Miller/Donatell

miller didnt have a great game but he like morris was left on an island a lot. that is not an easy spot to be left in.

donatell didnt do anything bad really but he seemed over matched speed wise or he thought he was because he seemed to retreat (turn his back to offense) really quickly. maybe he needs to give more cushion or they just shouldnt play him close to los but a ss should be playing downhill.

i thought donatell was supposed to be the better pass defender and nico the run defender...if that was the case i figure we would have seen more nico but my guess is he is still thinking and struggling with his keys.

miller, donatell, morris or any other player that plays does so because the coaches (not just kf but also coordinators and position coaches) believe they give iowa the best chance to win. morris isnt out there because he played as a frosh it is because he is our best mlb (if it was because he was playing early than nolan macmillan would be starting right now too). miller and donatell must be our 2 best safeties right now. i just question whether the scheme fits their strengths because i dont like what they did in the game and i think other teams may exploit them in those positions. 1st game it can be fixed.
 
JonDMiller said:
I guess this thread falls into the file of Kirk doesn't play the best players who give his team the best chances at success, right?
Click to expand...

A comment completely devoid of any sort of critical thinking. Its a risk/reward analysis. Is there a safe player to play, who will potentially make fewer mistakes, and likely make less plays given said player's speed/skill/talent/size. Or is there a guy with greater speed/skill/talent/size who is also a greater risk of being out of position (due to experience, age, intellect, etc.).
 
For those of you who think KF would never play a lesser experienced player who is simply better than a guy who is more experienced see:

A) Banks/McCann for the entire 2001 season
B) Stanzi/JC for 4 games in 2008.

Both are clear examples of a far and away better performer who was on the bench because of lack or experience and knowledge of the playbook.

I have no idea of the Donatell/Law situation. For all I know Donatell is simply better. I haven't seen Law play to determine that.

But anyone who thinks McCann gave Iowa a better chance at winning than Banks in 2001 or that JC gave us a better chance at winning than Stanzi in 2008 needs to have their head examined.
 
BQuastU said:
JonDMiller said:
I guess this thread falls into the file of Kirk doesn't play the best players who give his team the best chances at success, right?
Click to expand...
A comment completely devoid of any sort of critical thinking. Its a risk/reward analysis. Is there a safe player to play, who will potentially make fewer mistakes, and likely make less plays given said player's speed/skill/talent/size. Or is there a guy with greater speed/skill/talent/size who is also a greater risk of being out of position (due to experience, age, intellect, etc.).
Click to expand...

please show demonstratable proof nico law is bigger or faster or stronger or makes more plays. k thanks.

ps the roster says donatell is bigger.
 
ATLHawkeye said:
Solomon Warfield is gonna be awesome!... now that's a cool name.
Click to expand...

heck yes it is!
he'll need to start from DAY ONE, no matter if he's teh best or not, just so we can maximize our use of his wicked kewl name
 
Xerxes said:
For those of you who think KF would never play a lesser experienced player who is simply better than a guy who is more experienced see: A) Banks/McCann for the entire 2001 season B) Stanzi/JC for 4 games in 2008. Both are clear examples of a far and away better performer who was on the bench because of lack or experience and knowledge of the playbook. I have no idea of the Donatell/Law situation. For all I know Donatell is simply better. I haven't seen Law play to determine that. But anyone who thinks McCann gave Iowa a better chance at winning than Banks in 2001 or that JC gave us a better chance at winning than Stanzi in 2008 needs to have their head examined.
Click to expand...

hindsight is 20/20...at the time i bet kf felt they gave us a better chance to win...knowledge of the playbook is quite important.

right now kf and wilson and pp must believe that donatell gives the best chance...in a few yrs maybe we will be able to say that he was wrong but that is living in the past.

there was no guarantee that stanzi or banks would be improvements. these are after the fact comments and the staff wont put someone on the field that they think isnt as good or better than the other player unles there is an injury or they are in the doghouse. looking back we could determine that shonn greene should have played more when he was younger or any number of things...but right now they are going with donatell because they believe he is the better player.
 
JonDMiller said:
I guess this thread falls into the file of Kirk doesn't play the best players who give his team the best chances at success, right?
Click to expand...

BQ beat me to it. It isn't about KF not playing the players he thinks will help his team. It's about Kirk being overly cautious and over emphasizing an occasional mistake over athleticism.
 
Miller was playing really well at the end of last season and I am excited about having him on the back of the defense directing things the next two seasons yet. My beef with the run wasn't as much about the angle which was bad, but part of that came from being so far off the line of scrimmage and playing over top of one half of the field. We were in man on a big 3rd and 8. They had as many blockers in the box as we had defenders...coaches should have had Miller in the box to make sure he or Morris were going unblocked at the line.

NIU was no threat to pass...we needed to be more aggressive in our run defense. On the whole, the D played well statistically...but it was a QB and an entire oline making their first starts.
 
JonDMiller said:
I guess this thread falls into the file of Kirk doesn't play the best players who give his team the best chances at success, right?
Click to expand...

I don't think Ferentz ALWAYS plays the best players who give his team he best chances at success in a given single game. I think Ferentz will play someone who isn't as good as someone else, but that someone who gets playing time buys in more than the talented player. They do things as they are asked and they get playing time. It's more of setting an example which has lasting effects on the team as a whole and over an entire season and over a player's entire 4-years within the program.

The question is, does Ferentz sometimes lean too heavily on the "example setting".?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top