D-Line Loaded

[HawkeyeDenis]

The defensive line is Iowa's weakness on defense this year. The defensive line isn't bad, it's just not disruptive enough. Another year of strength training, 10-15 pounds of muscle some new faces and Iowa can intimidate some offenses.

 

[Fryowa]

So, if we get beat up and have a poor season, you will be right. If we have a good season, it will be the result of a weak schedule. You will be right. OK. thanks

Anything for you, darlin'.

 

[BigD]

Just imagine how good the defense would be if the offense resembled offense.

At Iowa we have to Imagine during the off season since most of us know it will be just another 7-5 season with a bowl loss. I don’t know but the term “Hopeless Romantic” goes through my mind as I watch this mindset repeat itself every winter and spring. Never mind me.....................continue on with banging your head into the wall. Ground hog day in black and gold.

I will never concede with wanting and expecting more it’s just a drive that is in me. My weak spot is my strong nature to be loyal and committed to my family and my faith. Why I had to make the mistake of mixing my favorite sports teams into that loyalty I will never know why. I was a Hawkeye before Kirk even knew they existed and I never got paid to have to find
out who they were. A man of honor who is truly loyal to a team and isn’t there just for the money would re-evaluate the situation and ask themselves am I really doing what is best for this program? Should I change things up or step aside ad let someone else try?

At the very least revamp your playbook and offensively tendencies to keep the defenses off balance. I am livid when I see our QB calling audibles. All he is doing is calling out blocking assignments for a running play and everyone in football nation knows that. That’s why they can send the house as soon as the ball is snapped. Is it really that difficult to call passing plays at least one every three audibles??? It appears that Kirk is arrogantly stating we are going to run the ball and let’s see you stop us. Who does that? The key to success is the element of surprise.

HOW FUN WAS IT when they went from a typical field goal formation to that crazy formation where most of the players suddenly lined up clear out to left and the ball was throw to a lineman for a first down? Even if the ball had been dropped instead it was fun as hell to watch. We all know that is an extreme rarity type of play call. I would love to see more of that type of play calling. A double reverse pass play, Statue of Liberty, flea flicker, hook and ladder, have the QB set the snap on the ground just behind the Center and roll out to the left and hold his hands like he has the ball. The left guard breaks right picks up the ball and runs down the right sideline wth the ball. BYU used this play to beat Michigan and win their only national title.

You can run your normal offense but just throw these trick plays in to keep the defense honest. I wouldn’t be afraid to run some of these plays two or three times a game. Doing it just once a season or even once a game is not going to keep a defense honest. By doing this it’s also going to leave your fans sitting on the edge of their stadium seats and on the edge of their couches at home. With 7-5 seasons year in and year out what the hell do you have to lose? I’ve never seen tenure as a football coach until now at Iowa. Kirk can’t lose, but sure as hell could make football fun again at I O W A.

 

[tksirius]

Insert two solid 5th year senior tackles on the O line and this could have been the case.

Myers wasn't any better than Jackson and one could argue that Boettger wasn't all that much better than Wirfs (at least toward the end of the season). The OT excuse is weak.

 

[HuckFinn]

Myers wasn't any better than Jackson and one could argue that Boettger wasn't all that much better than Wirfs (at least toward the end of the season). The OT excuse is weak.

The weakness of the excuse is based on your opinion about the comparative abilities of the players you reference. I absolutely disagree with your conclusions. Fifth year seniors that played well last year compared, even in physical maturity, with freshmen, is a foolish pronouncement. Sorry.

 

[SpiderRico]

Myers wasn't any better than Jackson and one could argue that Boettger wasn't all that much better than Wirfs (at least toward the end of the season). The OT excuse is weak.

I agree that both of the freshmen were equal to the seniors, physically. But there's such a big premium, especially on the OL within our system, of having several years of game experience. Would it have made a difference in any of our games? Certainly not the Wisky game. But I think it could be argued that having those two MIGHT have had a chance to flip one or both of the MSU/NW games.

 

[PCHawk]

I agree that both of the freshmen were equal to the seniors, physically. But there's such a big premium, especially on the OL within our system, of having several years of game experience. Would it have made a difference in any of our games? Certainly not the Wisky game. But I think it could be argued that having those two MIGHT have had a chance to flip one or both of the MSU/NW games.

And Purdue. We seriously could have gone 10-2 without those injuries.

 

[DunderMifflinHk]

Myers wasn't any better than Jackson and one could argue that Boettger wasn't all that much better than Wirfs (at least toward the end of the season). The OT excuse is weak.

The freshmen might have been better pass blockers but the seniors were much better run blockers. Those two injuries were the reason why we couldn't run the ball this year.

 

[HawkleberryFinn]

Like a loaded bake potato...a loaded sweet.

 

[tksirius]

They freshmen might have been better pass blockers but the seniors were much better run blockers. Those two injuries were the reason why we couldn't run the ball this year.

OMFG! Proof positive ^^^ that Brian Ferentz posts on this message board.

 

[hawkinn3]

We have got to start seeing sacks. I went back and watched Matt Roth highlights the other day to get my fix, we need a madman like that.

 

[deanvogs]

Myers wasn't any better than Jackson and one could argue that Boettger wasn't all that much better than Wirfs (at least toward the end of the season). The OT excuse is weak.

Meyer and Boettger as Sr. >>>>>> Jackson and Wirfs as Fr.

It is pretty simple really. Just as AJ will be much improved over his Fr. year so will Jackson, and Wirfs. I think all 3 will be very good next year, and excellent/all B1G types as Jr and Sr.

 

[deanvogs]

At Iowa we have to Imagine during the off season since most of us know it will be just another 7-5 season.

You could say this for the last 38 years of Iowa football.
7.3 Wins per year and a 12-15-1 Bowl record.

Fry 7.15 wins per year. 6-7-1 Bowl record
Ferentz 7.47 Wins per year. 6-8 Bowl record

What do you think Iowa has been over the last 38 years? We are a 7 or 8 win team the vast majority of the time with 9+ wins sprinkled in 6 times by Fry and 6 times by Ferentz.

 

[BigD]

You could say this for the last 38 years of Iowa football.
7.3 Wins per year and a 12-15-1 Bowl record.

Fry 7.15 wins per year. 6-7-1 Bowl record
Ferentz 7.47 Wins per year. 6-8 Bowl record

What do you think Iowa has been over the last 38 years? We are a 7 or 8 win team the vast majority of the time with 9+ wins sprinkled in 6 times by Fry and 6 times by Ferentz.

So do you just give up trying and stick with status quo?

 

[deanvogs]

So do you just give up trying and stick with status quo?

What are you talking about? Do you even understand that over 38 years to have this average is pretty freaking good? Only 16 P5 teams have averaged 8 wins or more over the last 38 years, they are: Virginia Tech, Tennessee, Texas, USC, Auburn, Clemson, Penn St., Georgia, Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Miami, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Ohio St. and Florida St.

Mostly Blue Bloods can average 8 or more wins per year over this kind of extended period. Iowa is just behind that group at 7.3 wins per year. And no, I don't think Iowa is going to move up to a blue blood type program.

Take note of some teams NOT on this list: Notre Dame, LSU, Texas A&M, Oregon, Washingon, UCLA, Wisconsin. They are all right around where Iowa is at. 7.3-7.9 Wins per year.

 

[HawkGold]

What are you talking about? Do you even understand that over 38 years to have this average is pretty freaking good? Only 16 P5 teams have averaged 8 wins or more over the last 38 years, they are: Virginia Tech, Tennessee, Texas, USC, Auburn, Clemson, Penn St., Georgia, Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Miami, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Ohio St. and Florida St.

Mostly Blue Bloods can average 8 or more wins per year over this kind of extended period. Iowa is just behind that group at 7.3 wins per year. And no, I don't think Iowa is going to move up to a blue blood type program.

Take note of some teams NOT on this list: Notre Dame, LSU, Texas A&M, Oregon, Washingon, UCLA, Wisconsin. They are all right around where Iowa is at. 7.3-7.9 Wins per year.

Dean, what are U talking about. Of course that's "pretty" good. It's more about the mediocrity the past few years excepting 2015. It's about the bowl game punishments. It's about consistently having "were young" problems. It's about total trashments in the RB, against TN, the 2nd half of the Outback. It's about running smallish RBs into a D line with little help. It's about the short side of the field. It's about insanely long and time consuming drives against the D. It's about having obviously better Qbs sitting on the sideline. It's about lack of a pass rush or line penetration on long consuming drives. It's about a horrific punting game in one year coming out of nowhere. (you can't tell me someone on the team couldn't do better). It's about not seeing the blitz or handling it. It's about very mediocre receivers. It's about 66 yards in a game. It's about a QB getting pulverized for lack of protection and mobility and not changing things up. It's about 66 yards after totally pulverizing what would have been a playoff team had they not been pulverized. It's about 500 yards by a what turned out to be not such an offensive Juggernaut It's about having a practice squad RB being the last standing RB. It's about not anticipating the best RB in the nation and keeping a wounded player on the field where he was running.

None of those things are a big deal considered alone. Eliminate about 1/2 of them (probably even 1/3) and most fans would be quite content with the record..Considered as a whole, those factors are indicative of dysfunction at a high level.

Dysfunctional kind of like insulting everyone you come into disagreement with.

 

[PCHawk]

Dean, what are U talking about. Of course that's "pretty" good. It's more about the mediocrity the past few years excepting 2015. It's about the bowl game punishments. It's about consistently having "were young" problems. It's about total trashments in the RB, against TN, the 2nd half of the Outback. It's about running smallish RBs into a D line with little help. It's about the short side of the field. It's about insanely long and time consuming drives against the D. It's about having obviously better Qbs sitting on the sideline. It's about lack of a pass rush or line penetration on long consuming drives. It's about a horrific punting game in one year coming out of nowhere. (you can't tell me someone on the team couldn't do better). It's about not seeing the blitz or handling it. It's about very mediocre receivers. It's about 66 yards in a game. It's about a QB getting pulverized for lack of protection and mobility and not changing things up. It's about 66 yards after totally pulverizing what would have been a playoff team had they not been pulverized. It's about 500 yards by a what turned out to be not such an offensive Juggernaut It's about having a practice squad RB being the last standing RB. It's about not anticipating the best RB in the nation and keeping a wounded player on the field where he was running.

None of those things are a big deal considered alone. Eliminate about 1/2 of them (probably even 1/3) and most fans would be quite content with the record..Considered as a whole, those factors are indicative of dysfunction at a high level.

Dysfunctional kind of like insulting everyone you come into disagreement with.

If we eliminated half of those, we would have over 8 wins per year. A threshold that Dean pointed out was very hard to attain.

 

[PCHawk]

Also the last few years were 8 wins, 7 wins, 12 wins, 8 wins, and 7 wins. That's 8.4 wins per year. A full win over our average over the last 38. I think the biggest problem is people's definition of mediocre. Top 30 or so is actually better than mediocre.

 

[HawkGold]

Also the last few years were 8 wins, 7 wins, 12 wins, 8 wins, and 7 wins. That's 8.4 wins per year. A full win over our average over the last 38. I think the biggest problem is people's definition of mediocre. Top 30 or so is actually better than mediocre.

Wonder where the "average" P5 team ends up in the rankings...

 

[PCHawk]

If we eliminated half of those, we would have over 8 wins per year. A threshold that Dean pointed out was very hard to attain.

Since you liked this post, I'm assuming you misunderstood it. All non blue bloods have things they can point to as reasons they don't win more. If they didn't have those reasons, they would be blue bloods. If everyone was a blue blood, then no one would be.