QB question

C

colthawk

Member
I had some time on my hands today and decided to run to ground a trend that I thought I saw throughout the Ferentz era in regards to quarterback play (Wins and Losses) when the season starts with a new starter vs a returning starter. It just appears to me that the team plays better through the years with a new starter vs a returning one and I wanted to see how the numbers supported that.

Basically I went through the last 18 seasons, determined the starting quarterback and checked the wins vs the previous year. I threw out 3 years when the quarterback position was unsettled (2000, 2008, 2014).

In the end the numbers I got where, when Iowa has a new starting qb they have averaged 1.78 more wins than the season before, when the starter returns they have averaged 2.8 less wins than the season before.

This is not a scientific poll, just someone who was bored at work and looking a reason to get pumped up for football this year. That said, those numbers look to be backwards from what you would normally think.

I've been reading message boards for a long time and up until now have chosen to let everybody think I'm an idiot instead of opening my mouth and prove it but I've never seen this statistic mentioned and just wanted to share it.
 
Trends are meant to be broken, but let's wait until next season to break that trend.
By chance, did you happen to factor in any injuries that might have happened, e.g. CJB last year...?
 
Interesting. Hard to explain why, but interesting. Maybe we should insert a new starting QB every game.;)
 
I didn't figure in injuries specifically. The only "filtering" I did was to throw out 2000 (McCann, Beutjer, and Mullen), 2008 (Christensen/Stanzi), and 2014 (Rudock/ Beathard).

That said I hope the trend continues this year and shatters next year as well.
 
colthawk said:
I didn't figure in injuries specifically. The only "filtering" I did was to throw out 2000 (McCann, Beutjer, and Mullen), 2008 (Christensen/Stanzi), and 2014 (Rudock/ Beathard).

That said I hope the trend continues this year and shatters next year as well.
Click to expand...
Or, they could go with Wiegers next year, so as to not buck any trends.
 
I would not throw out 2014 since Rudock started all the games except for the one where he was hurt.

2nd, I would not throw out injuries because that may be part of the explanation why 1st year starters do better than returning starters. In other words, being healthy may be more important than being experienced. Plus 1st year starters are told to run more when they don't know what to do. They can do that because they are healthy their first year.

Finally, the other mystey for me is why do QB stats sometimes get better for returning starters but number of wins go down.
 
Fair point on Rudock, if you add that in the average for returning starters is 2.33 less wins that the year before.

I also did it with points. The new starters averaged 0.35 more points per game while the returners averaged 1.2 less points per game.

Good call about Wiegers.

Go Hawks!!
 
Interesting that points don't go down much for returning starters. Makes you wonder how much defensive points go up or down.
 
colthawk said:
I had some time on my hands today and decided to run to ground a trend that I thought I saw throughout the Ferentz era in regards to quarterback play (Wins and Losses) when the season starts with a new starter vs a returning starter. It just appears to me that the team plays better through the years with a new starter vs a returning one and I wanted to see how the numbers supported that.

Basically I went through the last 18 seasons, determined the starting quarterback and checked the wins vs the previous year. I threw out 3 years when the quarterback position was unsettled (2000, 2008, 2014).

In the end the numbers I got where, when Iowa has a new starting qb they have averaged 1.78 more wins than the season before, when the starter returns they have averaged 2.8 less wins than the season before.

This is not a scientific poll, just someone who was bored at work and looking a reason to get pumped up for football this year. That said, those numbers look to be backwards from what you would normally think.

I've been reading message boards for a long time and up until now have chosen to let everybody think I'm an idiot instead of opening my mouth and prove it but I've never seen this statistic mentioned and just wanted to share it.
Click to expand...

Nicely done. Way to back it up. Yes, it has been mentioned on here many times the regression of QB's in subsequent years, which is an anomaly and a bit disconcerting. Maybe if it happens once, but this seems to be an issue at Iowa for some reason. Keep posting!
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Nicely done. Way to back it up. Yes, it has been mentioned on here many times the regression of QB's in subsequent years, which is an anomaly and a bit disconcerting. Maybe if it happens once, but this seems to be an issue at Iowa for some reason. Keep posting!
Click to expand...
Hopefully the addition of KOK as QB coach will change that. Ricky Stanzi did have a great senior season in 2010 under him.
 
I just think back to Tate, his first year, when in doubt he tucked and ran, Stanzi too. It seemed they made more big plays their first year. I would like to see if their tackled for loss went up during their second year, my guess is that they held on to the ball rather than run, or risk an interception.
 
I have posted about this before. The Ferentz era QBs have the most wins in the year they earn the starting position outright. There are a variety of reasons and scenarios that land a QB w/ the start from the git go be it a previous year's QB competition, graduation, transfers, injuries etc...

There also seems to be a "phase" issue w/ the rosters. Again it seems to be caused by a variety of reasons-recruiting, transfers, disciplinary.... For example the Hawkeyes should have an experienced QB next year but loose three senior LBs. That alone might account for less wins in 2018 if the pattern holds.

Stanzi in 2010 is a prime example of the "phase" problem. Statistically he had his best year in 2010, played like an experienced senior QB but the losses/injuries in the LB core helped bring his win total down.

Past results do not necessarily predict future outcomes so you can take all this w/ a shot of kool-aid.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Nicely done. Way to back it up. Yes, it has been mentioned on here many times the regression of QB's in subsequent years, which is an anomaly and a bit disconcerting. Maybe if it happens once, but this seems to be an issue at Iowa for some reason. Keep posting!
Click to expand...
Actually, there was a post on here a whlie back that showed that statiscally and QB rating wise QBs were either basic even or improved each year. The major exception being JVB, but I think we can all agree that was on GD.
 
GesterHawk said:
Actually, there was a post on here a whlie back that showed that statiscally and QB rating wise QBs were either basic even or improved each year...
Click to expand...
That is attributable to the "phase" issue. I think it comes down to not being able to recruit entire classes of 4 and 5 star players. The thing is that many of the highly ranked players in CFB have reached their peak and are ready to play when they arrive @ college. Some of them continue to advance but many have plateaued. The Alabamas of the sport dominate because attrition has less of an effect in positional unit gaps. Their cycles gently undulate near the peak as the ability of their teams is usually very good. Experience becomes the biggest factor in the depth of their cycles.

Iowa, as a developmental program, gets plenty of players who have not yet peaked along with many who will never reach the higher levels. So recruiting is a lot harder because one has to predict many players ceiling's several years down the line. All of the random factors that constitute attrition have time to play out over those time spans. Also some players peak quicker, some slower. These factors amplify the range between the peaks and the valleys of the cycles.

Looking at it positionally the RBs and LBs are peaking this year and the cycle is shallow. Both lines haven't peaked yet and it looks like their frequency is longer with many players at the higher levels. Iowa has been recruiting well here. QB and WR are on the lower, uphill side of the cycle as is the defensive backfield. The kickers are in the middle of the uphill side of the cycle. When most (or all) of the cycles are near the top Iowa has good to great seasons. When most of the units are near the bottom of the cycle this forum becomes nearly unbearable.

So Stanley may have his greatest number of wins this season because most of the cycles are going in the positive direction. He may statistically have a better year in 2018 but there will be significant fall off @ LB and some fall off on the lines next year which may result in less wins.

Will the historical patterns hold true this year? Will the random things that happen break it? We start finding out Saturday.
 
bitmap said:
That is attributable to the "phase" issue. I think it comes down to not being able to recruit entire classes of 4 and 5 star players. The thing is that many of the highly ranked players in CFB have reached their peak and are ready to play when they arrive @ college. Some of them continue to advance but many have plateaued. The Alabamas of the sport dominate because attrition has less of an effect in positional unit gaps. Their cycles gently undulate near the peak as the ability of their teams is usually very good. Experience becomes the biggest factor in the depth of their cycles.

Iowa, as a developmental program, gets plenty of players who have not yet peaked along with many who will never reach the higher levels. So recruiting is a lot harder because one has to predict many players ceiling's several years down the line. All of the random factors that constitute attrition have time to play out over those time spans. Also some players peak quicker, some slower. These factors amplify the range between the peaks and the valleys of the cycles.

Looking at it positionally the RBs and LBs are peaking this year and the cycle is shallow. Both lines haven't peaked yet and it looks like their frequency is longer with many players at the higher levels. Iowa has been recruiting well here. QB and WR are on the lower, uphill side of the cycle as is the defensive backfield. The kickers are in the middle of the uphill side of the cycle. When most (or all) of the cycles are near the top Iowa has good to great seasons. When most of the units are near the bottom of the cycle this forum becomes nearly unbearable.

So Stanley may have his greatest number of wins this season because most of the cycles are going in the positive direction. He may statistically have a better year in 2018 but there will be significant fall off @ LB and some fall off on the lines next year which may result in less wins.

Will the historical patterns hold true this year? Will the random things that happen break it? We start finding out Saturday.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you on this. Iowa needs to excel in all phases to have a truly fantastic team. But a lot of good Iowa teams have gotten by with OK offenses with great defenses.

The good news is that I think Iowa has had 3 really good Iowa fit classes in a row with some really good atheletes. I think we are going to see an increase in athleticism across every position. I also think we are building really good depth, not only in the trenches, but going further away from the ball. All good things that should help combat the phasing we have seen in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top