Would a Dual Threat QB Solve our offensive woes???

H

HawkeyeGold

Well-Known Member
How much would our offense improve if we had a DT QB? Marve essentially won the game with that 17 yard scramble at the end. A good QB is either mobile, accurate, or doesnt turn the ball over/make mistakes. You could argue the last point about JVB, but without the others you are basically spinning your wheels, getting nowhere.
 
Iowa's most prolific offense was with a Dual Threat QB.... Brad Banks.

Very good surrounding cast as well, but Banks deserved all the hype he received. He was a true play maker and KOK utilized him to perfection that year.
 
ssckelley said:
What good is a dual threat QB if they do not call the plays to maximize his abilities?
Click to expand...

+1. JVB showed yesterday that he has the ability to run a little bit.. But our playbook consists of JVB handing off, or dropping back to pass, and that's pretty much about it.
 
I think we would need to revamp our coaching philosophy to take advantage of a dual threat QB and I think it is hard to see that happening. I would just like to see a quarterback that has the ability to avoid the rush a little bit in the pocket. JVB is possibly the easiest QB to bring down that I have ever seen. It seems like he starts to fall before he is even touched. I would not say Tate was a runner but he was great at keeping the play alive when the pocket broke down.
 
Yes, I've said this from the beginning of the season, we just need to find a Vince Young caliber of QB and all of this complaining about Davis' offense will stop.
 
Banks wasn't "dual threat"...he was mobile...and no more so than Tate or even Stanzi. JVB has showed that he can be mobile as well, but part of having it work is knowing when to go and when to throw.
 
hawkfan33 said:
Yes, I've said this from the beginning of the season, we just need to find a Vince Young caliber of QB and all of this complaining about Davis' offense will stop.
Click to expand...
Hawks also need receivers who can get off the line faster...you can't run this offense with guys who need that extra split second to get open.
 
HawkeyeGold said:
How much would our offense improve if we had a DT QB? Marve essentially won the game with that 17 yard scramble at the end. A good QB is either mobile, accurate, or doesnt turn the ball over/make mistakes. You could argue the last point about JVB, but without the others you are basically spinning your wheels, getting nowhere.
Click to expand...

It would certainly help, but the main problem is the offensive philosophy of ultra conservative play. Too simple of formations, lack of inventiveness and trickery. Quality WR do not want to come to IA because we don't throw the ball enough. This season is obviously not going to help that either with only 5 passing TDs on the season thus far.

A dual threat QB would help, but our offensive scheme needs an overhaul. The name of the game in College football now is score, score, score. Fast paced offense, throwing the ball around and creative, mulitple dimension schemes. ie Oregon, K State, Ok State, Northwestern, Ohio State, heck even Indiana and Purdue's offensive looks and schemes would be a huge breath of fresh air.
 
HawkeyeShane said:
Banks wasn't "dual threat"...he was mobile...and no more so than Tate or even Stanzi. JVB has showed that he can be mobile as well, but part of having it work is knowing when to go and when to throw.
Click to expand...

Disagree strongly with this. At least based on what I can remember from 10 years ago. What comes to mind is that 44 yard run that Banks ripped off against Purdue back in '02.
 
WayzataHawkeye said:
I think we would need to revamp our coaching philosophy to take advantage of a dual threat QB and I think it is hard to see that happening. I would just like to see a quarterback that has the ability to avoid the rush a little bit in the pocket. JVB is possibly the easiest QB to bring down that I have ever seen. It seems like he starts to fall before he is even touched. I would not say Tate was a runner but he was great at keeping the play alive when the pocket broke down.
Click to expand...



I couldn't agree more. I have never seen a qb get sacked more without getting hit. If you have a qb who can scramble, then let them blitz all they want. You might actually break a long run. The way our offense is now, i don't know if vince young or john elway would make any difference. Get a real athlete back there and then let's see what we actually call. I don't think we would do anything different(We are stuck in the 80's). Personally i think it's time for an overhaul. This is just boring to watch. We strain for 7 yards. I agree with another poster on a different thread who said we are like basketball where the other team plays a zone and packs it in because there are no 3 point shooters. I think it's a perfect analogy. No qb,no receiver deep threats, and no plays that go past 15 yards
 
INTIMIDATORHawk said:
Iowa's most prolific offense was with a Dual Threat QB.... Brad Banks.
Click to expand...

Strangely, Iowa's least prolific offense was also with a dual threat QB...JC6 was one of the top dual threat QB's when he came out of high school.

Honestly I've tried blocking that year as much from my mind as possible, so I don't really remember if we switched the offense up all that much to take advantage of his "abilities." All I can remember of that season is JC6 holding the ball, holding the ball, holding the ball.......sack.
 
You have to run the QB....we take a dual threat guy and make him a drop back, doesn't work. Tate would have been much more of a weapon if they designed run play with QB. They made Tate into a drop back
 
It would sure as hell solve my problem of being bored as **** every time our offense goes on the field. That is for shizzle.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
Disagree strongly with this. At least based on what I can remember from 10 years ago. What comes to mind is that 44 yard run that Banks ripped off against Purdue back in '02.
Click to expand...
JVB had some nice runs yesterday too, 77...maybe we're arguing semantics, but "dual threat" to me includes next level speed and basically a RB who can throw it like a QB or a QB who runs like a RB. Banks wasn't that.
 
We don't need a dual threat to be successful. That said if we have a pocket passer we need him to be effective in passing to be successful. So far this year we haven't had that.
 
After watching that freshman A&M QB wreak havoc on Alabama, I am even more convinced that Iowa should recruit a mobile QB. In recent years, I haven't seen anyone carve up Alabama like Manziel did.

Banks, Tate, and Stanzi could all move around, make plays, and win games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top