Well ya, he's not going to be good, I can guarantee that. I don't think he's any kind of savior. I just want to see what the kid can do with the starter pants on. And none of this, oh we'll put SR in for a series BS. Full hand over, let the kid play. It's the least Rhoads can do for us for when he's not the coach next year.
Time For Lanning
- Thread starter CYdTracked
- Start date
Well ya, he's not going to be good, I can guarantee that. I don't think he's any kind of savior. I just want to see what the kid can do with the starter pants on. And none of this, oh we'll put SR in for a series BS. Full hand over, let the kid play. It's the least Rhoads can do for us for when he's not the coach next year.
You still throw the ball. Not throwing it there is inexcusable. Who cares if no one is open. Watch the Ole Miss game and tell me just throwing the ball up in desperation can't lead to something good.
I think Joel showed life - and if SBR had an arm he would have led Lanning on that play and hit him going downfield. Sam killed that play as it was open for a long gain - we barely got a 1st down with his noodle arm. Why are we still debating whether Sam is good or bad - he is 3-19. Yes the team has sucked as well - but SBR is a large part of that suckiness. His tendency to run around like a chicken with it's head cut off and not looking to throw is legendary! This staff is relying on a playbook that is ancient - play sandlot football as it would work better - 23 points! 23 - is that the high powered offense we were expecting? Believe The Mess offense averaged higher - so if 3 OC's and it is not better then the common denominator is - CPR!
I don't know what kind of dirt SR has on some of these posters but it must be good.
The receivers were running routes that would've put them in the endzone or close to it before they should've been turning around and looking for the ball. Their d-line absolutely blew up the left side of our o-line and SR was forced to scramble before he was done with his drop. I'm not saying that he shouldn't have thrown it however I'm saying on that play, it was broken before the wr's could get to the points in their routes where they'd expect the ball to be thrown at them. Could Sam have thrown it up during his scramble? Absolutely, however people bagging on Sam saying (or implying that) he's the reason we lost that game need to let off the gas a bit. He at least kept the play alive. There were a lot of other blunders in this game that could be looked at as well. Regardless of what hash mark the cole was kicking from, he should've made the fg to win it in regulation. It's not like it was a 50 yarder. The ridiculous amount of penalties in this game. The fumble by Warren when the defender did nothing to cause it. I'm sure there are others.
Losing is a team effort, but SR is 3–19 as a starter and 0–15 in the Big XII. Do you really think he's suddenly going to start winning games like last night? I have no idea if Lanning is any better (maybe worse), but it seems like we mind as well find out. Sam's record speaks for itself.
All we have to go on with Lanning is what we have seen which is too small a sample. However if we look at what he did at Ankeny with that fast paced option type game, he was brilliant. What we have now is a very limited running game. If I'm a defender I know if ISU runs its either off tackle left or right. If SR runs its after the pocket collapses. Pretty easy to beat that run game. What Lanning ran at the HS level was confusing to defenses with multiple fake handoffs and Lanning tucking and running through holes and arm tackles that didn't bring him down. He's a fullback who can throw. I'm no expert but what we run allows the linebackers to cover short passes which may explain why SR can't find anyone open and holds the ball til he is sacked. With Lanning the D Backs can't sit back they are frozen until they see the play develop. ISU's offense today allows almost a blitz on every down. With only one RB in the backfield and no running QB (or at least until he's forced) the D line and line backers control the line and next 5 yards. Lanning isn't a pocket passer but has arm strength to keep D Backs honest. Our offense needs to keep the defenses guessing and we can't with one running back up the middle and a QB who stands around. We have to play with the O Line we have and if they can't give SR the time he needs we have to go to plan B. I don't blame the Toledo loss on SR. Too many others to share the blame. But if our great receivers are always covered our deception isn't working. Receivers need to work against backs who are required to be part of stopping the run. Today's ISU run game is too easy to defend. Why do you suppose Iowa controlled the 2nd half last week?
You have stupid ideas. I suppose i shouldn't be surprised.
Sam kept us in that game basically despite the other 11 guys on the field. His oline, again, was awful even when they weren't being penalized. Sam seldom had a chance. Despite that, he made enough plays to keep us in it. Basically, last night, Sam and the defense didn't deserve to lose.
Penalties, yes, but I wouldn't call their performance "awful". They set us up for 207 rushing yards as a team. We nearly put up 500 yards last night, I mean, look at the team stat lines from last night: http://espn.go.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=400763421
We quite literally beat Toledo everywhere but the scoreboard. I'm fairly certain that those results mean we got outcoached. Sam threw for 269 and a TD, no turnovers. Acceptable. Brown ran for 129, and 5 a carry. That's pretty damn good for our standards. Our D only gave up around 300 yards, including the 2 OT's. That's pretty good. We controlled the ball for over 38 game minutes. That's pretty good. 27 first downs, that's good.
The players performed. The coaches did not. Mangino got creative with playcalling and that's great, but it still only devolved into 20 points in regulation. A little bit can maybe fall on Netten for underperforming in the clutch, but we really shouldn't have been that close in the first place.
As for Sam, you can't tell me our receivers can't get open. He clutches a lot and second-guesses. Did it a lot last night, too. He needs to step up and take a chance once in a while. Although, I'll leave the note that his scrambling last night was honestly pretty productive for the most part.
Because three is a crowd? Or did you already forget that Barnett and Jantz spend their entire two years together switching just about every other game?
I think making a switch will spark the WRs who are the strenght of the offense.
I mean the one third down conversion pass on that potential game winning drive Richardson hit got his WR absolutely destroyed he never puts touch on the ball and leads his receivers high into defensive backs I think they would rejoice at a QB switch. Sam isn't bad either just wrong guy in the wrong place 3 years of losing every close game and never making clutch plays and always throwing the ball in bad spots where the receiver either can't run with it or gets drilled has to grow old. ANd RIchardson has finally figured it out in terms of pocket pressence and awareness.
I mean the one third down conversion pass on that potential game winning drive Richardson hit got his WR absolutely destroyed he never puts touch on the ball and leads his receivers high into defensive backs I think they would rejoice at a QB switch. Sam isn't bad either just wrong guy in the wrong place 3 years of losing every close game and never making clutch plays and always throwing the ball in bad spots where the receiver either can't run with it or gets drilled has to grow old. ANd RIchardson has finally figured it out in terms of pocket pressence and awareness.
