Jeremy Hecklinski=short Leash; Hank Brown=no leash

[DuddyB]

Maybe it is, but because of Ferentz' offense we might have to pay an "Iowa" tax in order to convince a qb to come here.

To get a good quarterback to come here, I don’t disagree. To get an unproven quarterback, who had already failed at one school a chance at rebirth we should not be paying $1 million. If that were the case, I would either spend 2-3X to get a proven qb. I believe the Helinski number of less than 300 K but in my opinion, Hank shouldn’t get much more than that even coming into the season.

 

[CyberJJJ]

Different sport I realize but look at how Ben approaches building the basketball program. Part of his recruiting pitch is if you want to develop as a player come to Iowa. He wants to attract players who buy into the culture and stay at Iowa.

Ben will use the portal to fill holes like he did this off-season at point guard snd center. In my view Ben seems ahead of the curve in dealing with this new era. In football I don't think we have quite figured that out yet at least at the QB position.

He certainly did get players at those positions, but until we play some competitive games, it is a bit premature to say he "filled the hole".

 

[eyesofhawk]

because with great qb play we are elite

I happen to find that an extreme oversimplification.

Iowa has had seasons with great qb play. It didn't make them an elite program. It made them probably just a tick below elite in those particular seasons.

But it seems you mean, "elite", as a program.
And I'm not sure that "great qb play" is all that realistic on a consistent (year to year) basis. How many programs are actually getting that?

But even in its simplicity, if we are to accept that Iowa would be an elite program with great qb play, the problem is this narrative has been, and is again being presented as a complaint.

And when a very high percentage of the programs across the country would kill to be Iowa, complaining about Iowa football only goes so far.

Imagine what some of those programs, many getting good qb play, would do with a D and ST that were worth a darn.

The fact is, Iowa does so many things better than all those programs. Perhaps we're in agreement on that. But just because that makes it easier to narrow down what Iowa doesn't do great, doesn't mean what it narrows down to should more easily equal a complaint against the program.

In the end, it means Iowa is more praiseworthy, as a program. In the end, being a victim of one's own success, can only go so far. Because these other fan bases aren't able to complain about the one missing element that would make them elite. Because they aren't good enough to.

In the end, it's just really hard to complain about a program that obviously getting the most out of its resources, without looking really silly.

The only way it's even possible to almost always be better than your peers, but consistently remain a level below the blue bloods, is by not having blue blood resources, but having elite coaching.

Pretty sure we've gone over this a couple times over the years

 

[ClarindaA’s]

I happen to find that an extreme oversimplification.

Iowa has had seasons with great qb play. It didn't make them an elite program. It made them probably just a tick below elite in those particular seasons.

But it seems you mean, "elite", as a program.
And I'm not sure that "great qb play" is all that realistic on a consistent (year to year) basis. How many programs are actually getting that?

But even in its simplicity, if we are to accept that Iowa would be an elite program with great qb play, the problem is this narrative has been, and is again being presented as a complaint.

And when a very high percentage of the programs across the country would kill to be Iowa, complaining about Iowa football only goes so far.

Imagine what some of those programs, many getting good qb play, would do with a D and ST that were worth a darn.

The fact is, Iowa does so many things better than all those programs. Perhaps we're in agreement on that. But just because that makes it easier to narrow down what Iowa doesn't do great, doesn't mean what it narrows down to should more easily equal a complaint against the program.

In the end, it means Iowa is more praiseworthy, as a program. In the end, being a victim of one's own success, can only go so far. Because these other fan bases aren't able to complain about the one missing element that would make them elite. Because they aren't good enough to.

In the end, it's just really hard to complain about a program that obviously getting the most out of its resources, without looking really silly.

The only way it's even possible to almost always be better than your peers, but consistently remain a level below the blue bloods, is by not having blue blood resources, but having elite coaching.

Pretty sure we've gone over this a couple times over the years

I’m saying with the way the defense has been l,a great qb would have had us nearly unbeatable

 

[eyesofhawk]

I’m saying with the way the defense has been l,a great qb would have had us nearly unbeatable

Which all adds up to something very praiseworthy

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

I happen to find that an extreme oversimplification.

Iowa has had seasons with great qb play. It didn't make them an elite program. It made them probably just a tick below elite in those particular seasons.

But it seems you mean, "elite", as a program.
And I'm not sure that "great qb play" is all that realistic on a consistent (year to year) basis. How many programs are actually getting that?

But even in its simplicity, if we are to accept that Iowa would be an elite program with great qb play, the problem is this narrative has been, and is again being presented as a complaint.

And when a very high percentage of the programs across the country would kill to be Iowa, complaining about Iowa football only goes so far.

Imagine what some of those programs, many getting good qb play, would do with a D and ST that were worth a darn.

The fact is, Iowa does so many things better than all those programs. Perhaps we're in agreement on that. But just because that makes it easier to narrow down what Iowa doesn't do great, doesn't mean what it narrows down to should more easily equal a complaint against the program.

In the end, it means Iowa is more praiseworthy, as a program. In the end, being a victim of one's own success, can only go so far. Because these other fan bases aren't able to complain about the one missing element that would make them elite. Because they aren't good enough to.

In the end, it's just really hard to complain about a program that obviously getting the most out of its resources, without looking really silly.

The only way it's even possible to almost always be better than your peers, but consistently remain a level below the blue bloods, is by not having blue blood resources, but having elite coaching.

Pretty sure we've gone over this a couple times over the years

It’s not that complicated, eyes.

In just about every season in the 2020s, piss poor quarterback play was the difference between being competitive against legitimate top 25 teams and getting shellacked.

2021: BTCG Michigan 42 Iowa 3
2022: Ohio State 54 Iowa 10
2023: Penn St. 31 Iowa 0; BTCG: Michigan 26 Iowa 0; Tennessee 35 Iowa 0
2024: Ohio State 35 Iowa 7
2026: Ohio State 31 Iowa 14

The one year this decade Iowa had a decent quarterback (2025), they didn’t lose a single game by double-digits, which includes games against two playoff teams (Oregon and eventual national champion Indiana). Don’t tell me it was because Iowa’s defense was more elite than when BF was OC. Lol. It was because Iowa FINALLY had a quarterback capable of moving the chains, extending drives with his legs, and chewing up time of possession that kept some of those elite offenses off the field.

Again, this is not complicated. But we get it. Some random season Iowa could score 7 points against UNI and hold them to 6 and your one and only assessment would be “1-0.” And then when Iowa would end up 2-7 in the conference, you would disappear, or randomly pop up in a thread with: “RUN THE BALL.”

I’m shocked ESPN or Fox hasn’t called yet begging you to become an analyst.

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

I’m saying with the way the defense has been l,a great qb would have had us nearly unbeatable

We’re going to cause his brain to short circuit. Eyes can’t compute anything beyond “W,” “L,” current season record, or wishbone offense to “RUN THE BALL.”

 

[DBHawkSoCal]

It’s not that complicated, eyes.

In just about every season in the 2020s, piss poor quarterback play was the difference between being competitive against legitimate top 25 teams and getting shellacked.

2021: BTCG Michigan 42 Iowa 3
2022: Ohio State 54 Iowa 10
2023: Penn St. 31 Iowa 0; BTCG: Michigan 26 Iowa 0; Tennessee 35 Iowa 0
2024: Ohio State 35 Iowa 7
2026: Ohio State 31 Iowa 14

The one year this decade Iowa had a decent quarterback (2025), they didn’t lose a single game by double-digits, which includes games against two playoff teams (Oregon and eventual national champion Indiana). Don’t tell me it was because Iowa’s defense was more elite than when BF was OC. Lol. It was because Iowa FINALLY had a quarterback capable of moving the chains, extending drives with his legs, and chewing up time of possession that kept some of those elite offenses off the field.

Again, this is not complicated. But we get it. Some random season Iowa could score 7 points against UNI and hold them to 6 and your one and only assessment would be “1-0.” And then when Iowa would end up 2-7 in the conference, you would disappear, or randomly pop up in a thread with: “RUN THE BALL.”

I’m shocked ESPN or Fox hasn’t called yet begging you to become an analyst.

MG was the reason Iowa finished the way it did. While he didn’t get us over the hump against the best teams (tho the defense shares a lot of blame for not getting a stop!), he brought us back in a few other games, PSU comes to mind with his 60+ yard scramble on final winning drive

and now we are back to a complete cluster at the position.

I wasn’t opposed to rolling into the season with these two QBs because of their knowledge of the system….but the concern was always them learning the game experience and being ****.
Unfortunately that’s played out

 

[3-D_chess]

because with great qb play we are elite

truth

 

[85Bears]

In other words Ragnar Lothbrak is a dipshlt

 

[uihawk82]

It’s not that complicated, eyes.

In just about every season in the 2020s, piss poor quarterback play was the difference between being competitive against legitimate top 25 teams and getting shellacked.

2021: BTCG Michigan 42 Iowa 3
2022: Ohio State 54 Iowa 10
2023: Penn St. 31 Iowa 0; BTCG: Michigan 26 Iowa 0; Tennessee 35 Iowa 0
2024: Ohio State 35 Iowa 7
2026: Ohio State 31 Iowa 14

The one year this decade Iowa had a decent quarterback (2025), they didn’t lose a single game by double-digits, which includes games against two playoff teams (Oregon and eventual national champion Indiana). Don’t tell me it was because Iowa’s defense was more elite than when BF was OC. Lol. It was because Iowa FINALLY had a quarterback capable of moving the chains, extending drives with his legs, and chewing up time of possession that kept some of those elite offenses off the field.

Again, this is not complicated. But we get it. Some random season Iowa could score 7 points against UNI and hold them to 6 and your one and only assessment would be “1-0.” And then when Iowa would end up 2-7 in the conference, you would disappear, or randomly pop up in a thread with: “RUN THE BALL.”

I’m shocked ESPN or Fox hasn’t called yet begging you to become an analyst.

And the other thing about Grono was the TDs especially in the redzone. 16 of them I think running. Most of the time from 2021 to 2024 we had to settle for FG tries in the redzone

 

[eyesofhawk]

It’s not that complicated, eyes.

In just about every season in the 2020s, piss poor quarterback play was the difference between being competitive against legitimate top 25 teams and getting shellacked.

2021: BTCG Michigan 42 Iowa 3
2022: Ohio State 54 Iowa 10
2023: Penn St. 31 Iowa 0; BTCG: Michigan 26 Iowa 0; Tennessee 35 Iowa 0
2024: Ohio State 35 Iowa 7
2026: Ohio State 31 Iowa 14

The one year this decade Iowa had a decent quarterback (2025), they didn’t lose a single game by double-digits, which includes games against two playoff teams (Oregon and eventual national champion Indiana). Don’t tell me it was because Iowa’s defense was more elite than when BF was OC. Lol. It was because Iowa FINALLY had a quarterback capable of moving the chains, extending drives with his legs, and chewing up time of possession that kept some of those elite offenses off the field.

Again, this is not complicated. But we get it. Some random season Iowa could score 7 points against UNI and hold them to 6 and your one and only assessment would be “1-0.” And then when Iowa would end up 2-7 in the conference, you would disappear, or randomly pop up in a thread with: “RUN THE BALL.”

I’m shocked ESPN or Fox hasn’t called yet begging you to become an analyst.

This entire post is thoroughly laughable. Including your thinking that I post Iowa's record as a brag. I've explained it many times. Was I bragging when I posted 8-14 for men's basketball a couple seasons ago? Oh wait, you must not have seen that post, and were under the belief that I had disappeared. SMH.

I'm not even going to waste the time breaking down how bad the rest of your post is, because it has nothing to do with my post.

My point was, even if one accepts the "missing qb piece" narrative as truth, the problem is, it's being presented as a complaint. Even if the narrative weren't a grossly oversimplified leap, it would not be something that gives reason to complain about Iowa football. Read better

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

This entire post is thoroughly laughable. Including your thinking that I post Iowa's record as a brag. I've explained it many times. Was I bragging when I posted 8-14 for men's basketball a couple seasons ago? Oh wait, you must not have seen that post, and were under the belief that I had disappeared. SMH.

I'm not even going to waste the time breaking down how bad the rest of your post is, because it has nothing to do with my post.

My point was, even if one accepts the "missing qb piece" narrative as truth, the problem is, it's being presented as a complaint. Even if the narrative weren't a grossly oversimplified leap, it would not be something that gives reason to complain about Iowa football. Read better

You’re so rude.

 

[Grayhair1981]

You’re so rude.

And clueless, vacuous, monolithic,

 

[Oldman74]

Heck missed some layups, no doubt, but he got pulled too quickly. Let him play through some **** just like Brown got to do.

Hecklinski stared directly at his "give" read on an RPO slant and threw it for a should have been interception. He then did the exact same thing on an even more obvious "give" read and threw a horrendous pick in the red zone. When in doubt, hand it off, especially in the red zone. He threw a deep post to a covered Vonnahme with a high safety over the top, another ball that should have been picked. He also missed the wide open deep post that was a gimme touchdown. The ball was nowhere close. Iowa had no shot to win that game with Hecklinski staying in the game. Criticize Brown's second half performance all you want. But a huge number of people complaining about the half-time switch would be on here bitching about not making a switch if they hadn't pulled the plug. Hecklinski was great at Washington. He was awful at Minnesota.
In short, the first half of the Minnesota game was the worst decision making by an Iowa QB I can remember.

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

And clueless, vacuous, monolithic,

Lol, I was being facetious since I was rude to him first.

He’s not as dense as some of us like to think, but he can sure type like he is. I mean, the hills @eyesofhawk chooses to die on are still head scratching.

“I’m not saying quarterback isn’t important; I’m just saying Iowa has one who plays the position.”

“I’m not saying Brian Ferentz was a fantastic OC; I’m just saying Iowa won football games while he was here.”

“I’m not saying the forward pass is against the rules; I’m just saying the quarterback’s main job is to hand off to the running back.”

Etcetera etcetera…

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

In other words Ragnar Lothbrak is a dipshlt

And four eyes still can’t read. Shocking.

 

[Grayhair1981]

Lol, I was being facetious since I was rude to him first.

He’s not as dense as some of us like to think, but he can sure type like he is. I mean, the hills @eyesofhawk chooses to die on are still head scratching.

“I’m not saying quarterback isn’t important; I’m just saying Iowa has one who plays the position.”

“I’m not saying Brian Ferentz was a fantastic OC; I’m just saying Iowa won football games while he was here.”

“I’m not saying the forward pass is against the rules; I’m just saying the quarterback’s main job is to hand off to the running back.”

Etcetera etcetera…

He is either the dumbest person posting on the net or the most clever troll

 

[3-D_chess]

I have the reasoning skillz of KBJ

 

[HMB Trumpet]

And the other thing about Grono was the TDs especially in the redzone. 16 of them I think running. Most of the time from 2021 to 2024 we had to settle for FG tries in the redzone

Using Sully as the red zone QB made a similar difference in 2024, although typically around the edge rather than between the tackles.

 

[eyesofhawk]

Lol, I was being facetious since I was rude to him first.

He’s not as dense as some of us like to think, but he can sure type like he is. I mean, the hills @eyesofhawk chooses to die on are still head scratching.

“I’m not saying quarterback isn’t important; I’m just saying Iowa has one who plays the position.”

“I’m not saying Brian Ferentz was a fantastic OC; I’m just saying Iowa won football games while he was here.”

“I’m not saying the forward pass is against the rules; I’m just saying the quarterback’s main job is to hand off to the running back.”

Etcetera etcetera…

Careful not to mischaracterize another's hills.

Although you are pretty close on the 2nd one.

And real close on the last one. But if I had my own program, rather than QB's, I would use a player that most often would resemble a running back that could throw a little bit

 

[RagnarLothbrok]

Careful not to mischaracterize another's hills.

Although you are pretty close on the 2nd one.

And real close on the last one. But if I had my own program, rather than QB's, I would use a player that most often would resemble a running back that could throw a little bit

I am just having a little fun with you, eyes. If I didn’t like you, I would ignore you.

In the interest of establishing clarity, are you saying you want (i.e.) Scott Frost at quarterback?

 

[eyesofhawk]

I am just having a little fun with you, eyes. If I didn’t like you, I would ignore you.

In the interest of establishing clarity, are you saying you want (i.e.) Scott Frost at quarterback?

In the intersest of clarity,Frost