Washington

trj said:
Starting Sullivan isn’t that much of an upgrade from CM. He isn’t this magic elixir that will be able to consistently hit Lachey or Ostrenga on a 20 yard seam route. Currently, there isn’t anyone in the quarterback room that can push the football down the field vertically.

We are just clamoring over bullshit. They will end up 10-2, 9-3, 8-4 or whatever, no matter who the starting quarterback is.
Click to expand...
I call BS for two reasons. 1) We've never really had a good look at Sullivan as he's only gotten spot duty and now inside the 10 work. So, what would it really be like if he played the entire game? Now, I admit the coaches see both in practice, but ..................2) Yes, it can possibly be a push, but if Sullivan plays, the D has to AT LEAST scheme for his threat for his mobility or running game. In addition, he is around at 69-71% consistent passer. The fact the defense would have to honor him as an O threat is what tips the balance, IMO. Just throwing that wrench into the fold may loosen up the other skill positions. How the F do the coaches not realize this????
 
NorthKCHawk said:
While I don't disagree all that much, I still think we are one competent prevent defense away from this being a totally different discussion. We hold on against ISU---a game where we were the better team---and now with the Minny win looking very good, and Iowa is probably still ranked and this group is happy. We all knew there was no hope against OSU. They are just at another level.

I understand that the Iowa State loss happened, but the difference between the sky is falling and sunshine and rainbows is pretty F-ing thin right now......
Click to expand...
...as it was last year, when the Hawks went 6-1 in one-score games. This year they're 0-1. How the rest of the close games remaining this season play out -- and I expect there to be many -- will define this season, as it did last season.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
I call BS for two reasons. 1) We've never really had a good look at Sullivan as he's only gotten spot duty and now inside the 10 work. So, what would it really be like if he played the entire game? Now, I admit the coaches see both in practice, but ..................2) Yes, it can possibly be a push, but if Sullivan plays, the D has to AT LEAST scheme for his threat for his mobility or running game. In addition, he is around at 69-71% consistent passer. The fact the defense would have to honor him as an O threat is what tips the balance, IMO. Just throwing that wrench into the fold may loosen up the other skill positions. How the F do the coaches not realize this????
Click to expand...
I have no idea what the coaches are thinking, but my guess is:
1) they feel McNamara is a better thrower than Sullivan; and
2) they've been able to successfully run the ball vs most teams thus far, and by adding a QB whose strength is running it may encourage defenses to crowd the LOS even more, taking away the effectiveness of the run game.
I'm not endorsing that line of thinking, necessarily, but can imagine that discussion.
 
Fryowa said:
Sullivan needs to start. He won't, but he needs to. Bringing him in after we're down 3 scores does literally nothing. Start him and if he gets in trouble bring CM in.

Knowing CM can't run and can't throw the ball accurately is a gift to the opposing D. At least with Sullivan teams have to account for the possibility of designed QB runs and scrambles.

I do think that a greater than 50% part of CM continuing to start is KF throwing a middle finger to fans and donors who pushed his son out.
Click to expand...
Agree with you about starting Sullivan, but I'd say that if Sullivan can't get it going you have to go to Lainez and play for the future. Not saying he's ready or on the same playing field yet, but IMO we've seen everything McNamara has to offer at this point and it's not the answer. He's gone after this year anyway so I think you have to give the reps to someone who's going to be there in the future.

That said if McNamara were to start and it wasn't there and Sullivan took over I wouldn't be opposed to putting McNamara back on the field, but I feel that if you demote him to 2nd string and hand the reigns over to Sullivan I don't think there's any point moving him to backup status.
 
trj said:
Based on what I saw at Northwestern, he isn’t going to be Brad Banks or CJ Beathard.

However, your points are valid. He is the likely starter in 2025 and he can run more of the Lester playbook now than CM can.

I don’t have high expectations for Sullivan, if he gets legit playing time, hopefully he proves me wrong.
Click to expand...
I think Fry is right though. Sullivan has eligibility left and if CM isn't getting it done I think you have to take the chance and see what he has now to give some sort of insight into what needs to be done in the offseason at the QB position.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
I call BS for two reasons. 1) We've never really had a good look at Sullivan as he's only gotten spot duty and now inside the 10 work. So, what would it really be like if he played the entire game? Now, I admit the coaches see both in practice, but ..................2) Yes, it can possibly be a push, but if Sullivan plays, the D has to AT LEAST scheme for his threat for his mobility or running game. In addition, he is around at 69-71% consistent passer. The fact the defense would have to honor him as an O threat is what tips the balance, IMO. Just throwing that wrench into the fold may loosen up the other skill positions. How the F do the coaches not realize this????
Click to expand...
kicker22 said:
I think Fry is right though. Sullivan has eligibility left and if CM isn't getting it done I think you have to take the chance and see what he has now to give some sort of insight into what needs to be done in the offseason at the QB position.
Click to expand...


As I replied to Fry, he is likely the starter in 2025 and he could/can run the Lester playbook better than CM. You have no push back from me given him reps.

I just don't have high expectations for Sullivan. Based on what I saw at Northwestern I can't get excited. This time next year it feels like we will be calling for Resar.

I hope you guys are right and I am wrong.
 
trj said:
As I replied to Fry, he is likely the starter in 2025 and he could/can run the Lester playbook better than CM. You have no push back from me given him reps.

I just don't have high expectations for Sullivan. Based on what I saw at Northwestern I can't get excited. This time next year it feels like we will be calling for Resar.

I hope you guys are right and I am wrong.
Click to expand...
It's not a matter of me being right or wrong cause honestly I have no idea. I just think that if it gets to the point where Sullivan's named starter and McNamara is demoted then there's no point keeping him at number 2 on the depth chart and should go with youth and get them more reps.
 
Grady said:
Lots of fans thought Ferentz would leave at the end of last season, after his son was fired. I was pretty confident he wouldn't be derailed by that -- his health was good and he still truly seemed to love the game. But I feel differently now. Going into this season expectations for this team were VERY high, and if they don't pan out this will be tough for Kirk to deal with, inside himself, even tho he won't admit it publicly. Only 4 games into this season, he already looks as old physically as he's ever looked. With this group of players and this schedule, THIS was the year to do something special. If the Hawks run the table and end up in the Top 20, it would be a great year for him to retire. If they end up 6-6 or worse -- certainly a possibility -- and facing a more/less complete rebuild (by Iowa standards) next season, he might just decide to retire for that reason too. The only reason I can see him staying on through next season is because the expections will be so low, the pressure will be off, and he'll be able to focus on 'teaching' the game more than Wins and Losses.
Click to expand...
I believe he will stay until he passes Woody Hayes for 2nd most B10 coaching wins. Currently, he needs 7 more wins to pass Hayes.
With 7 regular season games left this season, if Iowa wins out, I predict he will retire.
Otherwise, I see him back for one more season to get the milestone.

Let's hope he doesn't try to pass Alonzo Stagg for #1 - could take years.


www.sports-reference.com

Big Ten Conference Coaches | College Football at Sports-Reference.com

Big Ten Conference Coaches
www.sports-reference.com www.sports-reference.com
 
Last edited:
SCHawkeye2 said:
Washington is a better program than many think.
I have been puzzled all season by how many on this board considered this game a confident Iowa win.
We do not match up well.
Click to expand...

Rutgers

Rutgers has a similar style to Iowa. Iowa just does it a tick better.

Washington outplayed Rutgers, but Rutgers did Iowa like stuff to win the game.
 
Grady said:
I have no idea what the coaches are thinking, but my guess is:
1) they feel McNamara is a better thrower than Sullivan; and
2) they've been able to successfully run the ball vs most teams thus far, and by adding a QB whose strength is running it may encourage defenses to crowd the LOS even more, taking away the effectiveness of the run game.
I'm not endorsing that line of thinking, necessarily, but can imagine that discussion.
Click to expand...

McNamara seems to be limited throwing downfield. I saw some crazy stat mentioned the other day that blew my mind away. Do you know the last group 4 team that McNamara threw a TD against.

Wait for it.............................Iowa in the BIG C-ship game years ago.

From what I can see I don't think one can say McNamara is a better thrower than Sullivan, especially having limitations throwing accurately downfield.
 
SCHawkeye2 said:
Washington is a better program than many think.
I have been puzzled all season by how many on this board considered this game a confident Iowa win.
We do not match up well.
Click to expand...
I'm jokingly puzzled by how any game can be considered a "confident" Iowa win. We're implementing changes on the offensive end, but realistically 5 games ago we were the worst offense in the country and the personnel hasn't changed much. I think were on the right path and I do see progress, but last year the majority felt that we could just as easily lose games as we could win them. I'm not a doom and gloom guy, and am still optimistic about this team, but has anything really changed yet?
 
kicker22 said:
I'm jokingly puzzled by how any game can be considered a "confident" Iowa win. We're implementing changes on the offensive end, but realistically 5 games ago we were the worst offense in the country and the personnel hasn't changed much. I think were on the right path and I do see progress, but last year the majority felt that we could just as easily lose games as we could win them. I'm not a doom and gloom guy, and am still optimistic about this team, but has anything really changed yet?
Click to expand...
Agree, especially how Iowa plays so close to the vest. In years past they've had outstanding D & special teams to pull them out. This year that doesn't seem to be a sure thing, but I think the punter will continue to improve but he's new.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Agree, especially how Iowa plays so close to the vest. In years past they've had outstanding D & special teams to pull them out. This year that doesn't seem to be a sure thing, but I think the punter will continue to improve but he's new.
Click to expand...
Agreed and as an optimist I'm thinking we'll get better at all other aspects, but I don't see the program anywhere near a point where I'm confident going into any game. Whether favorites or not I can see almost every game go either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top