Stanley's take on the game

I'll give him credit for answering those questions.. had to be rough.

One thing I can't help but notices is year after year our unprepared and poorly coached our QB's are in hurry up or audible situations.

Kirk is a good coach.. but if in his twenty years he could have gave this the importance it needed and surrounded himself with coaches who could coach this competently he might have been great.

His stubbornness or inability to ever truly address this something that got in his way that he could never get right.
 
"Special" teams aren't 6-2 after giving away two of them.


Read the full sentence, this team is something special when they perform even average at QB. Because iowas defense is that good. Wisconsin lost was on turnovers more than anything. Stanely was fine that game.

It is hard to know what to do next. Coaches have to figure out a gameplan that works with stanely or just like every other position, try someome else.
 
Read the full sentence, this team is something special when they perform even average at QB. Because iowas defense is that good. Wisconsin lost was on turnovers more than anything. Stanely was fine that game.

It is hard to know what to do next. Coaches have to figure out a gameplan that works with stanely or just like every other position, try someome else.
I'd argue Stanley played well against Wiscy. The scramble and throw to Hock was a thing of beauty. It's a week to week thing though. Credit to PSU for taking advantage of a tremendously off day.
 
"It" is a big deal in sports competition. Those players, especially QBs, that have the "It" win games on their own, demonstrate calm and leadership in the midst of chaos, and for the lack of a better word, just plain get it done especially in crunch time and in big games. They have the "It" of a winner.

Stanley does not have that "It"...he tends to wilt under the pressure.

I don't mean to be harsh, sure he is a good kid, but the "It" just Ain't.

Kirk is lacking "It" as well, especially during the flow of the game. He is an "Isn't" with 9 lives for longevity.
 
This is the type of loss/performance that can really mess up a QB. Stanley seems to have no confidence...leadership is questionable at best. KF 24 hr “flush it” rule- we will see. Unfortunately It is kind of like a gunshy dog...may train great and look good in practice but once the gun goes off freezes and cant perform.
 
I'll give him credit for answering those questions.. had to be rough.

One thing I can't help but notices is year after year our unprepared and poorly coached our QB's are in hurry up or audible situations.

Kirk is a good coach.. but if in his twenty years he could have gave this the importance it needed and surrounded himself with coaches who could coach this competently he might have been great.

His stubbornness or inability to ever truly address this something that got in his way that he could never get right.
Kurt Ferrets has never had a two-minute drill for half- and game-ending possessions. Never.
 
"It" is a big deal in sports competition. Those players, especially QBs, that have the "It" win games on their own, demonstrate calm and leadership in the midst of chaos, and for the lack of a better word, just plain get it done especially in crunch time and in big games. They have the "It" of a winner.

Stanley does not have that "It"...he tends to wilt under the pressure.

I don't mean to be harsh, sure he is a good kid, but the "It" just Ain't.

Kirk is lacking "It" as well, especially during the flow of the game. He is an "Isn't" with 9 lives for longevity.
Barry Alvarez once wrote something I've never heard any other coach say, and I'm strating to wonder if it makes perfect sense.

He would take the time to watch football recruits when they played basketball, wrestled, or ran track. He claimed this was the best way to see how competitive an athlete truly was, when they were playing their second best sport, and also a good way to see how they handled pressure and how much they flinched.

Say what you want about their coaching change a few years ago, and I know Chryst was recruiting Stanley for Pitt. But in the end Wisconsin passed on him.

I wrote last week that Maryland was a good time for him to be bad Nate. This week was a bad time for him to be bad Nate. That team gave him every opportunity to win or get it into OT and he pissed just about everyone of them down his leg.

I wrote last week that he would have their back and possibly soon. Now it's a necessity. He owes them big time and Purdue would be a good place to start. It could be a crossroads game like Chuck Long Arizona in 1982, Matt Rodgers Oregon in 1989 or Rick Stanzi Pitt in 2008.

For the record, Stanley was a hell of a basketball player. My nephew and other classmates that I helped coach crossed paths with him several times at middle school tournaments, etc.
 
Last edited:
Stanley stood in the pocket and took the hits, during the interviews but not so much in the game. He is not good at going through his progressions and got "happy feet" early and often. I think he's a stand-up guy, but has no swagger. I think Purdue is very winnable, Michigan State's defense made Purdue's offense looked bad. Iowa can do the same. When Iowa went to the hurry-up late Stanley looked much better, but his accuracy has the look of an Iowa multi-year starter. Everything low and late. That has to be coaching,
 
Youd think they could give coaches a device for calling time outs...

Penn state got some pretty favorable no calls holding wise.

Another thing that bothers me is plays that clearly go out of bonds, occasionally they mistakenly just keep running the clock.

Tough lose after that outstanding start on defense. This team is special when they have a qb doing even an average job.

On out of bounds plays, clock stops until ball is set if greater than 2 mins left. Under 2 mins, clock stops until ball is snapped.
 
Sad thing is that if McSorley was a Hawkeye, Ferentz would try to make him a safety or a WR. I’m glad you guys have Stanley. He is sure to choke against the tough teams in big games.
 
Sad thing is that if McSorley was a Hawkeye, Ferentz would try to make him a safety or a WR. I’m glad you guys have Stanley. He is sure to choke against the tough teams in big games.
Check back when you're one of those tough teams. In the meantime stay away from the kettle when you're the pot.

Ferentz has a long history of players changing positions and making the NFL at those positions.

Minnesota has a long history of changing coaches.
 
Hey, I know we suck. Especially at QB. You know I’m right about the McSorley comment.

BTW, tell Stanley no crying in football or in his post game interviews!
 
Ok, good come back boys.

Last shot, can you guys go get him a friggin beer and a real haircut! He looks like Alfred E. Neuman. A crying Alfred E. Neuman!
 
Top