Hawkeye fans that know anything about football at all know that Purdy is a good QB. Any that say differently are just trolling. How good is open to debate and will be determined in the next year or two (hopefully!).
All Iowa Football Team---Post Bowl Edition
- Thread starter YeahBuddy
- Start date
That's just silly. Purdy is a good QB. He may end up being as good, or even better than Stanley. Time will tell. The biggest monkey on his back is crunch time. Stanley consistently stepped up at the critical moments in big games and delivered. That's something BP still needs to prove he can do consistently.
I mean it would be hard to be as innaccurate and immobile as Stanley. It's a valid question IMO
NEBRASKA LMAO! They just keep pumping rainbows up their rear like they do Texas. At least Texas has the talent every year to win
You can be a better quarterback than someone else while also not winning as many games as the other. The two do not go completely hand in hand. There are tons of other variables that go into determining who's better. Right now, Brock is a better quarterback than Stanley. Will he achieve as much as Stanley has in his career as far as wins go? Time will tell, but any un-biased person that follows college football would pick Brock over Stanley 9/10 times.
I'm definitely not saying Stanley is great.. I'm just saying he doesn't suck. He was a solid QB, who just like a lot of other QB's, has his deficiencies. So yes, I think there is a chance that the Oregon State kid could be worse. He could be more talented but make more mistakes, which would lead to worse performances as a whole. Who knows.
I never said you couldn't. If you thought Purdy was/is the better QB, good for you. I think Stanley was/is better, not because he won more games, but because he didn't fold at critical moments of big games the way Purdy did. That's a pretty big red flag. And it's not like I'm making it up, even the NFL scout identified that as the biggest problem with Purdy's game in his analysis. He may very well get over that hump this season, it wouldn't surprise me, he's a good QB. We'll see.
You said Stanley was immobile. It would be pretty damning if Purdy didn’t run faster than an immobile QB. For the record, I’m not sure that he could beat a 4.81 forty. It would certainly be close.
I understand your reasoning, however I think you're putting way too much weight into Purdy's "late game" abilities and not enough into the rest of his abilities. NFL scouts probably aren't either considering some currently have him pegged as a top 15 pick in next year's draft. Even with all the "clutch" plays Stanley had in his career he ended up getting picked in the very late 7th round. Not saying where Stanley ended up is bad either, just saying scouts are obviously thinking Purdy is a better QB than Stanley, even though Stanley is a more prototypical NFL QB.
Either way, you have your opinion you're set on and isn't going to change from me trying to persuade you right now lol. Brock hopefully will have two more years to change your thoughts.