I agree. I'm guessing he didn't see a clear enough path to playing time. If that was the case, it's ironic now that we really could use him.
5 Iowa Football X-Factors in 2024
- Thread starter RobHowe
- Start date
No doubt. Would love to know why he left. He would be the 3rd DT and be playing as many snaps as he could handle this yr and in line to start the next yr once Black graduates. I don't think we'll get the real reason why from him. He ended up at Western Michigan I think. It was just odd that he left.
trj
Well-Known Member
Lets be real(as the kids like to say) the season comes down to the following two things:
How productive can the offense be and how good Drew Stevens and Rhys Dakin are on Special Teams.
Technically, that is 3 things, but everyone gets my point.
Kirk ain’t deviating from the formula at this point.
How productive can the offense be and how good Drew Stevens and Rhys Dakin are on Special Teams.
Technically, that is 3 things, but everyone gets my point.
Kirk ain’t deviating from the formula at this point.
thedukeofearl
Well-Known Member
Hopefully we can keep the offense on the field for more than three plays and an punt
Give the D a bit of a rest on the bench/sideline
Amen. That'd go such a long way it's not even funny. TOP has to be more even to give our boys a chance. That falls under that 'complimentary football' mantra KF likes to bring up all the time.
It's ironic, the more it was brought up by Brian and Kirk the last 2 seasons, the more obvious it became that Brian needed to go.Amen. That'd go such a long way it's not even funny. TOP has to be more even to give our boys a chance. That falls under that 'complimentary football' mantra KF likes to bring up all the time.
RobHowe
Administrator
What if KF says “F it” and allows for offensive evaluation as he has with PP and the D?
There is a successful path to offense within his conservative philosophy that works. He just has to let go and allow for necessary modernization. I do think Lester has some good ideas.
BTW, if it works, and Iowa gets to the CFP, then who’s to blame for the BF failed experiment?
There is a successful path to offense within his conservative philosophy that works. He just has to let go and allow for necessary modernization. I do think Lester has some good ideas.
BTW, if it works, and Iowa gets to the CFP, then who’s to blame for the BF failed experiment?
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
FWIW, the word from one of the parents is that it was academics.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
I continue to disagree with the notion that KF is someone putting restraints on system and play calling. To my understanding, KF has never been an OC or play caller in his life, on either side of the ball. He was a position coach or HC.
At Iowa, he has not dictated the type of offense to be run or play calling. KOK ran a pro style offense, then Davis brought in a completely different (and stupid) horizontal type offense, BF somewhat reverted back to more KOK concepts, and now by all accounts Lester has been allowed to implement his offense that is totally different than BF's in terms scheme and terminology.
IMHO, the issue with Iowa's offense has not been some mystical governor that KF has dictated to his OC's about running antiquated plays and schemes. The issue has been that KOK was an average OC at best, and then KF made two really shitty hires in Davis and BF. Davis' best days, if he ever had any, were well behind him and BF was a singularly untalented OC/QB coach.
I firmly believe that if Lester lives up to his pedigree, he will be successful at Iowa and KF is going to let him be successful. Will he put up video game statistics? Probably not given Iowa's righteous defense and KF's complimentary football approach, but Lester can be very good at Iowa. Don't get me wrong, KF is totally responsible for Iowa's bad offense, but the blame is in who he put in charge of the offense, not what he did or did not do to impact how the offense functions.
As for the BF experiment, there is no one to blame but KF.
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
I tend to agree here.
I do believe that Kirk restricts the offense to a degree with his overall philosophy, but the idea that he oversees the position in some kind of a tyrannical control-freak fashion has been way overblown. It makes for good message board fodder.
As correctly pointed out above, ironically, Kirk's offensive philosophy is rooted in TOP and staying within range until the 4th quarter, at which time he hopes to pounce with defense and special teams. That philosophy works IF you have an offense that can sustain long drives and capitalize on the majority of them, something we haven't seen consistently for a long time.
My gut tells me that Lester is going to do just fine in that role. We will see flashes this season, but fans will need to be patient knowing that it takes time to build something from the ground up.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
If McNamara can stay healthy, this offense has a chance to shock some folks. CM was a ball distributor and chain mover at Michigan. Not flashy, but effect in running an offense. That meshes well with what Lester seems to like to do. Lester and a healthy CM seem like a very good fit. The OL, while both fairly and unfairly maligned, will benefit from better QB play and play calling. We are stacked at TE and RB, and WR has some raw talent that could emerge. If the offense is just statistically average then Lester should be in line for the Broyles award. Statistically average is achievable this season.
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
I'm cautiously optimistic.
For the most part, if healthy, the pieces are there. Barnett and the offensive line will have no excuses this year, and, other than WR (where there are a lot of unknowns), the skill positions talent and depth are fairly solid.
What will take time is the scheme adjustment. Lester is talking about implementing, at least in part, the "Kyle Shanahan model," a version of which he learned in Green Bay. That type of offense utilizes a lot of motion and relies heavily on players independently doing pre-snap reads. I'm sure he'll implement those concepts slowly, but the adjustment probably will result in an uneven performance for at least a good portion of the season.
For the most part, if healthy, the pieces are there. Barnett and the offensive line will have no excuses this year, and, other than WR (where there are a lot of unknowns), the skill positions talent and depth are fairly solid.
What will take time is the scheme adjustment. Lester is talking about implementing, at least in part, the "Kyle Shanahan model," a version of which he learned in Green Bay. That type of offense utilizes a lot of motion and relies heavily on players independently doing pre-snap reads. I'm sure he'll implement those concepts slowly, but the adjustment probably will result in an uneven performance for at least a good portion of the season.
Ah. I hadn't heard that. Sucks he couldn't get the help or whatever it woulda took to keep him here.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
Wait, these kids still go to school?
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
Shanahan's offensive philosophy puts a lot of pressure on the QB. But, the system is designed to create mismatches that a smart QB can exploit. The system allows a thoroughly average QB like Brock Purdy to get to a super bowl and be statistically excellent. You don't have to have Mahomme's arm to be successful; but rather just be really smart and accurate with your throws. The plays are there. Again, I think CM fits that mold.
I agree that it may start out slow.
The players get lots of help from "tutors" and others. If someone can't make grades, it's almost an explicit action against passing.
Where I think KF put restraints on was more situationally. I think at certain points in games he wasn't for trying passing plays downfield on 3rd and 7s and would want something conservative called. Not to mention going for it on 4th and shorts. As bad as BF was at what he did I can't for the life of me think that he'd have wanted to not even try to convert many of the 3rd downs that they didn't. Granted I could be wrong though tough to know for sure
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
The one way that KF absolutely injects himself into the offense is deciding whether to go for it on 4th down, but I think that is true of every head coach. That is a HC call. Whether KF calls or suggests a play, or just says go for it and leaves it to the OC to execute, I don't know.
Did KF put clamps on the passing game in tight games last year? Probably. I mean it would not shock me at all if he told BF to run in a passing situation so as to not risk a TO. I mean, how could any sane person watch Hill play and be confident that he would not get sacked, fumble, or throw a pick. "Son, call a draw."
I still don't believe it is KF's preference to get too involved with the play calling on either side of the ball.
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
Who do we think made the decision to keep playing Deacon Hill and not give another QB an opportunity?
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
The head coach, the O coordinator, and the position coach in concert. I would guess they came to the conclusion that Deacon was their best option. Yes, KF listened and consensus was achieved. That is the way it works in the real world, regardless of our fantasy.
