Whoever we go with, we need to keep the same offensive gameplan. When Kempt was in there Manning and the coaches did a good job calling plays that never really put him in a position to fail.
Where do we go at QB from here?
- Thread starter WIB
- Start date
That responsible, hard working, walkon, small-town Iowa farm-boy Kempt epitomizes ISU.
We call this "Paul Rhoads Syndrome."
I blame the game plan against Texas for a lot, but to say that Park was blameless in that game is silly.
With greater rewards come greater risks too. If Park doesn't throw that interception against Iowa, they might not have gotten that field goal and we might have won. And I am interested to know if there is any truth to the idea that at least some of the dropped passes are due to our receivers not being able to hang on because of the way he throws the ball. We didn't see many dropped passes yesterday with a guy that the starters haven't played with much. I also wonder a bit about the chemistry of the team with him out there....obviously everyone was pissed at the Texas game, so I hardly blame him for that. But the fact that he was upset during the Akron game is a bit unsettling. The last thing a fragile team are leaders that make things worse.
I know I'm coming across as anti-Park here and I'm not really. It is just an interesting discussion and I like to play devil's advocate.
I suspect that you are probably right and that we've seen Kempt for the last time. And that is probably fine.
When judging the qbs just on their appearances, Park and his hair cut is clearly unKempt.
Terrible puns aside, you go with Park when/if healthy, but you're not afraid to give Kempt another shot when things need a spark.
Terrible puns aside, you go with Park when/if healthy, but you're not afraid to give Kempt another shot when things need a spark.
No one has said he was blameless, but Park hasn't been the problem and Kempt wasn't the answer.
Kempt's teammates stepped up and it had very little to do with Kempt vs Park. CMC told the guys they needed to, for good reason. The blocking, catching, and play calling needed to get better.
Like a majority of football teams these days we incorporate run pass options where the QB can handoff or throw based on his read of the defense. I can't say for certain how many of the plays Park had 2 choices vs how many were designed pass, but I think its safe to assume he chose pass on quite a few since we were only down by 1 score most of the game and not needing to play catch-up, but yet ended up passing 48 times + 5 QB sacks/flushes vs only 10 handoffs to an RB.
That's 15% runs for a staff at Toledo that I believe was usually around 55% run...when we were down by 1 score with plenty of time to try to mount and sustain a drive. I wouldn't expect the staff to be that incompetent, especially not after the masterful game plan we just saw vs OU. I would also suspect it was Park's reads that him and Campbell were arguing about.
That would also help to explain some other wise confusing route trees with 3 fly routes and 2 skill guys staying in to block with absolutely nobody in the middle of the field...an other wise stupid play but if you are running 3 deep to clear space in the middle, one would assume a coaching staff that has gotten this far in their careers was doing that to clear space for a handoff. And even if it was a designed pass on the 3 fly routes, when literally nobody from either team is in the middle of the field, Park has to have the presence of mind to take off for a 20 yard scamper rather than chuck a deep bomb into cover 2 for an INT.
It was a bad game plan but Park also gets his share of blame.
Oh yeah, you easily could be right. But none of them mentioned him yesterday in the post game.
The fact that Kempt had only thrown two passes in his career before yesterday is an advantage right now. Oklahoma obviously had no idea what to expect, and I'm sure Kansas will be pouring over the tape to see what his weaknesses are. After a few more games I'm sure Big XII defenses will make Kempt look human again, and we will all be wondering when Park will return.
I'm mainly playing devil's advocate. I don't think Park is as good as a lot of people do. But I do think he is the coach's choice and probably the best choice. But I think it is an interesting discussion to have.
And my comment about the players wasn't meant as anything that bad, but I was a tiny bit surprised that he wasn't really mentioned by them in the post game interviews.
Park numbers wise has a chance to be the best QB Iowa State has ever put on the field. If he's ready to play, he plays.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. I'm guessing yesterday was quite a bit of luck. If Kempt was a better QB than Park he'd have been on the field already. Park has been very, very solid this year when given time to throw. When he's getting hit constantly he makes boneheaded decisions (like just about every other QB on earth in the same position). Our running game yesterday was pretty pathetic but it was enough to keep OU honest. That helps your line and QB as well.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. I'm guessing yesterday was quite a bit of luck. If Kempt was a better QB than Park he'd have been on the field already. Park has been very, very solid this year when given time to throw. When he's getting hit constantly he makes boneheaded decisions (like just about every other QB on earth in the same position). Our running game yesterday was pretty pathetic but it was enough to keep OU honest. That helps your line and QB as well.
It is amazing how fast people turn on our own players. 1 bad game and people forget how good he has been and can be.
Kempt did a great job yesterday under crazy pressure but a lot of his production was due to other guys making plays. I do like how he gave them the chance to make the plays. 2 tds and like 150 yards came on throws at the line of scrimmage. Another 100 was on jump balls. We are a much more dangerous team with park back there in my opinion, but I am perfectly comfortable with Kempt starting until park gets right
Kempt did a great job yesterday under crazy pressure but a lot of his production was due to other guys making plays. I do like how he gave them the chance to make the plays. 2 tds and like 150 yards came on throws at the line of scrimmage. Another 100 was on jump balls. We are a much more dangerous team with park back there in my opinion, but I am perfectly comfortable with Kempt starting until park gets right
I don't know if the result would have been different but they for sure would have given it to DM a lot more and that's what makes this offense go. And that's the difference from the offense against UT vs OU.