***Official Bench Steele Jantz thread***

zwclones51

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2010
3,954
136
63
West Des Moines
Im a Jantz fan and think he gives us the best chance to win some big 12 games. BUT, I think JB gives us the best chance these next two games.

With TCU and KSU, they will be lower scoring games. We need a manager that can run the ball and keep us in the game. I don't think our D gives up more than 21 these next 2 games if we don't turn the ball over.
 

Tre4ISU

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 30, 2008
27,897
8,657
113
Estherville
Any poster that wants Jantz benched doesn't understand football or understand that he is our best option at the moment.

Maybe our best option to make a play. I don't think he's our best option to win football games anymore. I was really optimistic coming into the season, however I'm just not sure he can make good decisions. There hasn't been a well played offensive game. 38 points against WIU is really pathetic and he has scored two TDs against UI and TT combined. That's awful. Maybe he is our best option best the next one can't be much worse so I think it's worth giving it a shot just like we did last year. FWIW, I'm not sure that's Barnett.
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
45,872
35,265
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
You are nuts to not consider Sage and Seneca to be really good QB's. Name a really good QB that had less talent around them than those two?

You don't spend 8-12 years in the NFL, even if it is mainly carrying a clipboard, if you aren't a really good college QB. Really good QB's at the Div. 1 level, career backups in the NFL.
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
45,872
35,265
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
Well, while we're on the subject... What about our kicking game?
How do you miss an extra-point at point blank range? (Not sure Mason Crosby could even answer this one)

Mason Crosby missed 8 PAT's in his Colorado career. He had a cannon for a leg, but certainly wasn't perfect for accuracy, not even from point blank range.
 

IcSyU

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2007
27,796
6,021
113
Rochester, MN
Jantz wasn't that bad Saturday. The fumble was god awful. One interception is on Brun. Another interception is on the receiver who ran the wrong route. The problem started with the guy calling the plays and was basically summed up by a 3rd and 12 where we ran play action while they were showing blitz. Imagine that, a guy runs off the edge untouched and makes Steele's job a real pain in the ***. He didn't even get to look up the field before he was running for his life.

What did we do to counter the pressure? We kept running plays 10-15 yards downfield that take time to develop because our receivers can't beat press coverage when they're trying to run straight through it. An occasional screen to slow pursuit down? Nah. Maybe a draw? No, we'll just keep running the zone read right into the teeth of where they have us outnumbered. Makes sense.
 

aeroclone

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2006
9,833
5,859
113
Have anything to back that up?

We have a backup who won big games in the Big 12 last year. He lead the team that drilled this Tech team at home 41-7. He lead the biggest upset in Iowa State football history.

What has Jantz done? Outside of the Iowa game last year, he turns the ball over, and over, and over and has the ability to squeak by teams that are inferior to us (UNI, UCONN, Iowa this year) and has yet to win a Big 12 football game.

You are totally on track here. I would take it one step farther and say that Jantz hasn't ever played a good game against real competition. Everyone likes to point to the Iowa game last year because we scored a lot of points and won in dramatic fashion, but if you go back and look at it, we had every chance in the world to put that game away early, and got bit by the same issues that have always plagued our Jantz lead offense. That game never should have gone to OT.

We need to do what KState would does here and play to our strengths and personnel. We have a defense in the top tier of the league, and a great punter. We need to play mistake free, field position football. We need an offense that can go pick up a couple first downs and take care of the ball. Eat up some clock, give the D a rest, and pin teams deep. This puts us in a place to win games scoring in the 20s, which isn't something we will have many chances to do this year turning it over 4 times a game. And this is not something that Jantz can give us.

I read through all the QB prediction threads preseason, and heard all the Jantz backers talking about having a higher ceiling. I asked the question then, and I still have the same question now: based on what? Sure, there were some flashes of brilliance last season, but they were typically leading a rally that only needs to occur because turnovers spotted the other team a double digit lead (UNI, Iowa, Uconn). We are a third of the way through his senior season, and he doesn't look much better than he did at the beginning of last year. Who cares if he is a little faster or has a stronger arm, if the offense isn't taking care of the ball and isn't scoring points none of that matters.

At this point, we are just wasting snaps with Jantz. He is what he is. Why not use those snaps to give some experience to someone with a future in the program. Before anyone tries to say that is giving up on this season, tell me with a straight face that you don't think Barnett or Richardson could go out there and throw for 73 yards and 3 picks. We wouldn't lose a thing on offense with a QB change right now.
 

snowcraig2.0

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 2, 2007
11,498
8,429
113
46
Cedar Rapids, IA
Maybe our best option to make a play. I don't think he's our best option to win football games anymore. I was really optimistic coming into the season, however I'm just not sure he can make good decisions. There hasn't been a well played offensive game. 38 points against WIU is really pathetic and he has scored two TDs against UI and TT combined. That's awful. Maybe he is our best option best the next one can't be much worse so I think it's worth giving it a shot just like we did last year. FWIW, I'm not sure that's Barnett.

Jantz has every tool you would want in a QB physically. He just doesn't have it between the ears right now. Probably due to the fact he hasn't played QB much. I don't think we can afford to waste this defense waiting for him to 'get it' though.
 

andjhostet

Member
Sep 11, 2011
46
1
8
Burlington, Iowa
Come on, if you think Jantz should be benched, you should say our O-line should be benched, our WR's should be benched and most importantly Mess should be benched. This awful offensive performance can not be pinned on one person. If I absolutely had to blame one person, I'd say Mess, as that was the worst game of offensive play calling I have ever seen in my life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ISUAgronomist

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
45,872
35,265
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
Jantz wasn't that bad Saturday. The fumble was god awful. One interception is on Brun. Another interception is on the receiver who ran the wrong route. The problem started with the guy calling the plays and was basically summed up by a 3rd and 12 where we ran play action while they were showing blitz. Imagine that, a guy runs off the edge untouched and makes Steele's job a real pain in the ***. He didn't even get to look up the field before he was running for his life.

What did we do to counter the pressure? We kept running plays 10-15 yards downfield that take time to develop because our receivers can't beat press coverage when they're trying to run straight through it. An occasional screen to slow pursuit down? Nah. Maybe a draw? No, we'll just keep running the zone read right into the teeth of where they have us outnumbered. Makes sense.

I will disagree with you on Jantz' play. We shouldn't forget the "free play" interception. I know that you take a chance on that play and if you give up an INT when you know it will come back anyway it is no big deal. However you try to make a play not throw it to a D-back who doesn't have a single one of your receivers anywhere near him. I was in the endzone and saw that play unfold right in front of me. There were only a couple of players who had a prayer of getting in the vicinity of that ball and neither of them were wearing cardinal and gold. It's a free play so get it to one of your receivers, even in coverage; only good can happen. You get a big reception or a PI call. If they knock it down or get the INT you take the penalty. He simply threw the free play away. Even throwing it out of bounds would have been better because the easy INT just gave their D-backs more confidence.

The sideline INT was on both Jantz and Lenz. They obviously weren't on the same page. However, when Jantz threw that it was already apparent that Lenz couldn't get the the point he was throwing it to. It isn't like Lenz broke in just as Jantz threw it instead of breaking out. Lenz broke off the route long before the ball was thrown.

The end of game INT was just like the "free play". You have to take a chance at that point of the game, but you take a chance where someone (other than just the DB) can make a play. Again, there wasn't a Cyclone player in the same area code as that pass. Throw it into double coverage at that point but you can't compute the coverage there because you can't divide by zero.

The fumble might just be one of those inexplicable things that happen once in a great while, but the inexplicable happens a lot with this QB. He wasn't touched. I thought I was watching Brad Banks.

Jantz didn't give himself a chance either. The running game was atrocious. As others have said there weren't many holes created by this line. However on numerous occasions Jantz had an opportunity to take the seam and get two or three yards. Instead he would run lateral to the line and get dumped for no gain or a loss. Sure he didn't have a chance on third down because they were bringing the house. They would have had to respect a lot more options if it was 3rd and 4 or 5 rather than third and 8-12.

I agree with you on the screens. People keep talking about the bubble screen. I don't remember every play but it seemed like their corners were playing pretty tight and it might have been anywhere from difficult to disasterous. However what about a more conventional screen. Jantz was running for his life anyway, why not give a pretty good receiving back like White a chance to make a play on a screen? It might just slow down that pass rush as well.

The whole offense was terrible; putrid was the word I used in a text at halftime. However, Jantz was as big of a problem as anyone.

At this point how about giving Richardson a chance with a pared down playbook? It couldn't get much worse. In any case I hope this offense as a whole is embarrassed and ****** off. They should be. Perhaps we will see a better performance out of them after a week of feeling like that. Kudos to the defense who played their hearts out. I was proud of them.

I certainly hope this ends the nonesense we were hearing on here just a couple weeks ago about how Jantz has a shot at the NFL. Curious that we haven't seen Rusty posting anywhere.
 

cycloneworld

Facebook Knows All
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 20, 2006
27,996
16,919
113
Urbandale, IA
Come on, if you think Jantz should be benched, you should say our O-line should be benched, our WR's should be benched and most importantly Mess should be benched. This awful offensive performance can not be pinned on one person. If I absolutely had to blame one person, I'd say Mess, as that was the worst game of offensive play calling I have ever seen in my life.

I agree that the game planning was bad...run, run, short incomplete pass is pretty much how every drive went. But when your QB can't make basic decisions, its not like we can open up the playbook.

The offensive line was bad...but didn't throw 3 picks and fumble the ball untouched during a huge drive.

For those who think Jantz should still be the guy...how can we afford to let him turn the ball over 3-4 times per game and still expect to win in the Big 12. Because if he has proven one thing, its that he will continually turn the ball over. He's done it in every game he has played at Iowa State.
 

twojman

Well-Known Member
Jun 1, 2006
7,216
3,092
113
Clive
Barnett lovers, take a look at what Kirk Haaland wrote on this very site. Barnett cannot hang onto the ball! He fumbles 10.58% of his rushing attempts, he just got lucky that he or someone else on the team recoverd it. enCYCLONEpedia: The "Jantz Dance" | News | Football | Cyclone Fanatic

I am not trying to defend Jantz here, I do not think we have a great QB that we have seen. Hopefully Richardson is that guy. I really think that if ISU had an average QB last year against K-State and OU both of those games would have been W's for ISU.
 

bdnichols2000

Member
Dec 19, 2008
121
5
18
Barnett lovers, take a look at what Kirk Haaland wrote on this very site. Barnett cannot hang onto the ball! He fumbles 10.58% of his rushing attempts, he just got lucky that he or someone else on the team recoverd it. enCYCLONEpedia: The "Jantz Dance" | News | Football | Cyclone Fanatic

I am not trying to defend Jantz here, I do not think we have a great QB that we have seen. Hopefully Richardson is that guy. I really think that if ISU had an average QB last year against K-State and OU both of those games would have been W's for ISU.

Guy has 24 turnovers in 10.5 games..Really bad!! I think the best stat to compare the two QB's would be 3 and out percentage. I think that is where you would see the biggest comparison between the two. I believe Barnett would have a decided advantage.
 

cyclonepower

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,143
2,201
113
WDM
Guy has 24 turnovers in 10.5 games..Really bad!! I think the best stat to compare the two QB's would be 3 and out percentage. I think that is where you would see the biggest comparison between the two. I believe Barnett would have a decided advantage.

Wow, how is that even possible...
 

InCytful

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2010
1,230
28
48
Omaha, NE
You are totally on track here. I would take it one step farther and say that Jantz hasn't ever played a good game against real competition. Everyone likes to point to the Iowa game last year because we scored a lot of points and won in dramatic fashion, but if you go back and look at it, we had every chance in the world to put that game away early, and got bit by the same issues that have always plagued our Jantz lead offense. That game never should have gone to OT.

We need to do what KState would does here and play to our strengths and personnel. We have a defense in the top tier of the league, and a great punter. We need to play mistake free, field position football. We need an offense that can go pick up a couple first downs and take care of the ball. Eat up some clock, give the D a rest, and pin teams deep. This puts us in a place to win games scoring in the 20s, which isn't something we will have many chances to do this year turning it over 4 times a game. And this is not something that Jantz can give us.

I read through all the QB prediction threads preseason, and heard all the Jantz backers talking about having a higher ceiling. I asked the question then, and I still have the same question now: based on what? Sure, there were some flashes of brilliance last season, but they were typically leading a rally that only needs to occur because turnovers spotted the other team a double digit lead (UNI, Iowa, Uconn). We are a third of the way through his senior season, and he doesn't look much better than he did at the beginning of last year. Who cares if he is a little faster or has a stronger arm, if the offense isn't taking care of the ball and isn't scoring points none of that matters.

At this point, we are just wasting snaps with Jantz. He is what he is. Why not use those snaps to give some experience to someone with a future in the program. Before anyone tries to say that is giving up on this season, tell me with a straight face that you don't think Barnett or Richardson could go out there and throw for 73 yards and 3 picks. We wouldn't lose a thing on offense with a QB change right now.

I don't see your point...why is throwing for 73 yds and 3 picks the height of the bar our QB's have to reach? Are you saying we should throw them out there because they can lose as well as Jantz did in one of four games? You were doing pretty well until that point. I'll back whoever CPR throws out there at QB.
 

Wesley

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
70,923
546
113
Omaha
Got me, but it happens a lot. Wisconsin missed one, boise state seems to miss them a lot and won't try any field goals it appears, etc, etc. We're not the only team with a missed PAT this year.

Yeah, but with our offense, we cannot afford to miss one at all. It screwed us in half our games so far.
 

megamanxzero35

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2011
2,524
719
113
I don't see your point...why is throwing for 73 yds and 3 picks the height of the bar our QB's have to reach? Are you saying we should throw them out there because they can lose as well as Jantz did in one of four games? You were doing pretty well until that point. I'll back whoever CPR throws out there at QB.
His point is do you honestly think that Barnett or Richardson would have done worse than Jantz against Tech? Do you think Barnett would have thrown for less than 73 yards? Do you think Richardson would have thrown 3 picks? His point is, in that Tech game, Jantz gave us nothing. Barnett or Richardson could have given us something so why not try them right now.
 

InCytful

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2010
1,230
28
48
Omaha, NE
His point is do you honestly think that Barnett or Richardson would have done worse than Jantz against Tech? Do you think Barnett would have thrown for less than 73 yards? Do you think Richardson would have thrown 3 picks? His point is, in that Tech game, Jantz gave us nothing. Barnett or Richardson could have given us something so why not try them right now.
You word it much better, though yes I do think both of them would have struggled to pass against Tech. Jantz's picks in this game weren't all on him. That fumble sure was. I think that the blame for this loss is more on the coaches who call the plays rather than all on Jantz. You can bench him and call the same plays with another QB if you want, but I don't believe you'll see a much different result. We will see who wins out this week and starts against TCU. You all could be right about who should start. Who knows? We'll see on saturday.
 

troutslayer

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Oct 28, 2011
715
563
93
I was really surprised Jantz wasn't benched after the inexplicable fumble. I know we were still somewhat in the game at that point, but he was showing no signs of being productive at all. That said, I fully expect him to start on Saturday, with Barnett eventually coming in off the bench at some point. Not to say that Barnett is any better, but you have to make a change if things continue the way they are. I also think that Rhoads won't be afraid to bring in Richardson if Barnett stinks up the place. Maybe not the TCU game, but at some point down the road.