Who do you want to see win the QB battle?
- Thread starter JerseyCityHawk
- Start date
Whoever can routinely complete 10 yard passes.
Whoever the coaches determine to win the job.
My only preference is that it can be announced early enough to help minimize the controversy that fans will try to create
My only preference is that it can be announced early enough to help minimize the controversy that fans will try to create
The mobile guy that isn’t jittery in the pocket and also throws an accurate ball.
heard a few comparisons of Hecklinski to Drew Tate...that's enough for me to decide
In a perfect world, Hank. If he did indeed win, that would mean he improved. And since he has a better arm, that would then be a plus. I just want one of them to be an above average QB.
I didnt vote because I dont know which is better or even has the bigger upside. I hope one of them is the clear winner for being the starter and then they have a great season. I have no dog in this fight
Me too. But mostly I want the best QB to win the job. I just think that will be Hecklinski. And I also think the coaches are saying it's even and the battle might even go into the season largely to keep both guys (all the QBs) working hard and invested. Or maybe the coaches really don't see any significant separation yet. In any event, Lester had better be the one making the choice, because we all know how horrible KF is at evaluating offensive talent in general and QBs in particular: e.g., Christensen over Stanzi, Rudock over Beathard, and Deacon Hill over anyone . . .
% great postHe’ll stick with his guy through thick and thin for the (supposed and potential) benefit of continuity.
My personal take is that these are very different players with different playing styles. I think Brown and pocket passer types are no longer a schematic fit for Iowa. His type worked in the old pro style offense, but it really isn't a good fit in the new Shanahan RPO scheme. Hecklinksi is a better fit for the new scheme.
Last year I had a chance to attend a semi-private Q&A with some donors (I was a guest) and Kirk after summer open practice. Someone asked Kirk about the QB position last year, and Kirk played coy, as usual, and said it was a fluid situation, changes every day, all guys have their strengths, blah, blah, blah.
But I do remember him then giving the following unsolicited assessment: "You know, Hank Brown is a really interesting player..." My interpretation of that comment was that Hank Brown looks like the protypical tall pocket passer type that Kirk has always liked to put under center for 25+ years. When Brown was at Auburn some fans worried about his lack of mobility, and I don't think his style has really changed much but I could be wrong.
QB skills will drive scheme and playcalling at the end of the day. I like the RPO heavy scheme we ran with Gronk, and I want the QB who can best keep that going. I hope Hecklinksi performs well enough in the camps to earn the starting job.
Last year I had a chance to attend a semi-private Q&A with some donors (I was a guest) and Kirk after summer open practice. Someone asked Kirk about the QB position last year, and Kirk played coy, as usual, and said it was a fluid situation, changes every day, all guys have their strengths, blah, blah, blah.
But I do remember him then giving the following unsolicited assessment: "You know, Hank Brown is a really interesting player..." My interpretation of that comment was that Hank Brown looks like the protypical tall pocket passer type that Kirk has always liked to put under center for 25+ years. When Brown was at Auburn some fans worried about his lack of mobility, and I don't think his style has really changed much but I could be wrong.
QB skills will drive scheme and playcalling at the end of the day. I like the RPO heavy scheme we ran with Gronk, and I want the QB who can best keep that going. I hope Hecklinksi performs well enough in the camps to earn the starting job.
Obviously the best one.
I want a qb who makes good decisions, is mobile (and I don’t mean a running qb), is able to complete a high percentage of his passes, and can move the chains.
Hopefully that man is on campus.
I want a qb who makes good decisions, is mobile (and I don’t mean a running qb), is able to complete a high percentage of his passes, and can move the chains.
Hopefully that man is on campus.
What a laughable narrative. The hall of fame coach is horrible at evaluating offensive talent. Yeah, sure.
In the end, KF got Stanzi and Beathard right. One could just as easily praise him for twice making the very difficult decision to switch QB's, and twice getting it right.
You want the choice to be made by Lester. Well, who's to say it wasn't the OC that chose Christensen and Rudock? We don't really know.
And yes, if the rumors about another qb were true, which all reasoning adds up to, then Deacon was the only choice.
Do you have a problem with authority figures, or something? To me, if one has respect for the coach in the first place, one sees right through these types of narratives, and does not ever give them any real consideration
What makes Heck a better fit for the system?
To me, they're both pocket players with some mobility. Perhaps, Iowa might be able to move the pocket some with Heck, and also get some mileage out of the boot game. But I don't see much designed run from either of them.
Interesting to hear the comments from Auburn fans about Hank's mobility. I had figured it was just a stereotype, as Lester has said Hank has good feet. Set a record jumping rope. So if there are questions about his mobility he must either be stiff through the hips, or he doesn't see the field well enough to play fast. I could see maybe a little of both.
But certainly, Hank could have started seeing the field better with more experience. Really, I don't think Lester would have brought in anybody that can't do the things he is looking for. So we'll see.
Iowa actually didn't run that much RPO with Grono. Are you thinking Read Option? Again, I don't expect much designed run at all from either qb this season
Personally, I think it's Heck's job to lose. Listening to Lester talk about him, I think he likes his tenacity, mobility, and the ability to extend the play. I think those are elements that he looks for in a QB. I just want the most accurate passer. I think this is the year Lester makes a real effort to have the pass offense take a step forward. We've got a few cupcakes on our schedule that we should be nickel and diming all game long, like Purdue, Northwestern, Northern Illinois, and UNI.
Agree to disagree… yes, having a more accurate passer is huge but if the qb can’t escape the pocket and doesn’t have wheels you get those 5/10 yard losses all the time. I think Iowa’s offense is better built around quarterbacks that can get out of the pocket without getting g creamed like we saw last year with Gronowski… and Heck is supposedly twice as better evading pressure and using his legs to bail out tbe play(s) both are most definitely important but I would rather go with a faster QB that can scramble than a qb that can toss the ball better
Yes, supposed (Generally believed or assumed to be true)Supposed?
Continuity is supposedly better more often than not in any facet. Sure as hell didn't work out that way with Spencer Petras but Kirk kept trotting him out anyway.
For the exact reason of continuity.
That offense (assuming you're talking about '22) was bad all the way around. Actually would have been unfair (to everyone) to have thrown a backup qb in there.
That offense needed every successful rep, as a group, that it could get. More importantly, the reps needed to build upon each other, as gaining even the slightest rhythm was paramount.
Plus, Padilla showed on a few occasions, to not be the answer. The fact that there are still Padilla fighters, blows my mind.
Turns out, theses coaches actually know what they're doing. Somehow, especially hall of fame coaches
Or Carson May, Cash Herrera, James Resar, Marco Lainez, Alex Padilla, Joey Labas... or dare I say his name, Deacon Hill. Let's just say in the weaning years of Brian's tenure we've been the worst in the country at evaluating QB talent. And that isn't an exaggeration. Thankfully Lester seems to have a much better understanding of what we need, and Mark was the first step in the right direction. And now he has two QB's that are in year 2 of this scheme and has a chance to truly develop them. Time for him to nut up and show some real improvement in our pass game.
Absolutely you nailed it on the head as it’s better to know who’s the best guy is under center so the offense can get accustomed to their new quarterback… so like you, I definitely agree and great post my Hawkeye brother
Your post has nothing to do with what Alum was talking about.
It also has no real relevance, as only one qb can play at a time. And Iowa has had qb's on the field during the BF tenure you mention, good enough to be part of KF''s winningest stretch at Iowa.
What you say also has no relevance, as over 26 years, Iowa has won about the same number of games, regardless of what their qb was like.
And it's also irrelevant, as qb play hasn't been rated very high by fans for much of KF's 26 year hall of fame career.
Also, to imply the qb situation you mentioned was BF's fault, is a mischaracterization. A shaky year of recruiting, from a coordinator, would fall on that coordinator. But multiple years of shaky recruiting would fall directly on KF. So again, we see the silliness and illegitimacy of complaints about a hall of fame coach.
Sullivan was a Lester recruit. Why was he not the "first step in the right direction"? Only the ripest cherries
How anyone refers to a league opponent on the road, as a cupcake, is beyond me.
How is racking up passing yards and going 4-0 (hopefully), better than going 4-0 with less passing yards?
You're proving KF right (and fan negativity wrong) to have commented on how overrated offensive yardage is. You literally are hoping for Iowa to rack up meaningless passing yards in games that would seem to be in Iowa's control. Somehow that will give you more satisfaction than a less stylish W.
Fans prove themselves to be in the wrong all the time, whether they admit it, or not
This can't be a serious question...
That's similar to wondering if going 4-0 with a 30-point margin of victory is better than going 4-0 with a 3-point margin of victory........