Park has the talent. I'm not convinced he made the reads he was supposed to pre snap and even when the rush came against Texas. Without this ability/skill, a gun slinger will not beat anyone who is decent. I would bet BIG MONEY he graded out very low against TEXAS. Just my opinion.
Where do we go at QB from here?
- Thread starter WIB
- Start date
Not as low as the staff.
Yep, this is what it comes down to. If the QB doesn't throw it to where the defense isn't, it doesn't matter how pretty and fast of a spiral he can sling. And RPO's aren't going away, they can be a deadly weapon when the defense blatantly cheats up to stop the run or sits back in coverage.
I watched you guys a lot last year and have a lot of respect what Candle did when defenses more often than not chose to focus their resources on stopping Kareem Hunt running behind your big h-back who got drafted in the 4th round...it was really impressive seeing how this lead to Cody Thompson and Jon'Vea Johnson each averaging over 19 yards per catch and both being top 15 in the country in YPC...unheard of for both WR's to go for 19 ypc.
The concern I have is I think defenses are being built to stop RPO's, and so it takes talent to do this stuff. We haven't had an NFL RB get a carry in 20 years and I don't think we have ever had a WR catch an NFL pass, so a 220 pounder like David Montgomery and 6'5 NFL talent like Lazard are rare for us and I question the sustainability of the offense we have run with Park when those are gone.
Plus I have seen too much Mark Mangino downfield ball be horrible at ISU. And have had to watch a little dipstick program in Cowtownville, Kansas win so many games for so many years by neutralizing the defense with a running QB.
Could Manning and Candle have that different of philosophies given that we have brought in dual threat guys like Devon & Re-al?
That is a good question. Not sure philosophies are that much different. Seems like the bigger programs want the dual guy more often, so they get them. Only so many around that can make all the throws and run effectively. Toledo has tried to recruit some of the high 3 and 4 star dual guys without success. You play with what you get.
Maybe I missed this, but do we know why Park took a personal leave? I thought all we knew was it was for personal health reasons (with some speculation maybe mental health). If that's the case, I completely don't understand the sentiment on here that he has to earn his spot back or prove his commitment to the team, or that his actions were in anyway negative. It's no different than if he couldn't play because he had pneumonia; that doesn't reflect negatively on him at all.
I think you play park when he's healthy, but I feel a lot better about Iowa State's QB position until then. Also, while Kempt was incredible, at least some of that needs to be attributed to Iowa State's play calling, Oklahoma's play calling, the fact that Oklahoma wasn't expecting him/weren't prepared for him, and the fact that there was less pressure since he was third string and Oklahoma was a 30 pt. favorite. Again, Kempt was incredible, and therefor I don't think you play Park until he's 100%, but once he's 100%, I think he should get the start
I think you play park when he's healthy, but I feel a lot better about Iowa State's QB position until then. Also, while Kempt was incredible, at least some of that needs to be attributed to Iowa State's play calling, Oklahoma's play calling, the fact that Oklahoma wasn't expecting him/weren't prepared for him, and the fact that there was less pressure since he was third string and Oklahoma was a 30 pt. favorite. Again, Kempt was incredible, and therefor I don't think you play Park until he's 100%, but once he's 100%, I think he should get the start
If the personal or mental health issue is addiction related, do you feel the same?
With an injury or physical illness you don't get the starting spot back until you're well enough to preform at a starting level. Imo saying Park will have to prove he is healthy/recovered is the same as saying he has to earn it back.
Also, if a player is out with injury and in the meantime the staff discovers a clearly better player, the old starter doesn't get his starting spot back Imo.
What?
Since you like to make it all about you, you've never had a bad spell that prompts you to take a little time away to recover and recoup? Actually, that explains a lot.
I'm just concerned about Park, that's all. He needs to take the time he needs and not rush back. If you're having enough issues to take a leave of absence from the team, just take your time and get everything straightened out. Football is not that important.
Last edited:
We need to allow CMC and staff to do what is best for each team member and the team as a whole. We can argue about if the coaches are good or bad, but need to be a little cautious about individual players.
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Kempt completed 75% of his passes for 18.5 yards per catch. His passer efficiency rating after 1 game is 236. Baker Mayfield leads the nation among guys who qualify with enough attempts, with a 214 rating.
But now teams have seen the screens and swings and will be stacking the edge to stop it. So what is the pawn on the chess board that Manning moves to take advantage of this? Well for starters, obviously a heavy dosage of Montgomery. I want Lanning on QB draws (especially if Willie Harvey is back). Doesn't seem like the fulltime move back to QB is coming, so if your choice is Park or Kempt, who pushes the ball downfield better? Park, so long as he sticks to the game plan, makes his reads, and doesn't start heaving into coverage.
But now teams have seen the screens and swings and will be stacking the edge to stop it. So what is the pawn on the chess board that Manning moves to take advantage of this? Well for starters, obviously a heavy dosage of Montgomery. I want Lanning on QB draws (especially if Willie Harvey is back). Doesn't seem like the fulltime move back to QB is coming, so if your choice is Park or Kempt, who pushes the ball downfield better? Park, so long as he sticks to the game plan, makes his reads, and doesn't start heaving into coverage.
I read the first 5 pages. I read many posts talking about our "walk-on" QB. He was a scholarship QB at Oregon State. Then transferred to a JC that had an established returning QB. Is it hard to learn a new offense and displace an established starter in 1 season? Now he came to ISU with 2 years to play without a scholarship. The coaches obviously believed he had the talent to play or you don't give up a walk-on spot to a 2 year guy when you could get a 4-5 year guy that might develop. The coaches saw something. He has worked and learned for 1+ years at ISU and showed that he is capable.
He is not the best QB in the country, and probably not even on the roster, but he did manage and perform the things he was asked to do. I am not sure how long before the game the coaches knew Park was going to be gone. Perhaps the game was simplified for Kempt because there was not a full week to prepare. I think all summer I heard CMC state that we need to get the ball into the hands of the playmakers. Kempt did that and did enough of his own running to win the game.
I also noted that the description on Park is 'personal health issues" and not injury. Not sure what that means, but it does sound different than other players. I hope it is something that is quickly resolved and that he returns. I would definitely hope the coaches do not play him before either he is near 100% healthy or worse case scenario is that Kempt becomes in-effective and Park has to be brought back before fully healed.
I am not sure what is going on with Nolan. At the Akron game, Kempt played a few snaps, and I heard that because he was from Ohio, the coaches wanted to play him. But I thought I also heard something after the game about Nolan not being healthy as well. Is there anything to this that anyone is aware of?
He is not the best QB in the country, and probably not even on the roster, but he did manage and perform the things he was asked to do. I am not sure how long before the game the coaches knew Park was going to be gone. Perhaps the game was simplified for Kempt because there was not a full week to prepare. I think all summer I heard CMC state that we need to get the ball into the hands of the playmakers. Kempt did that and did enough of his own running to win the game.
I also noted that the description on Park is 'personal health issues" and not injury. Not sure what that means, but it does sound different than other players. I hope it is something that is quickly resolved and that he returns. I would definitely hope the coaches do not play him before either he is near 100% healthy or worse case scenario is that Kempt becomes in-effective and Park has to be brought back before fully healed.
I am not sure what is going on with Nolan. At the Akron game, Kempt played a few snaps, and I heard that because he was from Ohio, the coaches wanted to play him. But I thought I also heard something after the game about Nolan not being healthy as well. Is there anything to this that anyone is aware of?
Probably not. And I disagree. If he proves he's healthy, and he's still the starter, then he'll get his job back automatically. Earning means he'd have to wait to Kempt to not be playing as well.
kepmpt, should keep the job. This offense has too many playmakers, we need a qb who is more of a manager, gets it into the right hands, and can put the ball up and let our receivers go up and get it, park had too much pressure and unrealistic expectations put on him, and he was trying to force himself to win games with every throw. which let him to be pressing and making bad reads and throwing high all year, if he comes back, he needs to understand , just make the each throw or hand off to Montgomery. as we now know that's all this offense needs.
Park gives us the best chance to win. A simplified game plan can't work every week. Also we really owe Mike Stoops for making things easier on Kempt.
The key is "if he's a starter". Are you a starter if the guy that replaces you when injured turns out to be better? Nope. Just like any other position or situation, you play the best guy. Injuries aren't a means to prevent future competition.
No, earning it means he'll have to be better than Kempt, in addition to whatever other stipulations may be added on. I expect that to happen quickly.
To be fair, Lanning gives us the best chance to win. If he went to Kstate he would go 9-3. Or if Dana Dimel was our OC we would go 8-4. But yes, if we run the offense we ran in the 1st 4 games that was 45th in the country in efficiency, Park gives us the best chance to go 6-6. However, take away the rare talents by ISU's standards (Montgomery & Lazard) and we are probably talking more like 4-8 with Park slingin' deep to Carson Epps or handing to Mike Warren for a 2 yard gain.
