Stanzi has always been average at best

the commentators said he will play sunday, the experts say he will have a shot to play. Stanzi did nto have a good game with the 2 picks but he his a very good qb and will probably get better. Thanks for the memories Ricky!
 
Love Stanzi. Just wish he would realized that some passes required a bit more zip.. In tonight's game those passes that were picked wouldn't have been if he threw them harder.. He threw a lot of FLOATER"S tonight.
 
hawkinn3 said:
Ricky will be a very good pro quarterback for a long time, most likely a backup he will be an NFL QB.

He is very accurate, and that is the most important thing you look for in a young QB. You can't teach that for the most part. I know some question his arm but any decent scout or position coach will tell you that arm strength can be increased. Also, few teams run an air raid down the field passing game that requires a huge arm to sling the ball down field on every play. The game is about short routes and accurate passing now days.

Ricky can make every throw and tosses a fine deep ball when he needs to. Given his chance over a 16 game NFL season (after soem time to learn and assuming he has a few targets) I would predict his number would be around 57% passing, 3800 yards, 18 TDs, and 10 INTs. Great? No, but not too bad and perfectly acceptable for a player with a run game and decent defense.
Click to expand...

Hilarious.

Peyton Mannings rookie season:

56.7% passing/3739 yards/233.7 ypg/26 TD/28 INT

Stanzi > Manning - obviously
 
ShadasRevenge said:
Seneca Wallace and Sage Rosenfels have made fairly nice livings being career backups, haven't they?

Stanzi is going to get drafted.
Click to expand...

neither seneca or sage are cosidered good NFL quarterbacks. below average would describe them pretty well.

have they made a nice living, yea. but the poster I reponded to claimed that a career backup can somehow be "very good" despite holding a clipboard 90% of the time.

this is not and ISU v Iowa dicussion, don't try to make it one
 
Stanzi would be below average QB in the Pros (which are the elite crop). In college he was very good. Maybe his numbers aren't as gaudy as other QBs but the style of offense doesn't ask him to throw it 50 times a game. As a career back-up in the pros you are looking at 32 teams and 3 QBs per team that is 96 QBs in the world so he would be 1 of the top 96 QBs in the world. Wow that sounds terrible considering the the BILLIONS of people that he is better than. That is like saying setting the a record for passer efficiency in a year at a school isn't a big deal...oh wait I think Ricky did that and if last night stopped him from doing that he is second. Terrible company of Long and Hartlieb, etc.
 
tanabs said:
neither seneca or sage are cosidered good NFL quarterbacks. below average would describe them pretty well.

have they made a nice living, yea. but the poster I reponded to claimed that a career backup can somehow be "very good" despite holding a clipboard 90% of the time.

this is not and ISU v Iowa dicussion, don't try to make it one
Click to expand...

I was simply pointing out two names who I thought you (as a Clone) might be familiar with.
 
hwks1 said:
Anyone believes he will play on Sunday is seriously deluded
Click to expand...

This is how "average" Stanzi has been:

--Winning drive against MSU in 2009
--Two TD passes in 2010 Orange Bowl
--Comebacks against Wisconsin and Indiana in 2009
--Destruction of MSU in 2010

Too many others to count.

Here is how "average" you are....(in other words, if you improve 80000000000% you MIGHT reach "average").

To put it bluntly: You suck. And posts/threads like this are precisely why you, and people like you, suck irredeemably.
 
tanabs said:
you line up and see X, you change the play to Y. You line up and see Z, you change the play to V. that's a system. STanzi isn't peyton manning out there calling his own plays. he does what he's been taught to do and he does it rather well much of the time. when he has to creat on his own or the drawn up play isnt there, that is when he makes mistakes.

I don't think it can be argued that stanzi is about average for a college QB and benefitted greatly from those around him. case in point, Vandenberg coming in last year against Ohio state and having the success that he did. any QB with a decent arm and an understanding of the offense can come in and have success.
Click to expand...

Listen, I can tell you don't have a smart phone so I'll take it a bit easy on you...

What you just said is stupid. For the last time we don't run a system. Mizzou ran a "system", Indiana and NW run systems, we don't. We run a pro style ball controll offense which features a running attack along with a mixture of quick pass, and longer devloping PA plays. By your definition every QB in colllege would be "system" guys, cause all of them are taught to audible out of bad plays.

Second in back to back sentences you go from saying Stanzi does a good job of checking out of plays that are dead to saying he struggles when the drawn up play isn't there. Which is it?

Lastly you imply he's a sytem QB because he doesn't do what Peyton Manning does. Guess what, no one has done what Peyton Manning does since Jim Kelley, and he didn't even do it all the time.

I just googled "system QB" on my smart phone and I got the following definition... "System quarterback is an American football term used to describe a quarterback who flourishes under a particular offensive system, specifically one that focuses on passing."

How on earth does Stanzi fit that description?
 
I think Rick has benefited from following Jake. The offense was SO terrible with Jake that Rick was like walking after being in a wheel chair. That said, we don't just want to walk. We want to run. This sport is so driven by QB play it's ridiculous. Imagine Iowa with a Blaine Gabbert...
 
DuffMan said:
Listen, I can tell you don't have a smart phone so I'll take it a bit easy on you...

What you just said is stupid. For the last time we don't run a system. Mizzou ran a "system", Indiana and NW run systems, we don't. We run a pro style ball controll offense which features a running attack along with a mixture of quick pass, and longer devloping PA plays. By your definition every QB in colllege would be "system" guys, cause all of them are taught to audible out of bad plays.

Second in back to back sentences you go from saying Stanzi does a good job of checking out of plays that are dead to saying he struggles when the drawn up play isn't there. Which is it?

Lastly you imply he's a sytem QB because he doesn't do what Peyton Manning does. Guess what, no one has done what Peyton Manning does since Jim Kelley, and he didn't even do it all the time.

I just googled "system QB" on my smart phone and I got the following definition... "System quarterback is an American football term used to describe a quarterback who flourishes under a particular offensive system, specifically one that focuses on passing."

How on earth does Stanzi fit that description?
Click to expand...

what I said was that stanzi can audible when the defense is showing they are prepared for the offensive play that has been called (change at the line). that is what he is taught, if you see Y, you do X... like I said. where he lacks is when a play breaks down (i.e. after the ball is hiked and the intended target is covered). this is what I meant when saying "create on his own". case in point was forcing throws last night, not checking down or throwing it away. He did do a better job of this throughout the year then he has i past seasons, but definitely had some mental lapses and/or showed poor judgement last night. his numbers dont exactly reflect it (TD's vs INT's) but there were plenty of Iowa drives that fell short this season due to errant throws by stanzi or as KF would say "lack of execution".

stanzi beneifitted from those around him. we can go back and forth over what defines a "system" if you want, but the point still stands. Vandenberg could have lead this Iowa team to a very similar record over the past 3 seasons, or any QB for that matter that can hand the ball off and get the ball in the vicinity of a guy with the talent of a DJK.

maybe use your smart phone and google "objectivity"?
 
I've seen average QB's in this system. Thier names are Chandler and Tate. Stanzi was light years ahead of both of those guy. Your point is nothing more than a wild *** guess at this point, we don't really have any idea what JVB is or is not capable of doing.

The bottom line is that being "objective" regarding Stanzi is that he is a very very good college QB that will get drafted. On average about a dozen college QB's get drafted each and every year. Thats 12 out of 119 starting QB's (assuming none of those drated are D1AA or D2 guys). That means guys who have absolutely zero team bias (READ OBJECTIVE) and who's jobs/livelyhood depends on them being good evaluators of talent have decided that Stanzi is a little better than "average".

The smart phone money says they are probably a little more qualified to judge talent than a intermet message board hack. Even if I didn't have my own opinion on the matter I think I'd take thier word for it.
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
This is how "average" Stanzi has been:

--Winning drive against MSU in 2009
--Two TD passes in 2010 Orange Bowl
--Comebacks against Wisconsin and Indiana in 2009
--Destruction of MSU in 2010

Too many others to count.

Here is how "average" you are....(in other words, if you improve 80000000000% you MIGHT reach "average").

To put it bluntly: You suck. And posts/threads like this are precisely why you, and people like you, suck irredeemably.
Click to expand...

So you don't remember the bad games he had with those? You do realize how many points we scored BEFORE that final drive at MSU, right? I'm not saying Stanzi has been bad, because that would be absolutely false, but to say he is great is not correct either.

Stanzi will go down as a great leader and a great Hawkeye. I have seen enough of him to know that he will never be a great NFL player. Look at how many college QB's go into the NFL and are even able to STAY in the league. Not many. Some of you need to understand football a little more and stop re-watching the "great Hawkeye wins" on your DVR and remembering only the amazing things Stanzi has done. Really disect how he throws the ball and reads the defense, then you may understand why he won't start in the NFL.

I love the Hawks and am in general a pretty optimistic person, but my OPINION is that he will not be an NFL QB. Not even a backup.
 
So I'm assuming when he gets drated and makes a roster you will eat your words? I see very few people claiming he's going to be a great NFL quarterback. I see a great many more thinking he gets drafted somehwere and holds a clipboard most of his career.
 
Hawkeye11en1 said:
So you don't remember the bad games he had with those? You do realize how many points we scored BEFORE that final drive at MSU, right? I'm not saying Stanzi has been bad, because that would be absolutely false, but to say he is great is not correct either.

Stanzi will go down as a great leader and a great Hawkeye. I have seen enough of him to know that he will never be a great NFL player. Look at how many college QB's go into the NFL and are even able to STAY in the league. Not many. Some of you need to understand football a little more and stop re-watching the "great Hawkeye wins" on your DVR and remembering only the amazing things Stanzi has done. Really disect how he throws the ball and reads the defense, then you may understand why he won't start in the NFL.

I love the Hawks and am in general a pretty optimistic person, but my OPINION is that he will not be an NFL QB. Not even a backup.
Click to expand...

The assertion of the OP was that "Stanzi is average at best". The OP is flat-out wrong.

JVB got very little action this year. There was a reason for that.

I care little for Stanzi's NFL prospects. While he was at IOWA, he was much better than "average".
 
DuffMan said:
I've seen average QB's in this system. Thier names are Chandler and Tate.
Click to expand...

I'll give you Chandler, but you can't have Tate. Drew Tate was much better than average at Iowa. The thought that Stanzi is light years ahead of him is laughable...

But I don't want to derail this thread with another Stanzi v. Tate discussion. So I'm going to be proactive and agree to disagree with you (and your smart phone) on this one. :)
 
DuffMan said:
So I'm assuming when he gets drated and makes a roster you will eat your words? I see very few people claiming he's going to be a great NFL quarterback. I see a great many more thinking he gets drafted somehwere and holds a clipboard most of his career.
Click to expand...


Yup. Just don't think he will make an NFL team.
 
Drew Tate does NOT go 0-5 on chances to win the game in the 4th quarter this year like Stanzi did. I also believe Stanzi could not have done as well in 2004 as Tate did. Very confident of both things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top