Rudock and Leshun Daniels bits

[PCHawk]

Sure, other coaches might pick their starters differently. Doesn't mean the on-field results would prove those coaches ultimately made a better choice. Nico Law certainly didn't look good once he stepped into the lineup.

I agree it wouldn't always prove to be the right choice. That was meant to debunk the arguement that if Kirk chose the starter he obviously made the right choice. There are lots of equally qualified coaches that would chose differently. Just like some coaches would have went with Banks even with his limited knowledge of the playbook. And who knows, its even possible they would have been wrong and Banks would have lost all confidence ans sucked it up bad the following year.

But please for the love of god can people stop saying that people think Kirk choses the wrong people on purpose because he wants to lose. No one thinks that and no one is saying that. He choses his guys based on what he thinks it most important. Some people think his priorities are a little off. That's it. Nothing more nothing less.

 

[PhoenixHawk]

We're going back 12 years now, arguing about a premise that is just a waste of time; that Kirk doesn't play the players who he believes gives Iowa the best chance to win. Since he is the one with more exposure to the things that actually take place every day, I trust that he knows what's best more than we do on the outside.

That said, it doesn't mean he's beyond reproach for say leaving ARob in the game in the 4th Q of a blowout at home v MSU in 2010...or clock mismanagement...but intentionally not playing the players who he thinks gives the team the best chance to win, based on his thousands of practice rep observations and tape reviews per month? This is just pure silliness.

You start with a dodge of the question, but then come around and admit that KF isn't "beyond reproach" in his decision making. Thanks for stepping up.

KF benched Banks immediately after the kid stepped oob a yard too soon. (Does he pull every OL after a missed assignment, or D-Back for reading a play wrong and giving up a big one? Hardly.) That, to me, is a coach that is more concerned with the "teachable moments" in a game (or punishing a kid for a one time mistake) than he is in winning the game. There is no argument to be made. Everyone that watched that game said that Banks gave Iowa its *only* chance to win. Any other explanation is pure sycophancy.

 

[hwk23]

Stats can be deceiving. The majority of Sokol's yardage came on two pass plays where the receiver made something happen after the completion. Personally, I am all in on the Beathard train, but Rudock would be my second choice. Nothing against Sokol, but nothing I have seen from him shows me that he is better or has more potential than either Rudock or Beathard.

Actually, I think appearances can be deceptive, stats are pretty objective. Sokol had 10.2 ypa in the Spring game to and almost no yards after the catch. THat was splitting snaps against 1st team. I will bet right now he's completed more passes with throws over 10 yards (in the air) than both of them combined. Sooner or later it isn't a fluke. Again, it's not a beauty contest and you probably wouldn't have known T-Mart would be Nebraska's all-time leading passer either.

 

[RocknRollface]

Going off of kirk's history of decision making, I'm pretty certain that's what he was thinking. At least if something happens we have em backed up.

Honestly that makes perfect sense.

 

[RocknRollface]

We're going back 12 years now, arguing about a premise that is just a waste of time; that Kirk doesn't play the players who he believes gives Iowa the best chance to win. Since he is the one with more exposure to the things that actually take place every day, I trust that he knows what's best more than we do on the outside.

That said, it doesn't mean he's beyond reproach for say leaving ARob in the game in the 4th Q of a blowout at home v MSU in 2010...or clock mismanagement...but intentionally not playing the players who he thinks gives the team the best chance to win, based on his thousands of practice rep observations and tape reviews per month? This is just pure silliness.

That is NOT what ANYONE is saying.

People are saying that he could, at least possibly, be honestly believing the wrong players are the ones who give him the best chance because he believes avoiding mistakes is more important than it actually is.

And this would be more likely to manifest itself at the QB and RB spots because they handle the ball the most.

Im not saying this is true, just an idea.

 

[Foval21]

His motion is fine. This isn't a beauty contest, pal. Have you ever seen TMart play at Nebraska? He happens to be the leading passer in Nebraska history, with almost 10,000 passing yards at year end. Sokol looks like Tom Brady compared to him. Chuck Long didn't have a text book motion either. There are tons of examples. Let me guess you'd bet on the preppy country club player against Lee Trevino, right?

His motion is actually very flawed. Some qbs can have flawed motions and still do well so I won't say it is something that would kill him. His motion is not over the top and his hand gets under the ball which will cause it to float and in turn cause more interceptions, usually. Rudock has a more over the top motion that will cause the ball to be on a more downward path meaning less interceptions, usually. Philip Rivers has a similar motion as Sokol. He has had great career but is also very prone to floating the ball to the defense.

 

[Hal9000]

Actually, I think appearances can be deceptive, stats are pretty objective. Sokol had 10.2 ypa in the Spring game to and almost no yards after the catch. THat was splitting snaps against 1st team. I will bet right now he's completed more passes with throws over 10 yards (in the air) than both of them combined. Sooner or later it isn't a fluke. Again, it's not a beauty contest and you probably wouldn't have known T-Mart would be Nebraska's all-time leading passer either.

Get off the SOKOL love train, all you see are stats. Bethard is so far ahead of Sokol it is not even a close race for the backup slot.

 

[RocknRollface]

This "avoiding risk" is not what is happening. It is actually called experience. Most 1st year starters at QB make throws they SHOULDN'T make, either because of bad reads, or not understanding the opponents D, or tendencies, or any other number of factors. As they get more playing time, and adjust to the speed of the game, they understand these thing better, and don't make the throw they shouldn't, as they now make correct reads, and understand what the D is giving them. If your QB has a year experience and he is still forcing throws, because he can't read the defense, or understand where the play should go, then you are probably looking at a Steele Jantz type, and that ain't good.

The reason a QB should or shouldn't make a throw is all about risk.

While what you said is true it does not make what hw23 said untrue at all.

Making an experienced decision and avoiding risk/mistakes are basically the same thing.

Every pass has a chance to be completed, incompleted or intercepted.

There is inherent risk in every pass and you have to balance that risk. You can err to far to either side.

Forcing throws is one thing but being afraid to pull the trigger is another.

Throwing to a receiver in single coverage is generally thought to be an acceptable risk because the offense has the advantage of knowing where the play is designed to go. Throwing into double coverage is generally not an acceptable risk unless the receiver is a huge mismatch.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

You start with a dodge of the question, but then come around and admit that KF isn't "beyond reproach" in his decision making. Thanks for stepping up.

KF benched Banks immediately after the kid stepped oob a yard too soon. (Does he pull every OL after a missed assignment, or D-Back for reading a play wrong and giving up a big one? Hardly.) That, to me, is a coach that is more concerned with the "teachable moments" in a game (or punishing a kid for a one time mistake) than he is in winning the game. There is no argument to be made. Everyone that watched that game said that Banks gave Iowa its *only* chance to win. Any other explanation is pure sycophancy.

Interesting that you post that. Just the other day I was reading (or watching) an interview with Chuck Hartlieb. He talked about making that ill-fated pitch in the Tennessee game that was run back 95 yards for a TD. He said when he came to the sidelines he expected to be crushed. But Hayden told him "Forget about it, we're getting the ball back. Go out there and move your team". That's leadership.

Lest some of you forget, Chuck went on to be one of the greatest QBs in Iowa history.

 

[hwk23]

Interesting that you post that. Just the other day I was reading (or watching) an interview with Chuck Hartlieb. He talked about making that ill-fated pitch in the Tennessee game that was run back 95 yards for a TD. He said when he came to the sidelines he expected to be crushed. But Hayden told him "Forget about it, we're getting the ball back. Go out there and move your team". That's leadership.

Lest some of you forget, Chuck went on to be one of the greatest QBs in Iowa history.

Love those Hayden stories. He really knew how to get guys to go out and win.

 

[tm3308]

Actually, I think appearances can be deceptive, stats are pretty objective. Sokol had 10.2 ypa in the Spring game to and almost no yards after the catch. THat was splitting snaps against 1st team. I will bet right now he's completed more passes with throws over 10 yards (in the air) than both of them combined. Sooner or later it isn't a fluke. Again, it's not a beauty contest and you probably wouldn't have known T-Mart would be Nebraska's all-time leading passer either.

1. Stats are hardly objective. They can be twisted pretty easily when you elect to ignore all the variables (which you've repeatedly shown a willingness to do in this thread alone).

2. You're betting that Sokol has complete more attempts on passes longer than 10 yards based on absolutely nothing. That's not an objective measure that supports your argument; it's projection based on speculation.

3. Being the leading passer at Nebraska doesn't say a whole lot. The previous record was 5,850 yards, and that was set by a JUCO transfer who played just 2 years (which tells you how "storied" Nebraska's passing attack was prior to Zac Taylor's arrival). Nebraska is an option program; always has been.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

Love those Hayden stories. He really knew how to get guys to go out and win.

Yep. Hayden had two things KFz doesn't. I'll let you fill in the blanks.

 

[deanvogs]

The reason a QB should or shouldn't make a throw is all about risk.

While what you said is true it does not make what hw23 said untrue at all.

Making an experienced decision and avoiding risk/mistakes are basically the same thing.

Every pass has a chance to be completed, incompleted or intercepted.

There is inherent risk in every pass and you have to balance that risk. You can err to far to either side.

Forcing throws is one thing but being afraid to pull the trigger is another.

Throwing to a receiver in single coverage is generally thought to be an acceptable risk because the offense has the advantage of knowing where the play is designed to go. Throwing into double coverage is generally not an acceptable risk unless the receiver is a huge mismatch.

We just disagree then. What JV did last year was avoid any risk at all. What most QB do when they gain experience is learn when to take their shots, and that is dictated by what the D is giving them, and what their experience tells them is there. It doesn't mean they take any less shots, but yes they do avoid some of the stupid risks they took....I guess I think that is a good thing. Not all risk is good, and to act like all risk taking is good, is just insane.

 

[deanvogs]

His motion is fine. This isn't a beauty contest, pal. Have you ever seen TMart play at Nebraska? He happens to be the leading passer in Nebraska history, with almost 10,000 passing yards at year end. Sokol looks like Tom Brady compared to him. Chuck Long didn't have a text book motion either. There are tons of examples. Let me guess you'd bet on the preppy country club player against Lee Trevino, right?

Do you think that Sokol has Tmart's running ability, as that is the only reason he is an effective passer at all. Tmart wouldn't start at QB on a pee wee football team if he ran like Sokol, or CJ, or Rudock for that matter.

 

[DDStretch]

Good grief. Jake Rudock hasn't even been named the starter yet and people are calling for the backup.

People quickly forget this kid was the quarterback for one of the best teams in the nation while he was in high school. He's got some skills. Let's at least give him a quarter or two.

 

[whammer33024]

anyone have anything to say about schimonek(sp?)? obviously not in the starter race, just curious how he looks and how bright his future is

 

[whammer33024]

Well shoot... let's see... umm... Rudock completed a pass to himself against the first team defense! Didn't see that on Sokol's stat line whammer!

boom! switched me back to the rudock camp

 

[Makavelihawk]

I don't care who the starter is. I just know that I would much rather have the QB that gives Iowa the best chance to win as opposed to having the QB that gives Iowa the least chance of losing.

 

[kmurp]

I don't care who the starter is. I just know that I would much rather have the QB that gives Iowa the best chance to win as opposed to having the QB that gives Iowa the least chance of losing.

Me too. I'm just not sure which of those guys fit that bill. I don't think that any of them have probably shown that they are clearly the best so far. Jake gets the first shot, it seems. I hope he can do enough to win the first game.

 

[deanvogs]

I don't care who the starter is. I just know that I would much rather have the QB that gives Iowa the best chance to win as opposed to having the QB that gives Iowa the least chance of losing.

When JC and RS were competeing for the starting job, KF was looking for for the player that gave Iowa the best chance to win. Lots of times the player with more experience, who makes less stupid plays is the player who gives you the best chance to win. You can't keep trotting out players who continually make twice as many mistakes as the other player, and expect to win.

I point to Steele Jantz. He was by far the best QB ISU had, and this showed on the field and in practice. Yet he just continually made so many mistakes that cost his team the game, that the coaching staff ended up switching to the "safer" player. Why is this so hard to understand?

It isn't like we have Vince Young sitting on the bench, and KF won't play him. We have 3 QB's with similar skill sets, and whoever wins it I will be happy with, and root for.

PS Makavelihawk this wasn't necessarily aimed at you, I just used your post as a starting off point.