Iowa -7 vs ISU

TheGovernator

Active Member
Nov 5, 2008
690
140
43
38
Not trying to be mean but you really didn't do anything to back up why Stanley was better than the third team kid other than say Iowa beat Ohio State which is a silly reason

No offense taken. My point all along wasn't that Stanley was better just because they beat Ohio State. It was that if they had all these QBs that were better than Stanley, surely they would have put one in at some point when things started going off the rails, but they stuck with Barrett until the final whistle.

Brandon, you're all bark and no bite. CyTwins is who he/she is in regards to Iowa, but we've had a reasonable conversation. You're over there flailing around trying to land any punch you can when you can't back up your initial point.
 

CyTwins

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2010
80,179
65,789
113
Ankeny
No offense taken. My point all along wasn't that Stanley was better just because they beat Ohio State. It was that if they had all these QBs that were better than Stanley, surely they would have put one in at some point when things started going off the rails, but they stuck with Barrett until the final whistle.

Brandon, you're all bark and no bite. CyTwins is who he/she is in regards to Iowa, but we've had a reasonable conversation. You're over there flailing around trying to land any punch you can when you can't back up your initial point.

Ohio State wasn't going to pull Barrett even though they had a backup better than Stanley. Cmon
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Brandon

Brandon

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
6,942
7,805
113
No offense taken. My point all along wasn't that Stanley was better just because they beat Ohio State. It was that if they had all these QBs that were better than Stanley, surely they would have put one in at some point when things started going off the rails, but they stuck with Barrett until the final whistle.

Brandon, you're all bark and no bite. CyTwins is who he/she is in regards to Iowa, but we've had a reasonable conversation. You're over there flailing around trying to land any punch you can when you can't back up your initial point.
Everyone is all bark on a message board. SMH
 

TheGovernator

Active Member
Nov 5, 2008
690
140
43
38
Ohio State wasn't going to pull Barrett even though they had a backup better than Stanley. Cmon

I guess I could see that in their position of keeping their playoff hopes alive.

On the other side of the coin, nothing has been done to back up that OSU has 3 (now 2) QBs sight unseen are better than Stanley. That has been my objection all along.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: breck53

CyTwins

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2010
80,179
65,789
113
Ankeny
I guess I could see that in their position of keeping their playoff hopes alive.

On the other side of the coin, nothing has been done to back up that OSU has 3 (now 2) QBs sight unseen are better than Stanley. That has been my objection all along.

Burrow is better than Stanley and he didn't play in the game last year
 
  • Funny
Reactions: YeahBuddy

MeowingCows

Well-Known Member
Jun 1, 2015
35,910
34,343
113
Iowa
After it's all said and done, you may be right. But as of now, the burden of proof is on you. What makes him better than Stanley?
The fact that he doesn't play in the Kirk Ferentz QB School.

But seriously, saying a bunch of untested QBs are better than a P5 starter is pretty asinine by itself. Blue-blood effect at it's finest. That can change just a few games into a season, but beforehand, it's a ridiculous assertion comparing results to potential.
 

MeowingCows

Well-Known Member
Jun 1, 2015
35,910
34,343
113
Iowa
The fact that he doesn't play in the Kirk Ferentz QB School.

But seriously, saying a bunch of untested QBs are better than a P5 starter is pretty asinine by itself. Blue-blood effect at it's finest. That can change just a few games into a season, but beforehand, it's a ridiculous assertion comparing results to potential.
I feel I should clarify that you could compare guys on potential. You could look at a 5-star QB out of high school and say he probably has a higher ceiling than a 3-star guy with one season of experience, for example. However, that's based on potential. Can't really present that as objective fact, so the delivery of that comparison would be critical to define whether or not it's horsehockey.
 

TheGovernator

Active Member
Nov 5, 2008
690
140
43
38
The fact that he doesn't play in the Kirk Ferentz QB School.

But seriously, saying a bunch of untested QBs are better than a P5 starter is pretty asinine by itself. Blue-blood effect at it's finest. That can change just a few games into a season, but beforehand, it's a ridiculous assertion comparing results to potential.

Couldn't agree more.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron