A new great Penn State debate: Is the Iowa game different with Christian Veilleux at quarterback?

STATE COLLEGE — The Penn State community loves nothing more than a great debate with no clear answer. After Satuday, we certainly have one.

It didn’t take long for members of ‘Nittany Nation’ to watch quarterback Christian Veilleux perform in a 28-0 win over Rutgers and declare that the Iowa game, and thus the season, would be different if only he, and not Ta’Quan Roberson, replaced Sean Clifford at Iowa.

We will never know how that would have actually played out because we can’t repeat the past, of course. But, it won’t stop it from being the talk of the town for at least a little while as the 2021 season winds to a close.

What James Franklin said

The first question of James Franklin’s postgame news conference after Penn State topped the Scarlet Knights was on this very topic. He was asked why Veilleux wasn’t always the backup.

Veilleux, of course, was elevated to that role this week prior to Saturday. That marked his first game action since 2019, when he was a high school junior.

“A couple things: They’re allowed to get better,” Franklin said. “At that point, it was not obvious that he was going to be the backup quarterback. I also don’t know if going on the road at Iowa, number two in the country, in his first three possessions at the minus-one, the minus-two and a minus-one. Ta’Quan had been in the program longer and really, it’s pretty obvious to everybody, that he gave us the best chance at that stage to win.

“After the way Veilleux played today, I get the question. I understand it totally, but he’s just gotten better. You got to remember, he didn’t play football his senior year. His season got canceled because of COVID. So, he just keeps getting better and I was proud of him. He was very poised today, made some plays with his legs, made some big-time throws, made some checks. Obviously, it’s something to build on, but I get the question. He’s gotten better, that’s the difference and that’s the reason.”

Key factors to this Penn State debate

There are a few seemingly indisputable points here.

The first is that facing Rutgers at home is by far an easier spot than doing so at Iowa on the road. As Franklin noted, Veilleux had not only that in his favor but also much better field position to deal with.

Number two focuses on how it all played out. Penn State has been dealing with flu issues. In fact, late in the week, no scholarship passer was healthy. That means that everyone had to be prepared to play early or possibly start. That even includes walk-on Mason Stahl. It should go without saying that working through drills and meetings with that mindset compared to one of being the definite, 100-percent backup barring an emergency situation changes things dramatically.

Finally, and playing off that point, it feels fair to say that after the debacle in Iowa City, Penn State should have tried to improve its backup quarterback preparation plan. That was advantage Veilleux, too.

So what’s the verdict?

Hindsight is ALWAYS 20-20. Well, usually it is, anyway. Sometimes, things are still foggy despite knowing more now than we did then.

Ultimately, this space finds it difficult to believe that Veilleux would have waved a magic wand, so to speak, against the Hawkeyes and led the team to a win. There was simply too much to overcome. Could he have put the Lions in a better position to win? Now, it’s easy to say yes. Back then, though, it feels like the right decision was made.

“I, again, think there’s a big difference between being home in this environment against this opponent compared to that one. I got a ton of respect for Ta’Quan Roberson. He’s done all the things right since he’s been here, and two very different situations that we’re talking about as well. Got a ton of respect for Ta’Quan.