Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Arnaud vs. Stanzi

This was an interesting way to waste fifteen minutes! If trades were allowed in college football and I were the ISU GM, I wouldn't trade Arnaud for Stanzi. In the way of a preface, I live in Iowa City, know Kirk Ferentz and still hate the hawks with passion! Even so, there's something I like about Ricky Stanzi. Everybody is listing the advantages he had, but the guy carries himself well and simply gets done what needs to be done. There's no doubt that Arnaud is more physicially gifted but it's yet to be determined if he has the intangibles that make one a great college QB.

Conclusion: I prefer Arnaud as a QB for his "potential" but I don't think Ricky Stanzi "sucks" and fear he may be better than Tate, Banks, etc. I think both teams are well-positioned at QB for the next several years....
 
ketelmeister said:
While I'm an Iowa State fan, and have high hopes for AA, not sure how anyone could say this is a slam dunk, or stupid comparison. Would you rather have Freeman or Reesing? I'd take Reesing cause he's a winner. AA needs to show he can win at Iowa State. I believe he will.
Click to expand...

I am so sick of this damn argument from you. It's the same BS again and again. And I do like you...I guess it would be easier if it was coming from someone else because I'd just blame it on mental incapacity, which I do not think you suffer from.

Go take a gander at AA's stats compared to past ISU QBs. Look at how his are better in almost every single instance and he had less to work with on both sides of the ball.

AA made fewer mistakes in his sophomore season than every single other QB did in their senior seasons. AA was not the problem for ISU last year and I highly doubt he'll be the problem this year. It's tough to win games when our defense was penetrated more often than Paris Hilton.

Anyway, regarding the thread - Stanzi was much improved last season and I give him a lot of credit for such - I was impressed. I like waching him.

But I'd take AA. Why? Watch the UNLV game when he took over in the 2nd half, notably the final 6 minutes or so. There are a number of other reasons. AA just has the intangibles. He can create plays almost by himself. I don't think Stanzi has the same ability.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Clonegrad07
ISUFan22 said:
I am so sick of this damn argument from you. It's the same BS again and again. Go take a gander at AA's stats compared to past ISU QBs. Look at how his are better in almost every single instance and he had less to work with on both sides of the ball. But I'd take AA. Why? Watch the UNLV game when he took over in the 2nd half, notably the final 6 minutes or so. There are a number of other reasons. AA just has the intangibles. He can create plays almost by himself.
Click to expand...

I'm going to side with Kettle in this argument and submit that your argument is overly simplistic, being based solely on a comparison of statistics. If you've played fantasy football, you know it's a benefit to have a QB who's always playing from behind, as he garners garbage time stats against prevent defenses. Next, a spectacular game-tying drive against the prevent defense of UNLV is not career-defining in terms of "intangibles"; it's UNLV for gawd's sake! Finally, ISU's schedule last year did not include the conference "big dawgs"....

If you want to compare intangibles, which is the basis of your problem with Kettle, compare Arnaud with Seneca Wallace. The final Seneca-led team was not that talented, yet he led them to a winning record through sheer force of will. Wallace out equaled lopsided Cyclone loss (Boise State). Wallace had the intangibles that I have not yet seen Arnaud display, which is what I believe Kettle was trying to say. Running up gaudy statistics during the second half of routs is misleading; engineering a win against a superior opponent defines "intangible"...
 
I don't play fantasy football.

Often times, when a QB is playing from behind, he has poor completion stats and high numbers of INTs. Arnaud had neither.

Wallace had a lot more to work with in his senior season than AA did last year. The defense alone was far better than the poor excuse for such in '08.

I've watched AA in games and practice. He's got the best fundamentals I've seen from an ISU QB to date, including Wallace. His decision making is pretty good and I only expect it to get better.
 
Last edited:
If push comes to shove--and by shove I mean mano-y-mano in a Michael Jackson Beat-It Video Style Knife fight--I'm taking Arnaud. He's got reach on Stanzi and by the looks of him, knows how to handle a knife and himself when his arm is tied to another mans in a fight to the death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TarHeelHawk and jdoggivjc
iccyfan said:
I'm going to side with Kettle in this argument and submit that your argument is overly simplistic, being based solely on a comparison of statistics. If you've played fantasy football, you know it's a benefit to have a QB who's always playing from behind, as he garners garbage time stats against prevent defenses. Next, a spectacular game-tying drive against the prevent defense of UNLV is not career-defining in terms of "intangibles"; it's UNLV for gawd's sake! Finally, ISU's schedule last year did not include the conference "big dawgs"....

If you want to compare intangibles, which is the basis of your problem with Kettle, compare Arnaud with Seneca Wallace. The final Seneca-led team was not that talented, yet he led them to a winning record through sheer force of will. Wallace out equaled lopsided Cyclone loss (Boise State). Wallace had the intangibles that I have not yet seen Arnaud display, which is what I believe Kettle was trying to say. Running up gaudy statistics during the second half of routs is misleading; engineering a win against a superior opponent defines "intangible"...
Click to expand...

??? :confused:

This is the team that started out 6-1, was at one time #9 in the country, and was a screwjob away from beating FSU in Kansas City - and you're calling them not that talented? Au contraire - I'd consider that team one of ISU's MOST TALENTED teams, at least in recent memory. Granted, we weren't in OU's or K-State's league that year, but we certainly had enough talent to hang with Texas and Colorado, two pretty good teams that we lost to that year. Quite frankly, why that season collapsed wasn't so much due to a lack of talent but more because the better teams in the league figured out our schemes and we never adjusted to throw them off guard - in other words, a coaching problem.

Granted, it's early to say that Arnaud will be the best QB ever to don the ISU jersey, as he still has two years left to play here, but first considering the numbers he put up last season, and second considering who's coming in to run our offense this year, by the time Arnaud graduates he very well could be the best QB ever to walk out of here. He's only played one full season here, but I'd already be comfortable in saying he's one of the 5 best QBs ever to play at ISU, maybe one of the 3 best. However, I do agree - he's not the best to play here - yet.
 
jdoggivjc said:
??? :confused:

This is the team that started out 6-1, was at one time #9 in the country, and was a screwjob away from beating FSU in Kansas City - and you're calling them not that talented? Au contraire - I'd consider that team one of ISU's MOST TALENTED teams, at least in recent memory. Granted, we weren't in OU's or K-State's league that year, but we certainly had enough talent to hang with Texas and Colorado, two pretty good teams that we lost to that year. Quite frankly, why that season collapsed wasn't so much due to a lack of talent but more because the better teams in the league figured out our schemes and we never adjusted to throw them off guard - in other words, a coaching problem.
Click to expand...

The 2002 team was one of my favorites ever and gave us a wildly entertaining season, but were they really that talented or did Seneca Wallace make them competitive. With Seneca, they competed with everybody. When Seneca was injured, they got blown away (Oklahoma & Boise State). My non-thorough review of the 2002 roster shows three starters other than Seneca who made the NFL, namely Jordan Carstens (nice couple years), Zack Butler (cup of coffee) and Jeremy Lloyd (cup of coffee). I'm of the opinion that Seneca had the intangibles to make those around him much better and almost single-handedly willed us to victory (see the FSU screw-job game).

I'll concede that Seneca had better surrounding talent in 2002 than AA had in 2008, but I still think Wallace is the best pertinent example of "having the intangibles" and I don't think AA has demonstrated that he has "it" yet. He appears to have the physical tools; let's see him finish the job and beat some "superior teams" over the next couple years. It is pertinent to the argument at hand...
 
And my point is, it's very tough to beat not only superior teams, but average teams - when your defense is pathetic - which ours was in '08. And the offensive play calling for about half the season was rather, offensive.

While we're dropping the injury thing regarding Seneca, AA was supposedly hurt for about 2-4 games, depending on who you talk to. His worst performances came during this time.

AA is not perfect, much room to grow. But he's no slouch and is certainly not a problem area on this squad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneErik
ISUFan22 said:
And my point is, it's very tough to beat not only superior teams, but average teams - when your defense is pathetic - which ours was in '08. And the offensive play calling for about half the season was rather, offensive.

While we're dropping the injury thing regarding Seneca, AA was supposedly hurt for about 2-4 games, depending on who you talk to. His worst performances came during this time.

AA is not perfect, much room to grow. But he's no slouch and is certainly not a problem area on this squad.
Click to expand...

I agree. Unless the standard is 45-50 points a game, there weren't many games that Arnaud had a chance to win, and he was still keeping us in games. The guy has a ton of ability shown and plenty of room to grow.

Nobody wins with that defense. Somebody mentioned that Peyton Manning wins more games with that defense, but never answered the follow-up question: Would a first-year college starter Peyton Manning win with that defense?

This doesn't mean that I think Arnaud is equal to Manning. That's out there. But nobody wins games with that defense. Revkah and I could tell what happened to the defense from Jamaica, just by the words, "oh,no" in a post.
 
ISUFan22 said:
I am so sick of this damn argument from you. It's the same BS again and again. And I do like you...I guess it would be easier if it was coming from someone else because I'd just blame it on mental incapacity, which I do not think you suffer from.

Go take a gander at AA's stats compared to past ISU QBs. Look at how his are better in almost every single instance and he had less to work with on both sides of the ball.

AA made fewer mistakes in his sophomore season than every single other QB did in their senior seasons. AA was not the problem for ISU last year and I highly doubt he'll be the problem this year. It's tough to win games when our defense was penetrated more often than Paris Hilton.

Anyway, regarding the thread - Stanzi was much improved last season and I give him a lot of credit for such - I was impressed. I like waching him.

But I'd take AA. Why? Watch the UNLV game when he took over in the 2nd half, notably the final 6 minutes or so. There are a number of other reasons. AA just has the intangibles. He can create plays almost by himself. I don't think Stanzi has the same ability.
Click to expand...

22, I also like AA's ability and attitude. My only point is that for any QB, the ultimate judge of their success is wins. Stats mean nothing without the W. A good quarterback can motive a team to overachieve, even with a lousy defense. That overachievement may be a 500 season. I did not see AA lead us to overachieve last year. I hope with new coaches, that can happen this year. As for Stanzi, I would not trade for him because of AA's potential. But you have to give it to him, he did what it takes to get wins. Iowa was bowling while our suntans were fading.
 
He couldn't overachieve in the face of that horrid defense - we simply would have needed to average 40+ points per game - which would've been miraculous. No way could I expect that from a sophomore QB with an offense lacking experienced talent.
 
ketelmeister said:
22, I also like AA's ability and attitude. My only point is that for any QB, the ultimate judge of their success is wins. Stats mean nothing without the W. A good quarterback can motive a team to overachieve, even with a lousy defense. That overachievement may be a 500 season. I did not see AA lead us to overachieve last year. I hope with new coaches, that can happen this year. As for Stanzi, I would not trade for him because of AA's potential. But you have to give it to him, he did what it takes to get wins. Iowa was bowling while our suntans were fading.
Click to expand...

Absolute bull ****. Do you realize how incredibly illogical this is? By your standards, Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien, and Brad Johnson are better quarterbacks than Archie Manning and Dan Marino. This is ******* stupid. To say a great QB can just make the defense better is like saying someone can turn an ashtray into a pick up. Just ridiculous. Even Seneca had a much better defense that the one we had last year. To continue to say that Arnaud isn't great unless he can magically make the defense play better is pure insanity...
 
ISUFan22 said:
I am so sick of this damn argument from you. It's the same BS again and again. And I do like you...I guess it would be easier if it was coming from someone else because I'd just blame it on mental incapacity, which I do not think you suffer from.

Go take a gander at AA's stats compared to past ISU QBs. Look at how his are better in almost every single instance and he had less to work with on both sides of the ball.

AA made fewer mistakes in his sophomore season than every single other QB did in their senior seasons. AA was not the problem for ISU last year and I highly doubt he'll be the problem this year. It's tough to win games when our defense was penetrated more often than Paris Hilton.

Anyway, regarding the thread - Stanzi was much improved last season and I give him a lot of credit for such - I was impressed. I like waching him.

But I'd take AA. Why? Watch the UNLV game when he took over in the 2nd half, notably the final 6 minutes or so. There are a number of other reasons. AA just has the intangibles. He can create plays almost by himself. I don't think Stanzi has the same ability.
Click to expand...

You've insulted my mental capacity. In fact, it has scarred me for life. Does this mean you don't like me? :sad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom