mrolympia
Well-Known Member
this assumes colin is adult enough to get past his bias against Iowa which everyone knows he isn't.
Wait, What? did Colin Cowherd just say......
- Thread starter EstronHawkKing
- Start date
this assumes colin is adult enough to get past his bias against Iowa which everyone knows he isn't.
It’s funny when Iowa fans get on Colin. The one thing he really said about Iowa, that they’re the fake ID of college football, was because he thinks their non conference schedule is weak. The same exact complaint that many people have on this board.
Last edited:
IDK about that, but Stanford kind of made his point valid about the fake Id thing. So did Wisconsin last year.
Can't really say we belonged on the field either time.
Hope this team can shake that attitude and realize through the OSU game, they can play with anyone and win.
The drop off in QBs' from junior to senior year involves not letting them take off and run. Tate, Stanzi.....I am hoping that Stanley has seen enough tape this off-season to realize that he had plenty of opportunities to take off for good gains.
Also, a couple of people commented that getting better WRs' would make Stanley better, how is missing wide open receivers on deep balls a sign of poor receivers? I think that Stanley may be the best QB that I've seen at Iowa, and yes that includes Chuck Long. Long had a better supporting cast. A little progress this off season and I think Stanley will be a great one. I hope he sticks around for 2019. I hate it when I agree with Cowturd.
What would help Stanley most is if Ferentz Jr. would give him something more than off-tackle left, off-tackle right to check into on 3rd downs, how 'bout a pass play?
Also, a couple of people commented that getting better WRs' would make Stanley better, how is missing wide open receivers on deep balls a sign of poor receivers? I think that Stanley may be the best QB that I've seen at Iowa, and yes that includes Chuck Long. Long had a better supporting cast. A little progress this off season and I think Stanley will be a great one. I hope he sticks around for 2019. I hate it when I agree with Cowturd.
What would help Stanley most is if Ferentz Jr. would give him something more than off-tackle left, off-tackle right to check into on 3rd downs, how 'bout a pass play?
Last edited:
Ree4
Well-Known Member
We crushed a team on the road who beat Stanford though. Just shows that any team can show up. I doubt the outcome of that game would be the same even if we played it 10 more times.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
Is this just a general wish or what you actually observed? BF mixed it up MUCH more than GDGD ever did.
If he EVER checked down to a pass I missed it, if he did, it was towards the end of the year after everyone and their dog figured out what he was doing.
The MN play that should have been a 90 yard TD, but instead ended up bouncing off ISM's facemask for an int, was a run-to-pass check at the LOS.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
I doubt KF would show up as unprepared for subsequent games. Maybe he might make adjustments.
Meh, what ifs are just that.
HawkPrdatr40
Well-Known Member
Colin only said this because he thinks highly of Todd McShay and he comes on his show a lot. Todd McShay ranks Nathan very highly. So Colin just took it a step further. That being said Nathan has some tremendous upside and has a legit shot at being successful at the next level.
judzeehawk
Well-Known Member
Colin probably said it so if Nate fails he has something to slam Iowa about.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
Long had Hayden as his head coach and Bill Snyder as his OC. That was the extent of his better supporting cast. Wadley is about 90% of Ronnie Harmon. Noah Fant is better than Mike Flagg was. The bread and butter of our passing game was Bill Happel and Scott Helverson. There were crafty route runners who worked the sidelines well but it was long who frequently threw them open. Robert Smith could take the top off the defense from the slot but we have guys who could do that if Kirk and Brian turn them loose.
The point I'm making is that besides Harmon, Long didn't have all American talent around him, either. The difference was in the coaching staffs.
Yeah having a 2nd and 5 or 6 is better than 2nd and 10 or more because you throw it away or take a sack instead of running for what you can get. I felt as you do Stanley stood in the pocket too long sometimes allowing the pocket to collapse on him not feeling where he should roll to and occasionally take off when a lane was there
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
I was there when NU beat Standford and I was there when Iowa destroyed Northwestern. I can't fathom how that Rose Bowl got so out of hand.
This has been covered pretty extensively already so I am beating a dead horse, but I will beat away anyway.
Drew Tate did definitely drop off his senior year. There were numerous reasons for that (personnel, injuries). He actually had far more rushing yards as a senior than any other season.
Ricky Stanzi was miles better as a senior than as a junior. The team won less for reasons out of his control. Stanzi also had the only 2 rushing TDs of his career during his senior year.
One thing that is notable is both seemed to take far fewer sacks as seniors. Tate's rushing stats went:
89 for -76
44 for 41
49 for 124
from sophomore through senior years.
Stanzi went:
56 for 20
55 for -31
48 for -6
In mentioning areas for development for Stanley, both KF and BF have mentioned that he has to be more willing to pull the ball down and run when opportunities present themselves. So I don't think it is something they are discouraging.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
Staistically yes Stanzi was better. To some of the better stats came at a cost in mojo and risk taking. Stanzi is hard to quantify. The pics especially. The risk taking had an upside and a downside. Which was worse? The up or the down.
We can all remember Vandy tsking risks against OSU and being reigned in. Did that reigning in make him ultimately worse.
We can remember Banks and wonder why he wasnt playing more we he was obviously a talent. Great results his senior year but can remember him trying to stand in the pocket but oft would eventually just go.
Stats dont lie but they dont measure intangibles that tge eye can see. Stanzi was not the same his senior year to the eye.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
I guess you missed them then, I saw at least a dozen different ones but I guarantee we'll see more audible to pass plays this year though as it's hard to do that with a first year QB and inexperienced receivers.
The decrease in sacks (based upon fewer negative rushing yards, I have not actually looked up the sack totals) points towards decreased risk taking. The dramatically greater yards per attempt and TDs/attempt does not support that.
I do remember the ends of the Arizona and Wisconsin games Stanzi taking sacks in situations where he really couldn't afford to take sacks. Would junior-year Stanzi have flung it out there and hoped for the best? Maybe, but it is tough to know exactly what was going on without being able to see the coaches' tape.
Maybe your eyes are being deceived by the confounding factor that the 2009 D gave up 15.4 pts/game (14.5 over their last 4 games) and the 2010 D gave up 17.0 pts/game (23.0 over their last 4 games as the LB group was decimated).
Or by the fact that Stanzi's performance took a dive over the last 5 games (rating over 170 prior, under 120 over the last 5 games) as he lost Adam Robinson and his starting guards?
Or the fact that the defense could not hold 4th quarter leads that Stanzi helped create vs. Wisc (6 pt lead), OSU (7 pt lead), NW (10 pt 4th Q lead), or Minnesota (4 pt lead). In those 4 games, Stanzi had 8 TDs and 1 int, and he passed for the go-ahead TD in the 2nd half of all but OSU (4th Q go-ahead TDs vs. Minn and Wisc).
I also noticed quite a few, I think, although it is really impossible to know. We have no idea what was called in the huddle. If it looks like they are checking, we have no idea if it is legit or just a dummy call. When it looks like there is a check, and the result of the play is a modest run, it confirms everyone's bias that Iowa only checks to a run. People hardly even notice when they check to something else because they aren't looking for it and it does not confirm their bias.
