This Tells The Story

[InGoodCo]

sounds like you might get your wish, Stanley is unofficially "questionable" this weekend. I don't care what you say, I'll take the kid with 21 games of experience and 42 touchdowns on the road against Purdue over the unknown of Mansell every single day of the week and twice on Saturdays.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

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 consistently good Nate, not Good Nate/Bad Nate.

Here fixed it for ya

 

[Fryowa]

1) Dochterman - I guess I was referring to ranges of consecutive games, instead of picking the first two games than the last.

I guess when I look at it, Dochterman's goal was to show the juxtaposition of Stanley’s QB play at its worst and it’s best. To do that he took his worst four games and compared them to his best four games. I don’t think there’s any other way to do that.

The reason the stats stand out so much is because of how extreme it is, which shows the huge inconsistency. That’s why I mentioned game planning. The easy answer is that you always plan as if everything is going to go just right, but in reality we know that’s not the truth. No matter what anyone says I won’t believe that QB inconsistency (especially to this degree) doesn’t factor into the Ferentzes decision making, and not in a good way. And how do you confidently try to execute it without confidence?

Do you lean on the run when you shouldn't have to? Do you second guess your play calling because you don't have confidence he can hit a route? Even worse do you go conservative because now you're afraid you can't stretch things out? None of those coaches will ever admit that it's an issue, but we all know they think about it.

That last point is my biggest fear. I'll never hide from the fact that I was not a fan of BF coming on as OC. But...he's so far done what I didn't think he would do...he's gotten out of the conservative rut that I think has cost the Hawks games in the past and cost them better records, bowl games, bowl game wins, etc. To think that we might have to go back to the old style ball because we don't know who's going to show up is inexcusable. Is Mansell better? I don't know.

But I do know that a golfer who consistently hits a fade every shot is a whole lot easier to work with than a guy who bombs it 300 yards down the middle half the time and either hooks or slices it in the trees the other half, especially when you don't know which one you're going to get.

 

[InGoodCo]

 

[Hawkfnntn]

sounds like you might get your wish, Stanley is officially "questionable" this weekend. I don't care what you say, I'll take the kid with 21 games of experience and 42 touchdowns on the road against Purdue over the unknown of Mansell every single day of the week and twice on Saturdays.

Hadn't heard that yet his thumb I assume? If he can't grip it and rip it with the accuracy issue's he's already been having that sure won't help.

 

[Fryowa]

sounds like you might get your wish, Stanley is officially "questionable" this weekend. I don't care what you say, I'll take the kid with 21 games of experience and 42 touchdowns on the road against Purdue over the unknown of Mansell every single day of the week and twice on Saturdays.

For the record, I'll never wish for an injury to decide what happens and that wouldn't be my idea of getting my wish.

 

[InGoodCo]

For the record, I'll never wish for an injury to decide what happens and that wouldn't be my idea of getting my wish.

I didn't say you did, nor would I think you would want that....but I think there's a good chance we see Mansell at least in some sort of capacity this weekend. To me, that's not great and I bet you see the line move and reflect that. The rest of the country doesn't probably share your opinion on our starter at QB.

 

[4thngoal]

Yet here we sit with 2 losses. With Nate going what 60% in the first loss?
Say what you want, both losses were team losses.
Basically one less mistake or one play, BY ANYONE and we win those games

 

[Hawkfnntn]

I guess when I look at it, Dochterman's goal was to show the juxtaposition of Stanley’s QB play at its worst and it’s best. To do that he took his worst four games and compared them to his best four games. I don’t think there’s any other way to do that.

The reason the stats stand out so much is because of how extreme it is, which shows the huge inconsistency. That’s why I mentioned game planning. The easy answer is that you always plan as if everything is going to go just right, but in reality we know that’s not the truth. No matter what anyone says I won’t believe that QB inconsistency (especially to this degree) doesn’t factor into the Ferentzes decision making, and not in a good way. And how do you confidently try to execute it without confidence?

Do you lean on the run when you shouldn't have to? Do you second guess your play calling because you don't have confidence he can hit a route? Even worse do you go conservative because now you're afraid you can't stretch things out? None of those coaches will ever admit that it's an issue, but we all know they think about it.

That last point is my biggest fear. I'll never hide from the fact that I was not a fan of BF coming on as OC. But...he's so far done what I didn't think he would do...he's gotten out of the conservative rut that I think has cost the Hawks games in the past and cost them better records, bowl games, bowl game wins, etc. To think that we might have to go back to the old style ball because we don't know who's going to show up is inexcusable. Is Mansell better? I don't know.

But I do know that a golfer who consistently hits a fade every shot is a whole lot easier to work with than a guy who bombs it 300 yards down the middle half the time and either hooks or slices it in the trees the other half, especially when you don't know which one you're going to get.

At least with this part of things we are certainly more aggressive. Not necessarily with down field shots but with situational calls. Going for it on 3rd and longs 4 downs etc. One of the calls that pissed me off was the going for it on 4th down at the end of the half. That was a KF call obviously not BF but I bet BF had some influence on it. That was a must punt situation. Pin them inside 20 under a min to go and they don't even try to get 3. Instead they did and got momentum into half...

If Stanleys thumb is hurt bad enough for it to be an issue and it's even remotely cold out I say get Mansell in there. And if they do start Stanley I'd want a short leash...

 

[InGoodCo]

At least with this part of things we are certainly more aggressive. Not necessarily with down field shots but with situational calls. Going for it on 3rd and longs 4 downs etc. One of the calls that pissed me off was the going for it on 4th down at the end of the half. That was a KF call obviously not BF but I bet BF had some influence on it. That was a must punt situation. Pin them inside 20 under a min to go and they don't even try to get 3. Instead they did and got momentum into half...

If Stanleys thumb is hurt bad enough for it to be an issue and it's even remotely cold out I say get Mansell in there. And if they do start Stanley I'd want a short leash...

If he hurts, ya gotta have a short leash, I am guessing the staff will. I could see them just holding out to be cautious. I guess it's good that he's practicing.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

I guess when I look at it, Dochterman's goal was to show the juxtaposition of Stanley’s QB play at its worst and it’s best. To do that he took his worst four games and compared them to his best four games. I don’t think there’s any other way to do that.

The reason the stats stand out so much is because of how extreme it is, which shows the huge inconsistency. That’s why I mentioned game planning. The easy answer is that you always plan as if everything is going to go just right, but in reality we know that’s not the truth. No matter what anyone says I won’t believe that QB inconsistency (especially to this degree) doesn’t factor into the Ferentzes decision making, and not in a good way. And how do you confidently try to execute it without confidence?

Do you lean on the run when you shouldn't have to? Do you second guess your play calling because you don't have confidence he can hit a route? Even worse do you go conservative because now you're afraid you can't stretch things out? None of those coaches will ever admit that it's an issue, but we all know they think about it.

That last point is my biggest fear. I'll never hide from the fact that I was not a fan of BF coming on as OC. But...he's so far done what I didn't think he would do...he's gotten out of the conservative rut that I think has cost the Hawks games in the past and cost them better records, bowl games, bowl game wins, etc. To think that we might have to go back to the old style ball because we don't know who's going to show up is inexcusable. Is Mansell better? I don't know.

But I do know that a golfer who consistently hits a fade every shot is a whole lot easier to work with than a guy who bombs it 300 yards down the middle half the time and either hooks or slices it in the trees the other half, especially when you don't know which one you're going to get.

When did you watch me play golf?

 

[Fryowa]

Basically one less mistake or one play, BY ANYONE and we win those games

Not in the PSU game. The pick ran back to inside the five yard line was 7 mistake points, the wide open Hockenson was 7 mistake points. That's 14 points swung in the wrong direction; we lost by 6. I'm sorry but those aren't debatable.

And that's saying nothing of the bad misses.

 

[Fryowa]

When did you watch me play golf?

Well I would say I used myself as the example but I can't bomb it 300 down the middle. All of mine are duck hooks or Caddyshack slices.

 

[4thngoal]

Not in the PSU game. The pick ran back to inside the five yard line was 7 mistake points, the wide open Hockenson was 7 mistake points. That's 14 points swung in the wrong direction; we lost by 6. I'm sorry but those aren't debatable.

And that's saying nothing of the bad misses.

So was the Fant at the goal line. So was #30 being to far forward in the end zone and not even able to jump and tip, resulting in a PSU td.
Look closer, there were probably blocks that if held longer or maybe made a little better we convert or score even.
I'm not saying Nate played great. I'm saying, just like the Wisconsin game, we lost as a team.
Last year was no different.
Nate doesn't hit ISM and we probably would have lost to ISU.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

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?

When Stanley is flat, he is really flat.

 

[Motigerhawk]

Stanleys inconsistency is starting to turn into bad play. His confidence is low. Or it looks like it.
He neds someone to get into his head and fix it.

 

[Northside Hawk]

When did you watch me play golf?

Heck, I lose sight of my drives.

That's OK. I don't need eyes to know that my ball has safely splashed down into the drink.

Or rattled through half a dozen trees in the woods.

Or taken out about 20 corn stalks.

 

[Xerxes]

sounds like you might get your wish, Stanley is unofficially "questionable" this weekend. I don't care what you say, I'll take the kid with 21 games of experience and 42 touchdowns on the road against Purdue over the unknown of Mansell every single day of the week and twice on Saturdays.

Yep sounds like a lot of posters could get their wish this weekend.

 

[Caddy]

At this point in his career the issues aren't going to get fixed. He is what he is, good against poor teams, and below average against teams with a pulse.

 

[SteveGarvey1]

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.

Sure hope Brian and KOK are going over these things with him on film. You would think they would.