Although it was more nerve-racking than most people expected, Iowa is 2-0 to start the 2026 season.
The Hawkeyes were projected as 14.5-point favorites, and although they didn't quite reach that mark, a win is a win, especially against Iowa State. Iowa fell far short of the 507 total offensive yards they put up in week one, notching 284 in week two, but surprisingly, the passing game outdid the running game. Hank Brown started the game and never came out, which was odd after what Kirk Ferentz said leading up to the game. Ferentz recently clarified why he changed his mind on Saturday, which could be very revealing in the quarterback battle.
Kirk Ferentz cited the 'flow of the game' as the reason Brown stayed in
Before the week two game, Ferentz said that he planned on sticking to a similar quarterback strategy, with Hank Brown starting the game, and Jeremy Hecklinski coming in later. By the time the game ended, Hecklinski didn't receive a single snap, and Ferentz revealed why he decided to stick with Brown for the entire game.
Kirk Ferentz said that Iowa came into tonight planning to play both quarterbacks. Decided to stick with Hank given the flow of the game.
— David Eickholt (@DavidEickholt) September 13, 2026
Says they’ll continue to assess both quarterbacks week by week.
Ferentz said he chose to ride with Brown because of "the flow of the game," but they are still assessing both quarterbacks weekly. Brown struggled at times with the pressure from the Iowa State defense, and while the Cyclones didn't make it easy on him, he made plays when it mattered the most. Brown finished the game with 191 passing yards, completing 70 percent of his passes (21/30). He also added 22 rushing yards and a rushing touchdown. Notably, even though Brown played well and played the entire game, Ferentz didn't hand him the starting job.
It seems like Hecklinski has been all but eliminated from starting contention, but Northern Iowa presents another unique challenge in week three. UNI shouldn't be much of a challenge for the Hawkeyes, and Ferentz and the coaching staff might still use the game as a test for who earns the starting quarterback job. Hecklinski has really only had one opportunity to show what he can do, and while Brown has played well in the first two weeks, it is telling that Ferentz is still dangling the starting job like a carrot in front of both of them.
We would also like to know what flow Ferentz is referencing, because the offense was in a funk for most of the game. Brown was forced to throw the ball 31 times because the running game struggled, and while he was efficient, the offense didn't appear to be in much of a flow. It was more likely a case of riding the hot hand or not changing horses in mid-race, but if that was the case, that should have been made clear. Ferentz is the king of not tipping his hand, and maybe he truly did want to play both quarterbacks, but it didn't happen.
The week-to-week uncertainty is only hurting Brown and Hecklinski
If Brown and Hecklinski were truly in a fair battle for the starting spot, we would have seen Hecklinski at some point in week two. That didn't happen, suggesting Ferentz has made his decision. Both quarterbacks were kept in the dark during the week leading up to the game, and that could easily be the case again this week, even with Brown owning a small edge in the competition. We could truly be witnessing a three-week evaluation period before the Big Ten schedule starts, but the uncertainty is only hurting whoever the starter ends up being.
Brown has been given a clear advantage in the competition with two starts under his belt and a full game against Iowa State to use in his assessment, as Hecklinski continues fighting for a chance. After the first two weeks, if Ferentz truly doens't know who the starter should be, the offense is in way worse shape than we thought, and he should announce who the starter is. There is a possibility that Ferentz wants to give Hecklinski one more chance to earn the job, but he is at a huge disadvantage at this stage.
It would be better for everyone involved if Ferentz would name a starter and give them the entire UNI game to get their feet under them before Michigan, but that isn't what is happening. The teetering back and forth between the two potential options isn't helping anyone, and Ferentz and company better make sure they get it right if they keep delaying the decision.
Add us as a preferred source on Google