It's JB's job to lose. No question. I don't see it being an open QB competition like last spring.
Steele Jantz.....
- Thread starter CyVik7
- Start date
I have a niece close to the program. (Used to work in FB office). At Xmas she told us that after Steele got benched he worked even harder. Almost lives in the film room. Sounds like he still wants ot be the guy. I'm not ready to have him move to another positon.
I love having competetion as well as an experienced back up. No matter who starrts next year we will have a back up QB with at least 4 games under his belt.
I love having competetion as well as an experienced back up. No matter who starrts next year we will have a back up QB with at least 4 games under his belt.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
The defense was great for a quarter and a half. Then, the defense gave up a big play and a late/quick score.
Just because they started well does NOT mean they played the whole game well. The 2nd quarter the defense made the game practically impossible to win. I think they might have given up an early td in the 2nd half, also.
The defense deserved praise for about a quarter-and-a-half, but then it wasn't good.
To be fair on the interception argument. Steele threw down field more because the coaches thought he was able to. Once JB came in. coaches went to shorter passes. If Steele really is trying to learn the offense better I hope he is our starter. He opens up the field more so defenses can't focus on the run as much.
No but the happy feet were because of poor blocking by the O-line. Go back and compare line play when Steele was starting and when JB is starting and you will see a big improvement by the line and that meant JB was not running for his life on almost every play.
Step 1) Steele gets injured.
Step 2) Steele is noticably underperforming.
Step 3) Barnett gets some PT, and then gets the start.
Step 4) Barnett wins.
Step 5) You don't pull a well-performing, winning, starting quarterback who needs all the experience he can get just -- just because -- just because, well -- exactly. You don't. Who cares if Jantz is healthy now. Even if he is healthy, he hasn't been practicing (with the 1's, at least), he hasn't been playing in games, he's probably lost some confidence having been replaced as the starter-even with an injury as an excuse. Unless he's a LOT better, or JB totally chokes, you don't "flip-flop" to borrow a political phrase.
Looking back on the season, I summarize it like this:
Jantz -- showed us some great highlights, great talent/potential. Looks like he has very high "highs" (playmaker), but prone to some pretty low "lows" (turnovers). Happy/excited to have him as our quarterback.
Barnett -- showed us some unexpected level-headedness/calm. Proficient. Comfortable enough to take what the defense is giving him. I can't say I saw any really high "highs", and definitely no low "lows". Sure, he was the qb for the biggest ISU win ever over OkState, but I never once thought that he was the star -- but it was awesome that he wasn't the heel. Happy for now to have him as our quarterback.
I find Barnett to be more steady, with Jantz more up-and-down. BUT I see them as fairly equal on average. Next year -- will Barnett continue to be steady and rise? Can Jantz eliminate the "downs" and continue being a playmaker while gaining general proficiency? Will a wildcard like Richardson/Rohach/Tiller (sp?) surprise us all like Jantz did this year?
This goes back to the defense having to go out there time after time, after the offense goes 3, 4, 5 and out. No matter how good your defense is, they are going to get tired if the offense keeps putting them in that position. Once JB took over the offense they were able to sustain more drives and give the defense a chance to catch their breath. The defense really came on in the last half of the season.
But there were a few balls tipped by OUR WR's to the CB's. Maybe you should watch games instead of just stats? People would be ripping Barnett apart if he wasn't so lucky and all his fumbles got recovered by us instead of the defense like what happened to Jantz. Its easier for Barnett not to throw INT's when we don't trust him as much to throw the ball. Yet, somehow he still ends up with a worse TD/INT ratio and completion % than Jantz.
This is an over-used excuse. Like the other team's offense isn't out there just as long and gets just as tired.
Chicken and egg issue. Did the defense get better because the offense got better? I don't know. But I know in the Texas game, the defense was awesome to start and then probably about as bad as they were the entire season just before the half.
But I'm going to probably stop discussing. There are just way too many other factors involved to try and narrow this down to Jantz vs. Barnett when comparing the first half of the season to the last half. Linemen were injured. Defensive linemen rookies developed. How many running backs did we go through again?
Regarding Texas -- it's my opinion -- I thought the defense got way too much credit in that game. Again -- for the first quarter and a half you can't praise them enough. Then they underperformed. And I don't want to sound like they totally stunk -- I'm just saying they started awesome, had a pretty bad stretch, and then the game was out-of-hand from that point on. They were still better than the offense and the special teams overall in the game.
If its true that Jantz is living in the filmroom and working a lot harder, there is no possible way he doesn't in the Job.
This is just stupid. You might think he'll win the job, but there are all sorts of possible ways he doesn't.
In Barnett's defense, I think many of those fumbles that weren't lost were from the snap or handoff exchange (lower probability of the defense recovering) in contrast with fumbling because you're in traffic and not protecting the ball well enough.
Look at what each player does on offense on a play and then look at what the entire defense does on a play. The big difference is pursuit. Rarely do you see O linemen downfield on a play after the play is past 7 yards of the LOS. Every D lineman needs to pursue every play until the whistle blows. That pursuit without recovery is what takes it out of a D.
But with all due respect, if you don't think hes going to be better next year with as hard as hes working.. you're a complete moron.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I just want the QB that will give ISU the best chance to win each game -- but this comment is just stupid. All accounts have Barnett as a very hard worker and great student of the game. What makes it a slam dunk that Jantz will improve and Barnett won't?
You have such a HO for Jantz and are so critical of Barnett that it is difficult to even read your posts anymore.
