This Tells The Story

[Fryowa]

I get throttled by some posters here when I bring up the subject of Stanley being an all or nothing QB. The response is always some kind of garbage about how even Tom Brady has bad days (Jesus Christ, really.....).

Dochterman's tweet below perfectly sums up what I've been saying all year. People can continue to sniff Stanley's jock all they want, but there's no denying that his inconsistency is killing the Hawkeyes' chances at taking Wisconsin's spot as the dominant team in the west. They've given us the perfect opportunity to do it, too. Wisconsin losing to NW basically rolled over on their back, showed their necks, and handed the Hawks a knife. They said, "Here you go, Iowa. It's yours if you want it." Then Stanley proceeds to trip over his own shoelaces, fall down the stairs and stick the knife in his own leg like Will Ferrell in Talladega Nights.

Not only is the inconsistency horrible at face value, it's totally random. Someone tell me how any coaching staff can be confident in a game plan without knowing whether Chuck Long or Scott Mullen is going to show up. That's how far apart his two alter egos are. How are WR/TEs supposed to play full speed if it's always lingering in the backs of their minds that they'll probably have to turn around mid stride to catch a ball thrown a yard behind them, or dive down for a pass in the dirt? How are the Hawks supposed to build a lead when they have to potentially waste the first quarter figuring out whether Nate is Jekyl or Hyde that particular day?

Hate me or not, these numbers don't lie and there's no way to know whether Mansell is more consistent or not until you give it a shot. The "ride or die, by god I'm going down with this ship" folks are the ones who hopefully won't bitch if we end up in the RedBox Bowl. Could Stanley finish out the year strong? Absolutely; I hope he does. The homers on the board will be the first ones to let me know. But they'll also be the first one's to piss and moan about the rest of us being negative if he doesn't. It couldn't be that we were right instead of just being negative, could it?

 

[Motigerhawk]

He was named starter, therefore he remains starter. Its an Iowa thing.

 

[HawkGold]

You got throttled on style and retaliation. Disagreeung generally isn't the issue.

Wisky rolling over had nothing to do with Iowa. Iowa played a strong team on the road and lost in front of 100k close fans. Iowa needs to figure out how to imperfectly beat good teams. The weaker ones they seem to handle.

 

[NikeHawk21]

-Wisconsin will be underdogs on the road in two of their remaining 4 games

-NS played a great game against Wisconsin and without two special teams turnovers we are 7-1 and in control of the west.

-Nate Stanley is not Tom Brady

-Nate Stanley certainly needs to be more consistent

-If we win Saturday we are in great shape to head to Indy which should be Iowa’s goal every year

 

[mopkins]

Stanley's inconsistency is a huge issue. It can't really be denied. I'm still not sure benching him is the correct answer, but he hasn't been good enough to win the big games.

 

[eveningnewsteam]

I’m tired of Iowa’s Oline getting blown up by good teams. The recruiting on that unit needs a good kick in the ass

 

[Hawkfnntn]

There's no getting around it when Stanley is good he's really good. When he's bad he's well... Pretty darn bad. It's frustrating to have such a huge gap between his levels of play. Once he missed TJ on that wide open play I just had the most sinking feeling in my gut and he obviously let that affect him the rest of the day. The kid has most of the tangibles you want in a QB. Minus that huge intangible the 'it' factor Stanzi and Tate kinda had. They had a little different 'its' but they had it. Stanley doesn't seem to be able to recover from a rough start to a game. It just snow balls on him. Stanzi could throw 4 picks and still win the damn game some how.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I get throttled by some posters here when I bring up the subject of Stanley being an all or nothing QB. The response is always some kind of garbage about how even Tom Brady has bad days (Jesus Christ, really.....).

Dochterman's tweet below perfectly sums up what I've been saying all year. People can continue to sniff Stanley's jock all they want, but there's no denying that his inconsistency is killing the Hawkeyes' chances at taking Wisconsin's spot as the dominant team in the west. They've given us the perfect opportunity to do it, too. Wisconsin losing to NW basically rolled over on their back, showed their necks, and handed the Hawks a knife. They said, "Here you go, Iowa. It's yours if you want it." Then Stanley proceeds to trip over his own shoelaces, fall down the stairs and stick the knife in his own leg like Will Ferrell in Talladega Nights.

Not only is the inconsistency horrible at face value, it's totally random. Someone tell me how any coaching staff can be confident in a game plan without knowing whether Chuck Long or Scott Mullen is going to show up. That's how far apart his two alter egos are. How are WR/TEs supposed to play full speed if it's always lingering in the backs of their minds that they'll probably have to turn around mid stride to catch a ball thrown a yard behind them, or dive down for a pass in the dirt? How are the Hawks supposed to build a lead when they have to potentially waste the first quarter figuring out whether Nate is Jekyl or Hyde that particular day?

Hate me or not, these numbers don't lie and there's no way to know whether Mansell is more consistent or not until you give it a shot. The "ride or die, by god I'm going down with this ship" folks are the ones who hopefully won't bitch if we end up in the RedBox Bowl. Could Stanley finish out the year strong? Absolutely; I hope he does. The homers on the board will be the first ones to let me know. But they'll also be the first one's to piss and moan about the rest of us being negative if he doesn't. It couldn't be that we were right instead of just being negative, could it?

OK. First Dochterman simply cherry picks games to show the skew in stats or consistency. Anybody can do that with any QB.

Secondly, I get your pizzed and you make valid points and I genuinely enjoy your posts, but I think you should lay off Stanley just a bit. I have a hard time laying into a 20 year old who's working his butt off in practice every day and trying the best he can. He's a decent guy, and seems to represent the team and university well. But, you make valid points that he maybe doesn't do the best under pressure but he still has to continue to learn or manage that. He's not the first college QB that has had difficulty with a pass rush or pressure.

Now if you personally had experience playing QB and leading a Div 1 team, you get my "feel free to criticize pass". You would have that right. But, like me, I suspect you haven't been in Stanley's shoes or played on a Div 1 football team. Most don't. I'm not saying you don't have a right to an opinion, but maybe just tone it down a tad.

I'm with ya. It sucks being so close and not getting the prize.

I can almost guarantee you Nathan Stanley would be the first one to agree with you.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I’m tired of Iowa’s Oline getting blown up by good teams. The recruiting on that unit needs a good kick in the ass

I've never understood why Iowa and their coaches aren't getting high 4* and some 5* at the line positions, with their history of getting these guys to the NFL and playing in the NFL right away. That is one position we should be able to recruit highly rated players at.

"If you want to learn how to play on the line and get to the NFL, go to Iowa."

 

[MelroseHawkins]

There's no getting around it when Stanley is good he's really good. When he's bad he's well... Pretty darn bad. It's frustrating to have such a huge gap between his levels of play. Once he missed TJ on that wide open play I just had the most sinking feeling in my gut and he obviously let that affect him the rest of the day. The kid has most of the tangibles you want in a QB. Minus that huge intangible the 'it' factor Stanzi and Tate kinda had. They had a little different 'its' but they had it. Stanley doesn't seem to be able to recover from a rough start to a game. It just snow balls on him. Stanzi could throw 4 picks and still win the damn game some how.

Stanley doesn't "flush" well. Learn something from the bad plays or misses, then flush it. The really good QB's can do this. Stanzi had that quality. There was a stretch where Stanzi threw like three pick 6's in three games in a row. But, during those games he flushed it and didn't let him affect him the rest of the game.

The play is over, move on.

 

[homes]

It's commented on a lot, but his throwing mechanics are entirely inconsistent. Sometimes off his back foot, sometimes just his arm, sometimes with a nice follow through. It's no wonder balls sail over head, get spiked in the ground, or are delivered on the money. Inconsistent delivery = Inconsistent results.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Stanley doesn't "flush" well. Learn something from the bad plays or misses, then flush it. The really good QB's can do this. Stanzi had that quality. There was a stretch where Stanzi threw like three pick 6's in three games in a row. But, during those games he flushed it and didn't let him affect him the rest of the game.

The play is over, move on.

Yup for sure. And I kinda go back and forth on wanting a QB having a little fire in his belly. Tate seemed to go a tad further than I liked with it at times. Sometimes I like the Joe cool style like Joe Montana where you can't tell if he threw a pick 6 or a 80 yard TD. Somewhere in the middle with not too much of either would be preferred. But perfect is just well tough to attain...

 

[HawkGold]

I’m tired of Iowa’s Oline getting blown up by good teams. The recruiting on that unit needs a good kick in the ass

Iowas O line has been more oft to the not so great side as opposed to really good which at times historically exceptional.

 

[HawkGold]

It's commented on a lot, but his throwing mechanics are entirely inconsistent. Sometimes off his back foot, sometimes just his arm, sometimes with a nice follow through. It's no wonder balls sail over head, get spiked in the ground, or are delivered on the money. Inconsistent delivery = Inconsistent results.

If by this point the mechanics are an issue...not likely to get massively better.

 

[Denverhawk1]

Truth is, Stanley isn’t a “natural” quarterback. He’s a ball player, but He doesn’t have moxie, leadership, balls. He has the athletic ability. He’s smart, works progressions. But he doesn’t have the “it” factor that Iowa in particular needs from its quarterbacks. When he’s down he can’t lift himself out of it in real time. He can’t “shake it off.” He’s just missing that God-given natural personality trait that moves the needle from serviceable to good to great. It’s like he listens really well, takes instructions really well, studies really well, but when game time comes, and it’s 100 miles per second he’s not able to do it all then. I bet he is great at whatever he does after football, though. Great.

 

[eveningnewsteam]

It wasn’t all Stanley. He was off, but not the only one. Render snapping the ball off Stanley’s leg on 3rd down at midfield before the fake punt, the oline getting beat all day. I’m not putting this on the D, they were great. It’s on Stanley and the offensive line.

 

[Fryowa]

OK. First Dochterman simply cherry picks games to show the skew in stats or consistency. Anybody can do that with any QB.

I'm no Dochterman fanboy but he included every game this year in those stats. If you're referring to the grouping he used, how else would you group them when trying to show the disparity when he plays well vs. not?

As far as the criticism, I obviously haven't played D-1 football. But I also haven't been the president, been a cop, been a school teacher, a clergyman, coached basketball, or a million other people that we as humans criticize all the time. Believe it or not, I find way more fault with coaches not making a change than I do with Stanley. We could debate that all day long and never change each other's mind. I also understand he's a good guy, a good rep for the U and team, and he'll go much farther than I ever will in life. But those things don't preclude one from criticism. Nate will be totally fine. Nothing any of us says here will have even a tiny impact on his future or well being.

We could go the route of, "if you haven't coached or played shut your mouth," but that sort of eliminates 99% of the purpose of a college team message board. How bout we compromise and I won't retract my opinions, but I'll stop criticizing Nate Stanley. If it gets worse (hopefully not) I might have to interject with a generalized I told you so, but folks can just ignore it.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I'm no Dochterman fanboy but he included every game this year in those stats. If you're referring to the grouping he used, how else would you group them when trying to show the disparity when he plays well vs. not?

As far as the criticism, I obviously haven't played D-1 football. But I also haven't been the president, been a cop, been a school teacher, a clergyman, coached basketball, or a million other people that we as humans criticize all the time. Believe it or not, I find way more fault with coaches not making a change than I do with Stanley. We could debate that all day long and never change each other's mind. I also understand he's a good guy, a good rep for the U and team, and he'll go much farther than I ever will in life. But those things don't preclude one from criticism. Nate will be totally fine. Nothing any of us says here will have even a tiny impact on his future or well being.

We could go the route of, "if you haven't coached or played shut your mouth," but that sort of eliminates 99% of the purpose of a college team message board. How bout we compromise and I won't retract my opinions, but I'll stop criticizing Nate Stanley. If it gets worse (hopefully not) I might have to interject with a generalized I told you so, but folks can just ignore it.

1) Dochterman - I guess I was referring to ranges of consecutive games, instead of picking the first two games than the last.
2) Bold above - I was careful to not go to that extreme, as I feel you and others have the right to criticize. I never want to take one's opinion away. Everybody has a right to one. I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't criticize him or another player, but it seems since the game you were taking every chance you could to nail him in every post. It just seemed to be quite virulent, so just wanted you to keep it in perspective.

But, the criticisms are correct and Nate needs to grow that part of his game. It is part of the maturing process.

 

[4thngoal]

Like I said, nothing wrong with saying a player didn't play well.
That said, this conversation wouldn't be a big deal if Fant had ran the goal line play correctly.
How about if Jake had been one step deeper in the end zone and atleaat tipped PSU's td pass.

There was to many mistakes by everyone.

 

[Northside Hawk]

I'll boil it down to two words. Short memory. Nate needs to develop it. Next play. If he's putting too much pressure on himself to be too perfect, which BF and possibly Rob have mentioned, it's going to give the entire offense tight collars. Next thing running backs are going to be afraid to fumble. Loosen up and turn it loose. He still has a 2-1 TD to INT ratio and has shown improvement in extending plays. Be consistent Nate, not Good Nate/Bad Nate.