Totally agree, I have heard NFL analysts, former NFL players, say even pro QBs hate to be blitzed especially right up the middle.
If you make the QB tuck the ball or drop the ball down he cant throw it.
CALLING OUT HUCK FINN
- Thread starter Joshbrown
- Start date
Totally agree, I have heard NFL analysts, former NFL players, say even pro QBs hate to be blitzed especially right up the middle.
If you make the QB tuck the ball or drop the ball down he cant throw it.
jldhawk
Well-Known Member
So you're saying he is teaching them Kirk ball by letting the go in and run 3 plays and punt! Now I understand your gutless attitude! You absolutely need to develop players, especially backups, by allowing them to take chances whether they succeed or not. Yes, they should have gone for it or tried the field goal. We have a difference of opinion and that's fine, but my coaching method would make a better player for the next game and next year than yours and Kirks. No, he isn't really developing anything, a player or team by not playing the game.
When was that, that never happened.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Iowa is up 42-14 with 11:47 left in the game. Iowa has a 4th and 4 from the 42 yd line making it a 59 yard attempt.
Iowa is up 42-21 with 6:31 to go in the game. Iowa has a 4th and 5 with the ball at the 34 yard line making it a 51 yd. FG attempt.
It is your contention that if Iowa simply goes for it on 4th down either or both times, this creates a player who is better at the game of football for the next game, and next year?
We certainly do have a difference of opinions. My opinion is you don't know much about football. Not because you have a different opinion than me, but rather it cracks me up when people actually think they could be better coaches than current D1 coaches. I mean it is a free country dude, just pick up a clip board, and start making 4 mil a year coaching big time D1 football. It sounds like you got all the skills required to do so......just go for it on 4th down in a game that is pretty much decided already, and you will just KILL IT in this industry.....LOLOL.....
jldhawk
Well-Known Member
I will give you the length on field goals. Doesn't mean you don't try for it on 4th down instead of getting another punt in.
The rest, you're just being a dbag. I think most people would agree you let the players play. Why send them in to do nothing?
And nowhere did I say I was going to take over a college team and start coaching. I said my method would differ. Dumbass
CJ came in on 3rd and long and threw a TD on that one. I think Stanley's going to be a good one though since he's already #2. He passed a 4 star QB to get there.
pythagoras
Well-Known Member
You should apply for the Purdue head coaching job. Your keyboard coaching ability is hilariously terrible.
jldhawk
Well-Known Member
I think you are probably a *&!#(%$!
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Of course I'm right on the length of the FG attempts, that would have been crazy stupid to try FG of that length and potentially giving them good field position considering the score and situation. Also going for it on 4th and 4 and 4th and 5 would be risky. Down and distance makes a big difference. If we were 4th and 1 or 2, I would totally agree with you, but we weren't in 4th and 1 or 2, it was 4th and 4 and 5.
Ultimately I just thought it was silly to say that kicking a FG or going for that makes a player better. Since I thought it was silly, and you called my attitude gutless, I therefore called it out in a DB kind of way. Could I have been more mature and taken the high road? Sure I could, but what fun is that?
I thought Iowa missed a heck of an opportunity. I felt the coaches put the 2nd stringers in and set them up to fail. They could easily see Purdue wasn’t putting in their 2nd string. Not only was it 2s against their 1s but like some have mentioned Iowa’s play calling was just not going to do anything. Those plays called weren’t meant to do anything but burn a little clock. The only way Iowa was getting first downs was if Purdue committed a penalty.
What I thought could have been done which would have helped the younger players more would have been to sprinkle them in. Have Stanley in with 1st team Oline for his first series. You can sprinkle in the 2nd string WRs RBs and TEs. But let the first team Oline stay in for that extra series or two and run the O. Not get into prevent offense mode. There was just so much time left that they could have easily have done that. Imagine Stanleys confidence if playing with the 1st team for a series and he marched em down to score. I just felt what Iowa’s coaches did was try to not run it up on Purdue. Basically Iowa’s coaches used garbage time as garbage time. Which is stupid. Because you can’t evaluate how that 2nd group did can you? Sure they looked terrible but how can you expect anything less when you have them put in a position they can’t succeed in? That is on the coaches and it’s too bad they missed a chance for the 2nd stringers to get QUALITY reps. Instead they got a little exercise and worked up a sweat that’s about it. Basically the coaches wasted a quarter of football that could have been used a whole lot better for them and the players. To me when coaches go to that prevent offense mode they are taking the easy/lazy way out of doing their jobs..
What I thought could have been done which would have helped the younger players more would have been to sprinkle them in. Have Stanley in with 1st team Oline for his first series. You can sprinkle in the 2nd string WRs RBs and TEs. But let the first team Oline stay in for that extra series or two and run the O. Not get into prevent offense mode. There was just so much time left that they could have easily have done that. Imagine Stanleys confidence if playing with the 1st team for a series and he marched em down to score. I just felt what Iowa’s coaches did was try to not run it up on Purdue. Basically Iowa’s coaches used garbage time as garbage time. Which is stupid. Because you can’t evaluate how that 2nd group did can you? Sure they looked terrible but how can you expect anything less when you have them put in a position they can’t succeed in? That is on the coaches and it’s too bad they missed a chance for the 2nd stringers to get QUALITY reps. Instead they got a little exercise and worked up a sweat that’s about it. Basically the coaches wasted a quarter of football that could have been used a whole lot better for them and the players. To me when coaches go to that prevent offense mode they are taking the easy/lazy way out of doing their jobs..
jldhawk
Well-Known Member
Of course I'm right on the length of the FG attempts, that would have been crazy stupid to try FG of that length and potentially giving them good field position considering the score and situation. Also going for it on 4th and 4 and 4th and 5 would be risky. Down and distance makes a big difference. If we were 4th and 1 or 2, I would totally agree with you, but we weren't in 4th and 1 or 2, it was 4th and 4 and 5.
Ultimately I just thought it was silly to say that kicking a FG or going for that makes a player better. Since I thought it was silly, and you called my attitude gutless, I therefore called it out in a DB kind of way. Could I have been more mature and taken the high road? Sure I could, but what fun is that?
It's ok Deano...all is good...thanks for replying I don't really think those things of you... it's just how these message boards go. My next response would have been to move out of your mom's basement but I am sure you are very successful in life.
HawkeyeDenis
Well-Known Member
Against Iowa State (?) this year, before Vandeberg went out with a broken foot.
