Thoughts on Vandenberg

[tm3308]

I meant more of that it wasn't exactly a game winning drive like he had in 2009. It was a go ahead drive, which Indiana had the chance to win, and failed.

It wasn't really a drive at all. It took less than a minute to go 88 yards on three plays. We scored, but it was because we made a big play, not a back-breaking drive. It's sort of like when a guy rushes for 130 yards and a TD on 25 carries, but 70 yards came on a big TD run. That player didn't really have a great game, just one great carry.

 

[sportstalent]

We may be the only ones who think that. I keep hearing "better pure passer", but I think this guy is going to be a better clutch player also. It remains to be seen, and Stanzi was clutch as hell in 2009, but he came up completely empty in 2010. No game winning drives, other than Indiana in 2010, which I almost don't count.

Everything JVB has shown tells you he could be "destined for greatness" as Hayden put it. He now has to show what he can do with the game on the line against a defense that is coming hard. I think, based on what he did two years ago at OSU with the Rose Bowl on the line, he'll prove he can handle it and thrive.

We are going to be very tough to stop offensively. We can run the ball, and we can play ball control in the passing game. Young teams usually make great strides from game one to game two...I'm interested to see how they do on the road against ISU.

Let me expand a little more on my thought of JVB clearly better than Stanzi when all said and done. It all depends on how much studying JVB does, if he has as good of understanding of the offense and the defense as Stanzi did, he clearly has much more physical ability than Stanzi.
Yes, Stanzi had some good comebacks, but I would hate Stanzi if I were any other Iowa fan, he did nothing for three quarters and then played well for one. His stats were so misleading, I give him credit for making the NFL, but his shortcomings will come to a head eventually. There were so many times that he threw it right to a defender and it wasn't picked off, or so many times that he missed wide open guys. If anyone needs a reminder, just think of the Arizona game and that was a microcosm of his career, but there were times Iowa won those games. For a QB that had so many buzzwords surrounding him, I was never impressed with him as a whole. JVB may not have as may wins as Stanzi when it is all said and done, but he also isn't playing with the same defense, or skill players. JVB has pure talent and if he gets the mental game to go with it, he may very well end up a Top 15 pick in the NFL, he could be that good.

 

[SeattleHawkeye]

I as well, James is a more polished player at the same point in time and just overall more talented.

In all honesty he was probably the better player last year, not that I think Stanzi should have been replaced at all.

I feel similarly re Rick and JVB...and it's a bit strange, b/c that seems a bit contradictory to almost all conventional thinking when it comes to who should be playing (though it could be argued Adam Robinson was in a comparable situation, as most people thought he was less physically gifted than other RB's). I think the easiest manner to explain it is that JVB is just a more refined, polished QB in terms of his mechanics and skill set. But Rick had onions downstairs, and that's a quality QB's either have or don't. I think JVB also has that quality, based largely on the OSU game, but it would be nice to see more evidence of it. There will come a time when he needs to lead the O down the field, and I'll look fwd to him doing it.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

I feel similarly re Rick and JVB...and it's a bit strange, b/c that seems a bit contradictory to almost all conventional thinking when it comes to who should be playing (though it could be argued Adam Robinson was in a comparable situation, as most people thought he was less physically gifted than other RB's). I think the easiest manner to explain it is that JVB is just a more refined, polished QB in terms of his mechanics and skill set. But Rick had onions downstairs, and that's a quality QB's either have or don't. I think JVB also has that quality, based largely on the OSU game, but it would be nice to see more evidence of it. There will come a time when he needs to lead the O down the field, and I'll look fwd to him doing it.

Agreed, right now it's promise and potential. Until he has to make plays to get his team to victory in the fourth quarter...we can't put him in any category close to the great Iowa QB's. His time has come and I think he's going to be a great one. He just has that swagger, like he can make all the throws. He made a few mistakes yesterday in going to the wrong receiver, but he made a decision and put the ball where it needed to be 90% of the time.

 

[DuffMan]

So we got one guy who doesn't think Stanzi should get credit because the defense almost allowed Indiana to come back and win, and another who thinks it doesn't count because we scored in only 3 plays so it shouldn't count as a drive.

 

[tm3308]

So we got one guy who doesn't think Stanzi should get credit because the defense almost allowed Indiana to come back and win, and another who thinks it doesn't count because we scored in only 3 plays so it shouldn't count as a drive.

Well, a three-play TD possession isn't any better for the defense than a 3 and out. They got all of 52 seconds to rest before having to go back out. It's no wonder that they allowed Indiana to march right down the field.

 

[DuffMan]

Except for the part that their team has seven more points when they get back on the field. Seriously scoring too quickly should never be a criticism when you need a TD to take the lead.

 

[tm3308]

Except for the part that their team has seven more points when they get back on the field. Seriously scoring too quickly should never be a criticism when you need a TD to take the lead.

When the defense had already cracked in the fourth quarter in previous games, a long TD drive would have been best. A tired defense, going against exactly the kind of offense that can exploit that fatigue, is not a good thing when they have nearly three minutes left. We needed a back-breaking drive, and didn't get one. And if it weren't for sheer dumb luck, that should have cost us the game.

 

[HAWKEY3]

Except for the part that their team has seven more points when they get back on the field. Seriously scoring too quickly should never be a criticism when you need a TD to take the lead.

Agreed. Points from your offense can also be inspiring from a defensive player's perspective. I'll always be happy with points on the board.

 

[albertyoungisgood]

Not counting Indiana is a complete logic fail. He led the team to a TD the last time he had the ball, that's all he could do. It's not like he had any control over what the D did.

I count Indiana. So Stanzi was 1 for 6 on his chances to lead us on game-winning drive late. 1 for 6. Banks and a healthy Tate would have been better. So would Vandenberg, although no one could have reasonably expected Stanzi to be benched for JV.

 

[DuffMan]

he was 6 for 6 the year before 50% is an amazing percentage for that, its virtually unheard of.

BTW I just watched the game for the first time. The second fade route was not underthrown. He put it up where his receiver could make a play and he did, that's what is supposed to happen.

 

[RocknRollface]

I feel similarly re Rick and JVB...and it's a bit strange, b/c that seems a bit contradictory to almost all conventional thinking when it comes to who should be playing (though it could be argued Adam Robinson was in a comparable situation, as most people thought he was less physically gifted than other RB's). I think the easiest manner to explain it is that JVB is just a more refined, polished QB in terms of his mechanics and skill set. But Rick had onions downstairs, and that's a quality QB's either have or don't. I think JVB also has that quality, based largely on the OSU game, but it would be nice to see more evidence of it. There will come a time when he needs to lead the O down the field, and I'll look fwd to him doing it.

Thats basically what I was thinking but you said it better.

 

[olddude]

Well, a three-play TD possession isn't any better for the defense than a 3 and out. They got all of 52 seconds to rest before having to go back out. It's no wonder that they allowed Indiana to march right down the field.

True.

 

[JHHawk]

We have to be patient and have some tolerance for youthful mistakes that Vandy will inevitably make. He has the tools,but there is so much to being a winning qb,it cannot be assumed until we see him drive a team down the field to win like Ricky did in 2008 vs PSU. That was an epic drive,that required pinpoint passes vs a top 3 team in frigid conditions. It was the drive that cemented Ricky on a path to become one of the alltime winningest QBs. Vandy will have that opportunity at some point,and if his teammates help him,he can come thru,but he has to do it before we can be certain he will do it. I think he will,but no one can be certain. Til then, I will reserve judgement on anything other than the tangibles..ie. his great tools.

 

[Texashawk17]

much better arm than stanzi may be more accurate! But only one game.....

 

[CPHAWK82]

Most of that came off of McNutts 88 yarder

0 picks didn't hurt either

 

[CPHAWK82]

He did underthrow the two endzone passes to McNutt and Davis, but seemed to throw a good ball the rest of the game. He hit a couple guys like Meyers and Derby right in stride and they just dropped them. He commented on how heavy the balls were from the rain. I even remember a TT punt going about 15 yards in the 3rd quarter. I suspect next week we'll see a little more air under those throws.

 

[tm3308]

0 picks didn't hurt either

I calculated his rating without the 88-yarder. 130.26. In conditions like that, with several drops on perfect throws, that's pretty damn impressive. Ricky's rating was not usually that good in weather like that. He tailed off in November when the weather got cold (like most quarterbacks tend to do).

Vandy put up a rating that was respectable for even good weather, while excluding the big play.

 

[uofihawkInation]

So we got one guy who doesn't think Stanzi should get credit because the defense almost allowed Indiana to come back and win, and another who thinks it doesn't count because we scored in only 3 plays so it shouldn't count as a drive.

I don't think Stanzi shouldn't get credit. I just don't think that it should be a game winning drive because we shouldn't have won that game. Stanzi gets credit for putting his team in the POSITION to win the game. But if you think Iowa should have won that game, rewatch Indiana's last drive.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

I don't think Stanzi shouldn't get credit. I just don't think that it should be a game winning drive because we shouldn't have won that game. Stanzi gets credit for putting his team in the POSITION to win the game. But if you think Iowa should have won that game, rewatch Indiana's last drive.

Agree.. but that's also what is so silly about crediting or discrediting a single player for W's and L's. Last time I checked football was a team game with three phases. You have to get both individual and team execution.... and sometimes you just get a lucky break.