Can we agree to stop using "Total Offense" as our go-to metric?

[BigD]

And OSU has 9 in that time, Iowa should be comparing themselves to OSU right? Iowa is OSU right? Right? Dolt.

You lose when you start calling

And OSU has 9 in that time, Iowa should be comparing themselves to OSU right? Iowa is OSU right? Right? Dolt.

Who said anything about Ohio State? I can only guess that if Kirk stays around another ten years and doesn’t win a conference title in that time thus bringing it to twenty-five consecutive years with out a title, that you would be perfectly fine with that. That exposes you to the type of person you are. When you resort to name calling you also automatically lose the argument .

 

[CP87]

One thing I know is that we must use whatever metrics make junior look the best. If goal posts have to move year to year, that's what we'll do.

You will have to invent some new metric to make 2019 look good overall. There was serious regression on the offensive side, somewhat salvaged by the bowl game. As I said, I am starting to have serious doubts. I was expecting progress in year 3, not regression.

But sports is for fun. And there is nothing fun about predicting that everything will be awful. So I will contort, shimmy, look at things upside-down, squint, massage-data, whatever it takes to give myself some hope.

Year 4 of BF, CFP or bust!

 

[4thngoal]

Some might actually argue the opposite. Use the Goliath strategy (low risk, low variance) against the weaker opponents, and use the David strategy (higher risk, lower floor but higher ceiling) strategy against superior opponents.

I suppose it should probably be a combination. Try to minimize possessions against superior foes, but try to take calculated chances in the highest leverage situations.

Maximize possessions vs. inferior opponents by emphasizing tempo, but still play fairly close to your vest. Play with an acceptable amount of risk, but keep it conservative when a big mistake could cost you dearly.

Purdue is an interesting team to study. It seems like they play all-David-all-the-time. They have come up with some big wins that way. They also have some absolutely head-scratching losses.

There is probably an ideal combo somewhere that has to be informed by experience and gut-instinct. I don't think Iowa has necessarily found the right balance. They do really seem to play a lot better each year once they get to the "nothing-to-lose" point. Does something shift for them, or is it just random?

The problem is, say you know you ca

You will have to invent some new metric to make 2019 look good overall. There was serious regression on the offensive side, somewhat salvaged by the bowl game. As I said, I am starting to have serious doubts. I was expecting progress in year 3, not regression.

But sports is for fun. And there is nothing fun about predicting that everything will be awful. So I will contort, shimmy, look at things upside-down, squint, massage-data, whatever it takes to give myself some hope.

Year 4 of BF, CFP or bust!

Well we did play several ranked defenses.
I would bet most teams didn't exactly like their offense after playing our defense as well.

 

[BVHawk95]

I can only guess that if Kirk stays around another ten years and doesn’t win a conference title in that time thus bringing it to twenty-five consecutive years with out a title, that you would be perfectly fine with that.

When you resort to name calling you also automatically lose the argument .

Okay Mr. "I Live Vicariously Through a College Team So I Can Accuse Others of Being Soft"

 

[homes]

To play the What If game (and there are a lot of them) - If all of Duncan's FG makes under 40 yards, of which there were 14 (which puts them all within or just outside the red zone) went for TDs instead, Iowa would have averaged 29.2 points/game, good for 59th this year, still not great, but 30 places higher (6th in the Big Ten). Even if it's reduced to just FGs under 30 yards or less, of which there were 11 (all well within the red zone), the scoring average is 29/game, 66th place. Plus, assuming all other outcomes remained static, under either scenario, it would have been a win against Wisconsin. Also, Iowa probably would have kicked the extra point against Penn State for a 17-17 tie, but that cuts against my "all other outcomes remained static" assumption.

Here's the other thing, again all other factors remaining static, if they had gone for TDs in those games instead of taking the FGs and had come up short in every instance, it would have cost them only the Iowa State game. Purdue and Illinois would have been ties.

In general, I think going for TDs in the red zone are worth it. There may be certain situations that might support taking the FG. It would cost Duncan another shot at Consensus AA status next year, but it's an easy trade off to me, one I bet he'd be willing to accept, too.

It's just under 9 months until the next game. What else can we tear into bits and pieces?

 

[CP87]

It's just under 9 months until the next game. What else can we tear into bits and pieces?

The 2021 in-state talent, and why a top-100 recruit who plays TE would consider NE?

 

[homes]

The 2021 in-state talent, and why a top-100 recruit who plays TE would consider NE?

Because he wants to play with Tom Brady? Oh, you mean, Nebraska. I have no good answer for that nonsense.

 

[CP87]

Because he wants to play with Tom Brady? Oh, you mean, Nebraska. I have no good answer for that nonsense.

Last year Nebraska's TEs had 27 rec for 242 yards. In what was undoubtedly Iowa's worst TE production season in a decade (due to losing 2 early entry 1st round TEs), Iowa had 32 rec for 422 yards.

 

[trj]

If you are interested, here is how Iowa has fared over the last 13 years in national rankings in pts/game, yards/game, and offensive efficiency (from Football Outsiders). I have also included the B1G rank in offensive efficiency in parentheses:

View attachment 6216


A couple things stand out: BF is slightly better than KOK in efficiency, roughly equal in pts/game, but substantially behind in yds/game.

GD is substantially behind both BF and KOK in efficiency and pts/game.

BF regressed heavily in 2019. That ranking actually jumped about 10 spots after the offense scored 5 TDs in the bowl game. That backslide was mostly due to a very poor showing in the red-zone, which dropped their % of drives ending in TDs from a 60ish national rank the last two years to a 93rd national rank this year. Their redzone TD% of 57% (83rd in the country, and again this took a big jump after the bowl game) was substantially behind the last 2 years (69% in 2018, 25th in country; 65% in 2017, 44th in country; data from cfbstats.com).

The poor showing in the red zone can be directly attributed to losing Hocksenson and Fant.

 

[deanvogs]

I think most understand Iowa's (KFz's) strategy fine. They also have seen its limitations. I'd suggest the fewer possessions theory is somewhat of a myth. It's lost us as many games against "inferior" teams as it has won against the leaders. (looking at where we've won most of those, home field advantage would seem to be a big factor too)

Open it up more against inferior teams and put some points between us. Use ball control when it supposedly benefits us most and demonstrate the advantage. (which would arguably be even greater if teams thought they had to play honest after seeing us attack in other games and not load the box). Don't tell me the two are mutually exclusive and can't be done with the same personnel, we've seen it.

I would have agreed to that, until a stat was brought to our attention this year. Since 2015, Iowa has the 3rd highest winning % of all P5 teams when favored, behind only Bama and Clemson. We only have the one bad loss to NDSU in 2016, and I think 3 other losses when favored (I'm guessing those were games Iowa was just barely favored).

I think that lots of things changed starting that 2015 season, and I don't think KF gets enough credit for what has been done since then. Here are some highlights:

-47 wins over 5 years, the most of any 5 year period ever by an Iowa team
-(2) 10+ wins seasons
-Tied for 10th most wins of any P5 team
-Finished ranked in the top 25 (3) times
-One of only 5-10 teams to have (5) 8+ win seasons

I mean I simply can't understand how some are still all pissed off about the last 5 years. Heck I was right with everyone wanting KF fired in 2014, but man oh man things have turned around since then.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

I would have agreed to that, until a stat was brought to our attention this year. Since 2015, Iowa has the 3rd highest winning % of all P5 teams when favored, behind only Bama and Clemson. We only have the one bad loss to NDSU in 2016, and I think 3 other losses when favored (I'm guessing those were games Iowa was just barely favored).

I think that lots of things changed starting that 2015 season, and I don't think KF gets enough credit for what has been done since then. Here are some highlights:

-47 wins over 5 years, the most of any 5 year period ever by an Iowa team
-(2) 10+ wins seasons
-Tied for 10th most wins of any P5 team
-Finished ranked in the top 25 (3) times
-One of only 5-10 teams to have (5) 8+ win seasons

I mean I simply can't understand how some are still all pissed off about the last 5 years. Heck I was right with everyone wanting KF fired in 2014, but man oh man things have turned around since then.

No doubt we've seen a nice shift in the last 5 years...some would suggest an overdue shift. The tendencies that rub lots of folks the wrong way aren't as dominant as they were. Let's hope things continue in that direction.

 

[AreWeThereYet]

The poor showing in the red zone can be directly attributed to losing Hocksenson and Fant.

Hockenson, Fant, Easley, and the middle of the offensive line couldn't pick up blitzers.

 

[uihawk82]

Here’s a stat for yah. Fifteen consecutive years without a conference title. (drop mike and walk off stage).

Not only that but the bottom line is the Iowa offense still usually does not score enough point/game on avg. Twenty six points per game need to be more like 31 points per game. If they avg 8 to 10 possessions a game they need to be getting at least about 28 pts per game.

 

[IowaLawWasRight]

CP87 - you pose an interesting discussion but with a flawed premise. You essentially attempt to justify the fact that Brian Ferentz's offense was 103rd in the country in yards per game (despite an NFL QB, a stud RB, stud tackles, and the best WR corp in the past decade) by the fact that Iowa "emphasizes time of possession and field position. You conclude: welp, at least Iowa is better than Nebraska, a perennial Big 10 doormat.

Here's the truth...100% of the Big 10 emphasizes field position. Nearly all emphasize time of possession. Those traits are not unique to Iowa, and they have virtually nothing to do with Iowa going 3 and out with two runs up the middle, then punting. All teams want to score points. All teams want to gain first downs. That is the objective of the game. When you care about those factors, you generally win the time of possession battle and the field position battle. Back when Brad Banks was QB and he was flinging the ball down the field and putting up a ton of points, Iowa still cared about time of possession and field position...they just had better athletes than their opponents and scored a lot more points. No offense tries to rank 100th in yards and 80th in points...it happens when you simply can't move the ball as much as other teams.

Stop reading now if you have no interest in Offensive Efficiency metrics, this is a very TLDR post (@IowaLawWasRight -esque)

 

[hwk23]

We were 86th in yards per carry rushing in 2019. That is a stat that measures effectiveness and we were obviously not very good. Again Iowa hasn't broke the top 50 since 2008 and we were top 50 FIVE times between 2001 and 2008. KF said we need to look at changing our blocking scheme, and he's right. Hopefully, he does it (and also our audibles). Opposing teams have learned how to defend us very well, only had 20 years to figure it out, probably many other things we need to look at.

 

[CP87]

CP87 - you pose an interesting discussion but with a flawed premise. You essentially attempt to justify the fact that Brian Ferentz's offense was 103rd in the country in yards per game (despite an NFL QB, a stud RB, stud tackles, and the best WR corp in the past decade) by the fact that Iowa "emphasizes time of possession and field position. You conclude: welp, at least Iowa is better than Nebraska, a perennial Big 10 doormat.

Here's the truth...100% of the Big 10 emphasizes field position. Nearly all emphasize time of possession. Those traits are not unique to Iowa, and they have virtually nothing to do with Iowa going 3 and out with two runs up the middle, then punting. All teams want to score points. All teams want to gain first downs. That is the objective of the game. When you care about those factors, you generally win the time of possession battle and the field position battle. Back when Brad Banks was QB and he was flinging the ball down the field and putting up a ton of points, Iowa still cared about time of possession and field position...they just had better athletes than their opponents and scored a lot more points. No offense tries to rank 100th in yards and 80th in points...it happens when you simply can't move the ball as much as other teams.

I think you misunderstood the premise, which was stated in the thread title: Yards/game is a flawed metric, stop using it as a stand-alone measure of offensive effectiveness. The Iowa vs. Nebraska comparison was an example used to support the premise, not to justify the performance-level of the offense. Iowa's offense was sub-par this year by any metric, as I stated multiple times.

But you are exactly the type of person who would lean heavily on a metric such as yards/game since it allows you to cast Iowa in the worst possible light, which seems to be your primarily goal in every one of your posts.

To your babble above, I am not sure the point of most of it, which again is typical of your posts. But you seem to be saying that Iowa has a ton of 3-and-outs, so their offense clearly sucks. Actually, Iowa was in the 60th percentile nationally for fewest 3-and-outs (slightly better than average). They were also around national average (52nd percentile) regarding the % of available yards they actually gained (determined by # of possessions and field position).

Those numbers are clearly not where they need to be to be an elite team (hence the close losses this year), but when you combine that with 80th percentile rankings in fewest busted drives and fewest turnovers, they helped to protect the D. But the offense needed to score more points than they did, which is why they were a middle of the road offense nationally (below average prior to the bowl game), and why there were not in the upper-half of the B1G.

 

[4thngoal]

Yards per game is like the talent portion of Miss America. It might be useful, but most of the time it's just fluff. Even really bad teams can have better passing numbers when they are in a bunch of games where the other team is playing drives at the end of the game just trying not to give up the big play but letting them have the underneath.
That affects qb efficiency, wr receptions and yes yards per game and yards per attempt.
You really have to weigh everything out and when you do yards per game is important but it's not the end all to be all.

 

[Ree4]

Stop reading now if you have no interest in Offensive Efficiency metrics, this is a very TLDR post (@IowaLawWasRight -esque)

Do you know how to tell someone has an agenda when evaluating Iowa's offense? Their go-to stat will be "yards/game."

With Iowa's style of play, which includes emphasizing time of possession (hence fewer overall possessions) and field position (hence ideally working with shorter fields), Iowa almost always does worse in yards/game than they do in the much more important metric of pts/game.

I was looking at data over the past 13 years (this is how far back "efficiency" metrics are available). Over that time, Iowa's national rank in pts/game is on average 16 places higher than its national rank in yards/game. Over the last 5 years (New-Kirk era), the pts/game national rank is on average 31 places higher than its national rank in yards/game.

So who loves to use yards/game? Nebraska fans. Because they can fools themselves into thinking that Frost is some kind of offensive wunderkind. Nebraska kind of stunk the joint up on offense this year, but they can still say, "We were 55th in yds/game, and Iowa was 99th." And they would be right. But what if we look at pts/game?

Nebraska was 72nd nationally in pts/game, Iowa was 89th (it was a terrible year for Iowa in the red-zone). So Nebbie still has the upper hand on that side of the ball. But, what about accounting for the fact that Nebraska has way more possessions based upon their style of play, and they turned the ball over like a sieve?

Well, to account for that, we need to look at Offensive Efficiency. Football Outsider is a great resource to use for this. They essentially look at how many points a team gets out of each possession, adjusting for starting field position and quality of the opposing defense. ESPN also has efficiency metrics, but they do not control for quality of opposing defenses.

If we look at Efficiency metrics, we see that Iowa outpaces Nebraska with a national ranking of 62nd vs. 80th (Football Outsiders) or 52nd vs. 67th (ESPN). Nebraska also ranked 96th in the country in turnovers per possession, Iowa ranked 28th.

Furthermore, we can see that the Nebraska fan-base's disdain for their D-coordinator is probably misplaced, as Nebraska's defensive efficiency was substantially better than their offensive efficiency (44th vs. 80th).

Don't get me wrong, in general it is better to have more yards than fewer yards, it's just that yards by themselves are so incomplete. On Iowa's schedule alone this year, the losing team out-gained the winning team 4 times (ISU, PSU, Minn, USC).

So hopefully we can catch up with basketball fans, who have long since eschewed pts/game for pts/possession metrics, and we can ditch "Yards/game" as a go-to metric to encapsulate offensive quality.

I've been trying to make this argument as well for the last 3 years, thanks for posting this and fighting the good fight.

 

[Ree4]

One thing I know is that we must use whatever metrics make junior look the best. If goal posts have to move year to year, that's what we'll do.

I made this exact same argument to you 2 seasons ago and you dismissed it. Now you're saying somehow the argument has changed? It's identical - your memory is not good.

 

[tksirius]

Brian's knob ain't gonna polish itself, people. Let's go! #TeamFerentz