Tiller as the Starter

**khaal53** · 08-16-2011, 09:29 AM

I put this together over the past couple of weeks and thought I'd share. The point isn't whether or not I think Tiller should be the starter, or to try to explain every mistake from the Missouri game last season, but just to re-evaluate if ISU can win and provide some evidence to my statement that his game against Missouri last season was his best as a Cyclone.

I really don't care who the QB is, so long as he gives ISU the best chance to win.

Geeking out on Iowa State Football and Basketball - current and past: Tiller Time?

If you have any comments or questions, please share.

**Stormin** · 08-16-2011, 09:44 AM

Good post and some good points. IMO, Tiller has some decent skills and physical ability. But he may just be a little too inaccurate with his passing to make this offense go consistently. That is a big key with this offense. Accuracy and timing of getting the ball to the receiver make all the difference.

Sounds like Jantz could be even faster than Tiller. And might be a bit bigger (thicker) as well. IMO, Jantz throws a tighter spiral and a better ball in the swirling winds of JTS. It should be an interesting competition.

The lack of offensive scoring under Tiller for whatever reason is troubling to me.

**3GenClone** · 08-16-2011, 09:45 AM

I completely agree with you that Tiller's best game was against Missouri. It's interesting that you post Tiller's short yardage statistics as being a strong point for him. It seems that Tiller is an ideal candidate for Coach Herman's short-yardage passing offense that was so effective while he was at Rice. On the flip-side, you mention the WR dropped passes and I noticed that Lenz and Reynolds were both listed twice using your estimation. It makes me wonder if it's a miss-communication between WR & QB and maybe a new new QB like Jantz who already has a relationship with Horne is needed to spark some life in the receivers and cure the "dropsies."

After reading your article, I feel a little bit better about the QB competition, but worry a lot more about WR play.

**1100011CS** · 08-16-2011, 09:52 AM

Not that it matters much but... Shouldn't complete misses be 0 points and balls thrown away to avoid a sack be 1?

**Wesley** · 08-16-2011, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by Stormin

Good post and some good points. IMO, Tiller has some decent skills and physical ability. But he may just be a little too inaccurate with his passing to make this offense go consistently. That is a big key with this offense. Accuracy and timing of getting the ball to the receiver make all the difference.

Sounds like Jantz could be even faster than Tiller. And might be a bit bigger (thicker) as well. IMO, Jantz throws a tighter spiral and a better ball in the swirling winds of JTS. It should be an interesting competition.

The lack of offensive scoring under Tiller for whatever reason is troubling to me.

That lack of offense may also be a commentary on the performance of the past whole team.

**khaal53** · 08-16-2011, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by 1100011CS

Not that it matters much but... Shouldn't complete misses be 0 points and balls thrown away to avoid a sack be 1?

It wasn't a point system. It was just an identifier to separate the different throws. Otherwise, yes, you'd be correct.

**khaal53** · 08-16-2011, 10:04 AM

FWIW, there very easily should've been at least 6 points scored against Mizzou, which is nothing to celebrate but it is a whole lot better than zero.

Tiller made a few crucial mistakes, but the rest of the offense didn't do overly well to elevate their game in the absence of Arnaud.

It is also important to remember that there is no comparison to the UNI game where Tiller was largely attrocious. There wasn't much chance to rack up huge numbers with how the defense performed, but Tiller still was quite poor.

However, his last 5 quarters of play are probably his 5 best as a Cyclone, for whatever that is worth.

**Frak** · 08-16-2011, 10:05 AM

I remember him playing decent that game as well. What really stuck out to me was first, the ISU D played their butts off and second, the WRs had a HORRIBLE game. Lenz dropped one, Darks, Franklin, Reynolds...they were ALL dropping balls. Pretty much all of them deserved to be benched that game.

**1100011CS** · 08-16-2011, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by khaal53

It wasn't a point system. It was just an identifier to separate the different throws. Otherwise, yes, you'd be correct.

Oh duh, I see now. Good stuff. Thanks.

**bosco** · 08-16-2011, 10:08 AM

Great analysis. But you could be labeled a heretic here. Not because people will think you are supporting JT, but because you're using numbers and facts to support your opinion. Dangerous ground my friend, dangerous ground.

**Wesley** · 08-16-2011, 10:09 AM

It sure does point out that fieldgoal kicking is our Achilles heel, especially when we were in tight games.

**khaal53** · 08-16-2011, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley

It sure does point out that fieldgoal kicking is our Achilles heel, especially when we were in tight games.

Saying that Mahoney struggled the last 4-5 game is like saying Travis & Tim struggle to keep my interest in the mornings...a huge understatement.

**jdoggivjc** · 08-16-2011, 10:17 AM

It is kind of sick that Tiller's best game is a game that ISU didn't score a single point. It demonstrates the argument I made a lot last year that the receivers were not getting the job done, and perhaps Arnaud was getting far too much blame for the shortcomings of the offense.

**PabloDiablo** · 08-16-2011, 10:28 AM

Didn't LJ drop a Pick Six in the Mizzou game as well. Would've been another possible momentum swinger!

**dualthreat** · 08-16-2011, 10:29 AM

Someone on this board said our 2011 big upset will come @Missouri and I really agree. We have been very close to them the last two years, and they will be breaking in a new qb this year.

Some ppl were predicting a win @OU but that is a huge stretch... remember the circumstances the last two upset wins? They were vs proud historic programs on slides... the stars lined up if you will.