? I'd vote yes.
Click to expand...

I agree Eda, Im told Soup didn't even know the offense that year. Never forget him in the Pitt game.
 
ibahawkeye said:
A couple things, 1 positive, 1 negative...

I think VandeBerg is more athletic than he gets credit for.... Not sure of the game but he made a heck of a catch in a 1-1 scenario and out jumped the defender to secure the catch.

I'm not sure VandeBerg is the next Ed Hinkel. I'd be interested to see his stats for dropped passes but I can recall a couple and one I believe would have been a 3rd down conversion in the ISU game.
Click to expand...

The catch you're talking about was against Pitt and it set up the first TD, IIRC. It was a very athletic play that he had to go over the top of the defender to steal away (the ball could very well have been picked or defended).

I agree whole heartily about his athleticism being underrated. Sure he doesn't have the measureables that DW's had, but he definitely brings stuff to the table. The guy just makes catches. In fact, he had a huge 3rd down conversion catch (picked it right up off of his shoe laces and got to the sticks) vs BallSt to keep the first TD drive alive.
 
ibahawkeye said:
A couple things, 1 positive, 1 negative...

I think VandeBerg is more athletic than he gets credit for.... Not sure of the game but he made a heck of a catch in a 1-1 scenario and out jumped the defender to secure the catch.

I'm not sure VandeBerg is the next Ed Hinkel. I'd be interested to see his stats for dropped passes but I can recall a couple and one I believe would have been a 3rd down conversion in the ISU game.
Click to expand...

To be fair, I said he could be that type of receiver, although he doesn't have as good of hands as Hinkel had. But that's a pretty high bar to clear, as Hinkel was/is easily the most sure-handed receiver I've ever seen play for Iowa. But Vandeberg I think can be a similar player in terms of using underrated athleticism and crisp route-running to get open, which is the most valuable asset for a chain-moving receiver like Hinkel was.
 
KMM has been a great receiver for Iowa. Ed Hinkel had amazing hands. He rarely dropped the ball and he was always able to scoop the throws that were in the dirt up and make the catch. The stats are similar and both have been very valuable. I think the advantage with Ed was roles and game planning seemed more consistent game to game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top