Ryan Boyle

Good for him. That's why he left. He just wanted to play. I see he's thrown 10 Tds to 1 Int... It's too bad Iowas staff didn't prefer that style over the pocket passer. I think he'd have done great for us. Can't help but watch McSorley out there and think Boyle could play like that too...
 
Hawkfnntn said:
Good for him. That's why he left. He just wanted to play. I see he's thrown 10 Tds to 1 Int... It's too bad Iowas staff didn't prefer that style over the pocket passer. I think he'd have done great for us. Can't help but watch McSorley out there and think Boyle could play like that too...
Click to expand...

And 550yds on the ground. He's got good size too. I guess after this year I am struggling to see how a guy like Boyle didn't get a shot. No way he's any less accurate than Nate. Playbook thing? Our offense this year could've been pretty dynamic if we any threat running the ball. Especially a mobile QB.
 
Are we really wondering "what if" over a guy who had only thrown 5 TDs prior to this week? I'm happy for the guy, but jeez people, he's 4-3 as a starter in I-AA.

Boyle couldn't beat out Wiegers, Stanley, Mansell, OR Petras. I get that Stanley isn't playing the best but this is dumb. As for the running element, Mansell has the exact same skill set as Boyle. We're not missing out that much.
 
SheagleHawk said:
And 550yds on the ground. He's got good size too. I guess after this year I am struggling to see how a guy like Boyle didn't get a shot. No way he's any less accurate than Nate. Playbook thing? Our offense this year could've been pretty dynamic if we any threat running the ball. Especially a mobile QB.
Click to expand...

Maybe because people can’t see the future? Why would Stanley not have kept the starting job going into this season? It’s kind of ridiculous to point to one good game Boyle had against some bad 1AA team and claim that the coaches were idiots for not giving him a shot. Not to mention we have a mobile QB in Mansel. FFS people.
 
Last edited:
Stanzi said:
Maybe because people can’t see the future? Why would Stanley not have kept the starting job going into this season? It’s kind of ridiculous to point to one good game Boyle had against some bad 1AA team and claim that the coaches were idiots for not giving him a shot. Not to mention we have a mobile QB in Petras. FFS people.
Click to expand...

Petra’s is mobile? Sure you have the right QB?
 
BVHawk95 said:
Are we really wondering "what if" over a guy who had only thrown 5 TDs prior to this week? I'm happy for the guy, but jeez people, he's 4-3 as a starter in I-AA.

Boyle couldn't beat out Wiegers, Stanley, Mansell, OR Petras. I get that Stanley isn't playing the best but this is dumb. As for the running element, Mansell has the exact same skill set as Boyle. We're not missing out that much.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Our offense is a pro-style offense. We need a pocket passer. Boyle was not and is not a pocket passer. I'm happy for him that he found what he wanted but if he wanted to be a college QB he should not have gone to a school running a pro-style offense.
 
SheagleHawk said:
And 550yds on the ground. He's got good size too. I guess after this year I am struggling to see how a guy like Boyle didn't get a shot. No way he's any less accurate than Nate. Playbook thing? Our offense this year could've been pretty dynamic if we any threat running the ball. Especially a mobile QB.
Click to expand...

It is just adds a great extra dimension to have a Banks, Tate, and even a Stanzi who could run when he needed to. It is the main thing that makes the naked bootleg work, etc
 
I thought he could have been a really good slot receiver, could he have been better than Easley I have no idea. With his physical toughness I could see him excelling at those New England Patriot type option routes.
 
Stanzi said:
Maybe because people can’t see the future? Why would Stanley not have kept the starting job going into this season? It’s kind of ridiculous to point to one good game Boyle had against some bad 1AA team and claim that the coaches were idiots for not giving him a shot. Not to mention we have a mobile QB in Petras. FFS people.
Click to expand...

Maybe bc Stanley wasn't exactly accurate last year either. I don't have enough fingers and toes to keep track of all overthrown potential TDs last year. But everybody was saying oh it's just his first year and wetting themselves over a TD statistic that nowhere near told the true story of Stanley's play. And nowhere did I suggest that Boyle should be starting. I was simply saying when your cigar store wooden Indian QB has trouble consistently completing relatively easy throws for even non collegiate ability QBs why the F aren't/weren't other guys getting looks/reps?
 
BVHawk95 said:
Are we really wondering "what if" over a guy who had only thrown 5 TDs prior to this week? I'm happy for the guy, but jeez people, he's 4-3 as a starter in I-AA.

Boyle couldn't beat out Wiegers, Stanley, Mansell, OR Petras. I get that Stanley isn't playing the best but this is dumb. As for the running element, Mansell has the exact same skill set as Boyle. We're not missing out that much.
Click to expand...

boyle would have runs/passed for 5 td's against O$U last season, for sure.

joking aside. it's nice to see the kid doing well. once a hawk always a hawk.
 
Knight78 said:
Exactly. Our offense is a pro-style offense. We need a pocket passer. Boyle was not and is not a pocket passer. I'm happy for him that he found what he wanted but if he wanted to be a college QB he should not have gone to a school running a pro-style offense.
Click to expand...

That type of inflexibility is why KFs best years are long behind him. What good is a proto pocket passer who can't even complete routine throws with any consistency? None. And that is why we lost the only real meaningful games again this season. When was the last time Stanley won a game for us? Not a game we win, but one where Nate put the team on his back and carried the team to a big win? (Please don't say Iowa State game last year)
 
trj said:
I thought he could have been a really good slot receiver, could he have been better than Easley I have no idea. With his physical toughness I could see him excelling at those New England Patriot type option routes.
Click to expand...

Remember, Greg Davis said Boyle was still learning how to run a slant route
 
SheagleHawk said:
And 550yds on the ground. He's got good size too. I guess after this year I am struggling to see how a guy like Boyle didn't get a shot. No way he's any less accurate than Nate. Playbook thing? Our offense this year could've been pretty dynamic if we any threat running the ball. Especially a mobile QB.
Click to expand...
I feel this way about the backups we have now. How could they possibly be less accurate than Stanley at his worst? For Kirk union cards might have ended for DBs, but not for QBs.
 
SheagleHawk said:
That type of inflexibility is why KFs best years are long behind him. What good is a proto pocket passer who can't even complete routine throws with any consistency? None. And that is why we lost the only real meaningful games again this season. When was the last time Stanley won a game for us? Not a game we win, but one where Nate put the team on his back and carried the team to a big win? (Please don't say Iowa State game last year)
Click to expand...
That’s one of many reasons, yes. The worst part is that if we just had a guy that could play average under pressure we could be looking at one or fewer losses. Weird that the guy can play lights out when it doesn’t matter but totally falls apart when we need him to lead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top