The old saying goes if you have two quarterbacks then you have no quarterbacks. Well, Iowa now has two quarterbacks—Hank Brown and Jeremy Hecklinski—both of whom have a reasonable claim to the starting spot.
The season began with a quarterback competition and the dreaded “OR” on the depth chart. Then Brown seemed to distance himself in the ISU game, not necessarily due to his performance but because he took all the snaps; in effect, it was pretty clear which of the two the coaches had the most confidence
in.
Then Brown completed all 12 of his passes against Northern Iowa and the “OR” was no longer on the depth chart against Michigan. Unfortunately, Brown had a really bad performance against Ohio State and was injured toward the end of the third quarter. Re-enter Jeremy Hecklinski who played well against OSU, albeit largely against its second-team defense in pass prevent.
Nevertheless, Brown missed much of the practice leading up to the Washington game and Hecklinski got the start and had, on paper, the best performance of any 2026 Iowa quarterback against a Power-Four opponent.
So here we are. Next Saturday, Iowa heads to Minnesota to take on the Gophers, and the quarterback controversy has been reignited.
An Explanation on the Comparison
While comparing the two quarterbacks, I did look at their entire body of work in 2026, but my primary focus was on Brown’s performance at Michigan—his best individual performance against Power-Four competition—and Hecklinski’s performance against Washington, his only full-game performance against Power-Four competition.
Their numbers against UNI and NIU were taken into consideration for stat’s sake, but I didn’t spend much time on that as both of those opponents were well outclassed.
It is also important to note, for comparison’s sake, that all of Brown’s opponents, but particularly Michigan, have a better defense than Washington. On paper, Washington’s D looks okay—about the same as Iowa State—but in-game they looked like Charmin Ultra Soft.
Furthermore, Hecklinski had something Brown never had: a running game. You could argue that Hecklinski’s play opened up the running game, but on the second play from scrimmage against Washington, before Heck had thrown a pass, Kamari Moulton carried the ball for 19 yards, Iowa’s longest run against a Power-4 opponent up to that point.
It is true that Hecklinski was consistent for the full game vs Washington in a way Brown wasn’t for the full game vs Michigan (or ISU), but, unlike Hecklinski, Brown was responsible for most of Iowa’s yardage vs both UM and ISU; Hecklinski was not vs Wash.
Specifically, Hecklinski was responsible for 202 of Iowa’s 465 total yards vs Washington which is 43% of the team’s total yardage. Brown, on the other hand, contributed 223 yards, or 78%, of Iowa’s 285 total yards vs Michigan. He was also responsible for 71% of Iowa’s total yardage vs Iowa State.
What We Know
Independent of stats, we know that, as the coaches have repeatedly pointed out, Brown is the better runner of the two. He’s not Mark Gronowski, to be sure, but Lester has called draws with Brown—think of the Iowa State touchdown run—that he would not have called with Hecklinski. This is no small advantage near the goal line.
We can also infer that Brown is, by and large, the safer of the two quarterbacks. At one point during the UNI game, Hecklinski threw across his body to the middle of the field. Against Michigan, or ISU, those throws would have probably been picked off. Brown, while far from perfect, has yet to make that glaring of a mental error despite having had more playing time.
Lastly, Hecklinski seems to have the higher ceiling of the two quarterbacks. It’s hard to qualify this, but we’ve all seen or heard about Kid’s Day, and that seems to be the general consensus around the campfire.
Hard Stats
Brown: 78/124 (62.9%), 832 yards, 5 touchdowns, 1 interception, 6.7 yards-per-attempt, 4 sacks taken, 16 rushing yards on 17 attempts (.9 yards-per-carry), 1 rushing touchdown.
Hecklinski: 32/51 (62.7%), 410 yards, 4 touchdowns, 1 interception, 8.0 yards-per-attempt, 1 sack taken, 5 rushing yards on 2 carries (2.5 yards-per-carry), 0 rushing touchdowns.
Relevant Stats
Brown vs Michigan: 21/35 (60%), 227 yards, 2 touchdowns, 0 interceptions, 6.5 yards-per-attempt, 2 sacks taken, -4 rushing yards.
Hecklinski vs Washington: 14/19 (73.7%), 202 yards, 3 touchdowns, 0 interceptions, 10.6 yards-per-attempt, 0 sacks taken, 0 rushing yards.
Brown Film Study
First of all, a reminder that Brown was playing a really good defense, and he was under pressure all game.
One thing I noticed while watching is that Brown had a good second half; it wasn’t just the final drive. That is particularly highlighted on his first touchdown pass. It’s a quick pre-snap read and a perfect pass.
It does seem like Brown’s play action game is limited. Not only does he not fully sell the run, but he tends to lock on his outlet receiver. In this play, he play actions then drops back and is staring down his outlet receiver—the running back—the whole way. Play action with a deep drop back, he would typically look long. It just seems like his M.O. is always safety, and while that probably appeals to Kirk Ferentz, it’s not the nature of the play-action game.
His ball placement is erratic. Michigan has a good defense, but there were times when he wasn’t pressured, the pass catcher had a step on his man and he missed him. His one pick this year was not a bad decision; it was an inaccurate throw. You’ve got to make the makeables. He doesn’t always do that.
Brown was better throwing on the run than I thought he was. Going into this viewing I didn’t even remember Lester calling him any plays with a moving pocket, yet he did and Brown was certainly no worse (or better) than he was in the pocket.
Lastly, Brown didn’t really make any mental errors which again, backs up his high floor; most of his mistakes were of the bad ball placement variety, holding on to the ball too long or missing open receivers downfield and choosing the safe option instead.
Hecklinski Film Study
Yet again, I will note that the Washington defense was not only soft but it bit on every motion, every play action. The secondary, in particular, seemed confused which led to that viral shot of one open receiver pointing to a more open receiver. So, regardless of what its stats said coming into the game, this D was bad.
What was most striking about Hecklinski in this game was his ball placement. Again, he was under very little pressure, but even so, his throws were largely on the money. Of his five incompletions, two were drops, two were good defensive plays and one was thrown at the receiver’s feet. Consider his best throw of the night, a vertical route to Reece Vander Zee. It is a lesson in ball placement throwing it to his outside shoulder where only the receiver can make a play. I think Heck threw four fades in this game. He likes that throw; if he starts going forward look for it esp to Vander Zee who, at 6’4” is built for that.
He didn’t have a moving pocket that often which was surprising given his height—5’11”—but the two times he threw on the run he was accurate though one of them was a reception off a deflection.
He looked especially fluid in the screen and play-action games. It’s hard to say for certain as UW seemed so confused by it, but he sold the fakes much more believably than Brown. In the screen shown below, it’s hard to believe a Michigan or Ohio State would have found themselves so flatfooted, but either way, Hecklinski sold the screen perfectly.
Final Verdict
Let’s be clear, this isn’t a terrible place to be in. Every Iowa fan—every single one—would have enthusiastically taken Brown or Hecklinski as the starting quarterback any time during the 2023-2024 seasons. Most would have taken them from 2020-2022.
While I have included the stats, and especially the Michigan and Washington stats, I don’t put too much stock in them per se. The Washington defense was so bad, and Michigan’s defense so good, that it doesn’t make for a fair comparison. This is especially true given that Brown had to carry the team on his shoulders in a way Hecklinski didn’t.
But my preference is that Hecklinski starts vs Minnesota.
First of all, Hecklinski’s issues—what kept him from starting in the first place—seem to be mental, and mental mistakes can be fixed in season, with experience. Conversely, Brown’s issues have to do with accuracy and mechanics which generally require offseason tutelage to fix. In other words, Hecklinski is more likely than Brown to improve as this season wears on.
Secondly, Brown’s hesitancy to throw the ball downfield, and inaccuracy when he does it, puts a cap on the offense. I don’t think the running game opened up against Washington because of anything Heck did. But Iowa will need the consistent threat of downfield passing in order to keep future opponents honest, and it doesn’t feel like Brown can provide that. Hecklinski, I think, can.
Lastly, Hecklinski looks more smooth than Brown running the screen and play-action games. Yes, it was against that lousy Washington defense, but he looked more comfortable than Brown ever has in these regards no matter who the opponent. All of Brown’s best passes have been standard drop-back passes. Hecklinski seems more versatile.
If Hecklinski does get the starting nod, he will make mental mistakes that Brown wouldn’t have made, and they will cost Iowa. You just have to hope for good timing that doesn’t sink the Hawkeyes, but I think the reward is worth the risk.
And even though Hecklinski is the popular choice right now, if Brown is still the starter, I don’t think that’s a bad choice either.
What say you Hawk fans? Is Brown or Hecklinski your man?
