Stanzi vs. Arnaud
- Thread starter RedBlooded
- Start date
Based on measurables, AA could be an NFL QB, but I think 3 coaching systems will have hurt his chances. If his decision making improves, he has a shot, but his accuracy is still in question. He has the requisite arm strength and size to make it.
Stanzi should continue to bring his completion percentage up (Saturday's performance brought it up to 57.9 from 57.1). It is striking how much difference there is in NFL success for QB's who had a college comp% below 60% and those who had college comp% at or above 60%.
While this metric is not foolproof, the NFL decision makers are aware of it and it can make a big difference in the chances they get.
AA has a better arm and would be a better fir in a pro system. He has made th emost of teh 3 different systems he has been in. he has teh arm to play in the NFL and can make the throws. Look what he did in the 2nd season with Chizk. If he owuld of been in that system for all 3 years he would of rewrote the record book at ISU. He has done pretty good with out being in that system. He is 2nd in school history in yards.
He actually fits the NFL systems better then this system. Hopefully he will get a chance to show his stuff.
Eh, maybe not. I don't know. I do know that I have been much more impressed with his deep throws than with Arnaud's. I really have no idea how far he can throw it though.
Just so you know, Arnaud threw 13 picks and 15 TDs last season, while Stanzi 15 picks and 17 TDs. Not too much of a difference in the INT-TD ratio.
The only real difference here, with regard to interceptions, is the fact that several of Stanzis were pick-sixes. Not sure if any of Arnaud's were.
I'm not sure if Arnaud has ever thrown a pick 6, for that matter. He threw one that was close against KU as a sophomore, but it didn't go quite to the house. Pretty much had the same effect when they scored 2 plays later.
Trolling again? He said it wouldnt work in his post. and GT's style fed right into Iowa's strengths. Great DL and LB's vs almost all running offense = disaster for GT. Iowa's weakest spot on defense was, is, and almost always will be in the passing game.
On the subject of the thread though, i've always wondered how AA would fair in a pro-style system. He's obviously been groomed to be a spread QB here at ISU but say he went to a team like Iowa out of high school and learned that system, i think he could be extremely effective because he's got really good pocket presence and a strong arm. Accuracy lacks at times but it a moot point since he's with us. It is a great asset for us to have AA in the running game though, because he's a big QB and he often drags defenders or falls forward for extra yardage. He's a tough tackle. But like everyone has said, 2 completely different QB's in wayyy different systems. I like AA over stanzi personally because of his dual threat, and they are pretty much equal in turnovers.
Really? Overhyped? Seems like he has had a lasting NFL career. And FWIW...Seneca only played two years and is one of the all time leaders in passing.
Correct. This has to be the DUMBEST post on this site every year. You CANNOT compare the two QBs... because it is 2 completely different systems. AA would be a horrible QB in Iowa's system, and Stanzi would be awful in ISU's system.
Stanzi is the better pro prospect, based on their offensive system alone, but he will NOT be in the NFL. He's not good enough. Neither is AA.
I am still baffled people suck up to this stat and completely gloss over all the crappy parts of Stanzi's game. This stat is ONLY used for QB's that have good records and in a lot of cases, QB's that people feel instinctively is not as good as his record is or maybe not that good at all, but they say "ah well, shiz, look at his record, he's got to be a good QB right!"
I've said it before I'll continue to say it over and over again. Iowa is 20-4 despite Ricky Stanzi, not because of him, and I firmly believe that. Iowa wins games because of their line play, special teams, and their defenses ability to bend but never break. Stanzi's job is to not lose games, although he's tried over and over again the last 2+ seasons.
When I saw AA is a redshirt frosh, I thought he'd have a big career as a passer. He's had a decent career as a passer, certainly not a great one. But he's been a pretty solid (actually more than solid) runner for us, and he's done it under a couple different systems. I think AA can still have a big year if he shores up his accuracy and learns to read the field better. He may not have a whole lot of NFL potential, but I think Stanzi's supposed NFL potential is VASTLY overblown. Especially the arm strength aspect. How anyone can watch him and tell me he has a "rocket" for an arm is absolutely insane. I've never seen a QB that gets as much praise as he does throw a softer ball, even in situations where it calls for a bullet. Probably why he throws so many pick 6's...
EASILY ARNAUD. Don't say Stanzi the Panzis record means anything. How many games has his offense won him? ARNAUD ALL DAY
Remember McCarney ran more of a pro style offense when he was Head Coach at ISU, and he recruited Arnaud as a QB with the skill set to run that offense and to be to run within that scheme occasionally. If you put Arnaud at Iowa running their offense for three years, I can almost guarantee you Arnaud would be putting up some numbers that would make him a Heisman candidate because he can run along with being able to pass. If Stanzi was in his second year running ISU's spread offense, again I can almost guarantee that he would struggle more than Arnaud has due to his lack of athleticism. It's bacause of Arnaud's running ability that he's a better fit to run the spread than Stanzi, but I also believe, given the time to learn, Arnaud would run a pro style offense better than Stanzi because of his combination of athleticism and intelligence. Stanzi is a serviceable QB in the pro style, while Arnaud has more upside.
And INT's. Just saying if you compare his numbers vs Austen's I think most people would be surprised, especially when Wallace played on better teams. It's not really a bash on Seneca has much as it is on his fan boys.
