Qb battle

H

Hawkfnntn

Well-Known Member
Is anyone else a little antsy about how this battle is playing out? It seems like for there being a legit QB battle going on it's been pretty quiet on here and with the media about it. I don't have a favorite as I haven't seen enough of either of them to really have one. I was just hoping one of them would have been the hands down guy by now is all. There's a few ways to look at it. Is it because both are really good? Or are they both not where they should be? It doesn't feel like it's because they are really good to me...
I guess I would have liked for Stanley to be the guy if only to validate having taken his RS off last yr for being CJs backup. Evidently there must not have been much separation between them last yr also. (Which makes me scratch my head as to why you'd burn Stanleys RS) Granted Wiegers could have improved a lot since then heck if I know how this has all played out. I'm just wondering how it'll end up and what level of play should we expect to see.
 
Both of these guys came in as 4* recruits. I think we were all a bit surprised when Nathan passed Tyler for the #2 spot last fall. Now, I think we simply have two very solid QB candidates who are battling it out. Of course, there is a part of me that says "maybe" Iowa wants to be sure they have Tyler on board and ready to go for this fall even if he does not win the starter position. They sure don't want to lose him to transfer. And, QB's get hurt. A lot. Keep both in the fold. No worries.
 
I'm not all that concerned about having a spirited competition during the Spring. There is a new offense being implemented and both of them need to know it as either of them are only an injury away from being "the man". This way, they both get 1st team reps to gain a better understanding of the new offense. I would imagine that after the 1st week of fall camp, there will be a starter named, and they will move forward at that point.
 
Could a lot of what we've heard publicly about them being even in practice just be a smokescreen? The last things this staff wants is NS to get complacent with his starting job and for TW to transfer. The whole "QB battle" would nicely prevent both of those situations from happening.
 
I think Stanley having an extra year available has to be given some weight. Wiegers hasn't stepped on a game field in over a year and a half, and Stanley has the potential to be a 3 year starter. We could be thankful for the experience in 2019.
 
I am sure part of it is motivational. I believe the coaches see more potential in Stanley so the job is probably Stanley's to lose, but he still has to put the work in and make the progress that the coaches expect him to make.

If Stanley fails to progress like expected, there is a capable 4 year guy ready to step in instead. Stanley knows he has to earn the job, and Wiegers knows he could grab it if Stanley does not earn it.
 
Xerxes said:
Could a lot of what we've heard publicly about them being even in practice just be a smokescreen? The last things this staff wants is NS to get complacent with his starting job and for TW to transfer. The whole "QB battle" would nicely prevent both of those situations from happening.
Click to expand...

Could be, but I don't think so. I think this is more of Brian's observations of needed changes coming to fruition. We've had issues for years making sure the backup QB is ready if/when the starter goes down. Year after year, you see programs all over the country losing their starter and the backup comes in and performs well. And more often than not, when it happens to Iowa, it looks like the backup has never taken a meaningful practice snap in his life.

I like this approach....welcome it even. The odds say that, at some point during the year, you're going to lose your starting QB. It's high time we made sure he was ready when that time comes.
 
Yeah now that Cook has made his move to TE (finally) there's the transfer possibility lurking for pretty much whomever loses this qb gig that just seems to be the nature of the biz nowadays. So keeping them both stringing along till fall is certainly in the coaching staffs favor regardless of if they already know who they prefer already. Having just Boyle and Mansell backing up whomever the starter ends up being would be kinda dicey...
 
SpiderRico said:
Could be, but I don't think so. I think this is more of Brian's observations of needed changes coming to fruition. We've had issues for years making sure the backup QB is ready if/when the starter goes down. Year after year, you see programs all over the country losing their starter and the backup comes in and performs well. And more often than not, when it happens to Iowa, it looks like the backup has never taken a meaningful practice snap in his life.

I like this approach....welcome it even. The odds say that, at some point during the year, you're going to lose your starting QB. It's high time we made sure he was ready when that time comes.
Click to expand...

Yeah I tend to agree with a lot of what you've said here. I'll add a couple of things:

1. I was at the WDM practice. Honestly, Weigers looked a little bit more smooth with everything that he did. Specifically his footwork. Stanley's a big dude and his footwork was a little sloppy compared to Weigers. However, it's obvious Stanley has a cannon for an arm. I think it's fair to say he has a higher ceiling, but I could see why the competition is legit.

2. I also think there's a reason BF wants everything to be a competition. He doesn't want to be a first year offensive coordinator who comes in and names a starting QB right away. He wants to show the entire team that starting positions need to be earned. Nothing is going to be handed to anyone. I'm sure it's a bit of a philosophy thing that helps him earn the respect from the team.
 
DP5555 said:
Yeah I tend to agree with a lot of what you've said here. I'll add a couple of things:

1. I was at the WDM practice. Honestly, Weigers looked a little bit more smooth with everything that he did. Specifically his footwork. Stanley's a big dude and his footwork was a little sloppy compared to Weigers. However, it's obvious Stanley has a cannon for an arm. I think it's fair to say he has a higher ceiling, but I could see why the competition is legit.

2. I also think there's a reason BF wants everything to be a competition. He doesn't want to be a first year offensive coordinator who comes in and names a starting QB right away. He wants to show the entire team that starting positions need to be earned. Nothing is going to be handed to anyone. I'm sure it's a bit of a philosophy thing that helps him earn the respect from the team.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. This is about as clean of a slate as a new OC can have. Nothing is more important than getting the qb position right and by no means is he or the team out anything by waiting till fall. I was just looking at it from the comfort of a fans perspective of having the confidence of knowing what the pecking order is and where everyone stands. I’m sure he’d like to have one of them emerge so he can focus more on working one guy with the 1st team. I think whomever it ends up being needs every rep they can get and then some. As nice as getting 2 qbs ready would be it’d be especially nice to have the starter be ready to go game 1. It’s not just that BF is going to be tweaking the offense some. To what extent we can’t be sure yet. But neither of the QBs has taken any meaningful snaps yet. I just hope the growing pains don’t cost us games we should win
 
If weigers wins the job, please PLEASE redshirt Stanley. Don't waste 2 years of this kids eligibility. Boyle can take the 10 snaps a year we give to our 2nd stringer in the first handful of games. If (god forbid) there is an injury then pull the redshirt.
 
ShockHawk22 said:
If weigers wins the job, please PLEASE redshirt Stanley. Don't waste 2 years of this kids eligibility. Boyle can take the 10 snaps a year we give to our 2nd stringer in the first handful of games. If (god forbid) there is an injury then pull the redshirt.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is, if he's redshirting, he's getting absolutely no meaningful snaps in practice. You can't just pull a redshirt off of a QB that hasn't taken any 1st team reps in practice and expect him to just perform, like you could with, say, a DE.
 
SpiderRico said:
The problem with that is, if he's redshirting, he's getting absolutely no meaningful snaps in practice. You can't just pull a redshirt off of a QB that hasn't taken any 1st team reps in practice and expect him to just perform, like you could with, say, a DE.
Click to expand...

Is that a rule? Red shirted players can't take meaningful snaps in practice?
 
It is Spring I am not going to read a whole lot into this. Now that will change if we are hearing the same things the 2nd and 3rd week of August.
 
SpiderRico said:
Could be, but I don't think so. I think this is more of Brian's observations of needed changes coming to fruition. We've had issues for years making sure the backup QB is ready if/when the starter goes down. Year after year, you see programs all over the country losing their starter and the backup comes in and performs well. And more often than not, when it happens to Iowa, it looks like the backup has never taken a meaningful practice snap in his life.

I like this approach....welcome it even. The odds say that, at some point during the year, you're going to lose your starting QB. It's high time we made sure he was ready when that time comes.
Click to expand...
What are some examples of the Hawkeye back up looking terrible?
I thought Stanley filled in nicely last year on the few plays CJ was out.

I thought CJ looked pretty good subbing in for Rudock when Rudock was hurt.

I thought Vandy played pretty well when Stanzi was injured.

Stanzi coming in for Jake was a godsend.

The only time I can think of in Kirk's tenure where the back up looked pretty unready was Manson coming in for Tate.

What am I missing?
 
SamBrownlee48 said:
What are some examples of the Hawkeye back up looking terrible?
I thought Stanley filled in nicely last year on the few plays CJ was out.

I thought CJ looked pretty good subbing in for Rudock when Rudock was hurt.

I thought Vandy played pretty well when Stanzi was injured.

Stanzi coming in for Jake was a godsend.

The only time I can think of in Kirk's tenure where the back up looked pretty unready was Manson coming in for Tate.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...

He was probably refering to the times the starting QB gets hurt and the backup has to play the rest of the game.

Best example I can think of was in 2009 when JVB came in for Stanzi against NW. JVB looked loss and Iowa ended up losing. The next week, with a full week of practice, JVB looked a lot better.

Of course, there are counter examples to this argument. Beathard had no problem in 2014 coming off the bench against Pitt and leading Iowa to a comeback victory.
 
SamBrownlee48 said:
What are some examples of the Hawkeye back up looking terrible?
I thought Stanley filled in nicely last year on the few plays CJ was out.

I thought CJ looked pretty good subbing in for Rudock when Rudock was hurt.

I thought Vandy played pretty well when Stanzi was injured.

Stanzi coming in for Jake was a godsend.

The only time I can think of in Kirk's tenure where the back up looked pretty unready was Manson coming in for Tate.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...
JVB coming into that NW game looked like a fish out of water after Stanzi got hurt. He was ready against OSU, but NW not so much.
 
Fryowa said:
I think Stanley having an extra year available has to be given some weight. Wiegers hasn't stepped on a game field in over a year and a half, and Stanley has the potential to be a 3 year starter. We could be thankful for the experience in 2019.
Click to expand...
2019? According to Hawk QB trends, this will be Stanley's greatest season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top