PlanoHawk
Well-Known Member
there it is- we should just decide to go "wisconsin" on everyone. jeez.
Changes/Tweaks for Next Season
- Thread starter grandmahawk
- Start date
there it is- we should just decide to go "wisconsin" on everyone. jeez.
grandmahawk
Well-Known Member
Good ideas, Mutton. I don't see how it's that hard for us to find a decent kicker. Someone suggested that Meyer's kickoff distance suffered once he became the full-time kicker (I think it was Jon Miller). Not sure if that's true, but his power certainly did decrease as the year went on. Some have argued that we were just spoiled to have Kaeding and that we should be satisfied with mediocre kicking. I disagree...so many other teams have very decent kickers (except ISU and Northwestern)...it shouldn't be that hard to lure one to Iowa where, as we've seen, a true freshman starts in front of a senior if he's at all good.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I definitely think that Meyers' leg wore down as the season went on. As a true frosh, I'm not surprised. In that sense, not everyone is Kaeding. If we give Meyers another year (including more time with Doyle), I think he could be a VERY good kicker. If he can increase both his strength (for distance) and stamina (to keep booming it at the end of the season), then he would be able to afford to put more loft on his field goals, and raise the trajectory. If/when he gets to that point, he could really take off for us.
grandmahawk
Well-Known Member
Good points, tm. I sure hope so. I agree that Meyer shows some nice skill for a true freshman. You wonder how he'd do with a kicking coach...like Kaeding...Kirk should see about getting Kaeding's help in the off-season.
hawkfaninTX
Well-Known Member
Yeah that's right we should..... oh wait we would be slapped with NCAA infractions by involving an "agent" of the professional world with an amateur athlete.
Which from my days in IC, when i used to manage at Micky's, Kaeding would come in with current Iowa players all the time. He would also be seen at Carver with current Iowa Players & recruits siting just ahead of him. Where does the NCAA draw the line between friendship and infraction?
grandmahawk
Well-Known Member
Ha! Good point. We certainly don't need any infractions. I remember reading that Kaeding kept meticulous notes about each kick he ever made (in practice and in games) and that he used this to improve, etc. I wonder how many kickers do something like that. In any case, let's hope Kaeding's mere presence in Iowa City influences Meyer to become somewhat Kaeding-like.
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
I'm playing devil's advocate with this post....
If football is such an easy game where all a team has to do is be unpredictable and out-think the opponent on every play then who are these teams so many posters observe? These teams I take it must never lose any of their games and the talent, skill and toughness of the players on the roster must be a moot point.
I say we keep doing the things we do but do them better. Football is a physical, tough sport. It's about 11 guys (on each side of the ball) going out and dominating their opponent with technique, physicality and execution for 60 minutes. The team that does this better typically wins regardless of scheme or adjustments. The same thing we did just no more than 2 seasons ago when we won something like 15 games in a row. The same thing we did against ISU & MSU. It's amazing to me that suddenly that approach is out-dated and can't work.
That's my take... how about the coaching staff and players get back to the work-ethic, attitude and commitment it takes to dominate our opponents starting with the line of scrimmage?
Humor me anyone and list some of these programs that do the things suggested on this board and simply win all of their games all of the time....
If football is such an easy game where all a team has to do is be unpredictable and out-think the opponent on every play then who are these teams so many posters observe? These teams I take it must never lose any of their games and the talent, skill and toughness of the players on the roster must be a moot point.
I say we keep doing the things we do but do them better. Football is a physical, tough sport. It's about 11 guys (on each side of the ball) going out and dominating their opponent with technique, physicality and execution for 60 minutes. The team that does this better typically wins regardless of scheme or adjustments. The same thing we did just no more than 2 seasons ago when we won something like 15 games in a row. The same thing we did against ISU & MSU. It's amazing to me that suddenly that approach is out-dated and can't work.
That's my take... how about the coaching staff and players get back to the work-ethic, attitude and commitment it takes to dominate our opponents starting with the line of scrimmage?
Humor me anyone and list some of these programs that do the things suggested on this board and simply win all of their games all of the time....
Last edited:
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I don't think there's a need for total system overhaul. But, we DO need to make some tweaks against some teams (see: Northwestern/Indiana). A lot of staffs change things up a little (not a lot, but make subtle changes), depending on the opponent. We don't, or at least don't appear to. Matching up an OLB on a WR is perfectly fine.....provided that linebacker is Greenway or Edds. When it's not, I feel like we should account for that and take some of the stress off of the weakest area on the defense.
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
I don't like the LB on a WR either but our system has rendered some pretty good results over time,,, especially on defense.
I'm just a firm believer in fundamental football programs. When our program does things the right way starting with the head coach on down to the last guy on the bench we tend to get the results we want. When we 'slack' off programmatically and get away from core football fundamentals then we get what we get.
If we want to beat the NW's, IU's and Minny's of the world the formula is pretty simple. It requires physical domination on both lines of scrimmages for 4 quarters. How much did Wisconsin's 'D' matter which was statistically worse than our maligned defense when they jammed the ball down their opponent's throats, in a predictable fashion scoring 60+ points?
I would argue with most that our inept offenses in many seasons is far less a function of play-calling (although not great at times) and more a matter of inadequate offensive lines as a whole. Often we play under-sized guys in the interior line positions. We encountered this again this year, especially down the stretch when the staff elected to put in an under-sized, backup center in at right guard the final four games even though Nolan McMillan played at NW and was listed at # 2 on the depth chart the following weeks(who had been a starter)? Coincidence that the offense fell apart and only mustered a single rushing TD the last 4 games? The play calling certainly indicated that we had little confidence inside the red zone to utilize the running game...... it's a fact that if your O-Line is not up to par you can't run the ball effectively and consistently.
spudhawk
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with what you are saying really, I disagree with some situation specific playcalls. Iowa had success early in the season because they were constantly having success offensively on 1rst and 2nd down making either easier 3rd down conversions or no 3rd down at all. Against NW, OSU, and Minn the O was constantly in 3rd and long- some of that was on the execution for sure, but some of that was on the lack of adjustments by KOK and company to what the defense was giving in those games. Iowa had success all season with the 3 step game and seemingly went away from that until the Minnesota game. And they still didn't hammer at it enough in that game.
Defensively I will sound like a broken record here but Iowa tips their blitzes, rarely uses the nickel or dime packages and when they do they rarely change up the defenses that are called. Those teams that they used those packages against had veteran QBs that knew what the defense was going to do in key situations. Iowa sometimes plays left handed by themselves. It is my belief that they force their players to execute so perfectly that it is almost impossible for them to perform to our expectations on defense for four quarters against veteran QBs.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Agreed, if we execute we'll be fine. I would like to see us open it up more on offense though. Not go Oregon or Michigan, but maybe a little more like the Colts (more on the Edge-Era side of the spectrum). But execution is at a premium in that offense, too. It is in any offensive scheme. We do need to get bigger up front (I think guys will beef up with another year under Doyle), and we have good prospects coming in (and we're apparently still a legitimate contender for Koundidjio(sp?)).
Defensively, we do (IMO) need to run bring the corners up and take away the short stuff, give the D-Line time to get pressure (against NW/IU). You take away the short stuff, and those teams are in trouble. And we don't have to go exclusively to the nickel against the OSU's out there that gameplan differently against us. Sanzenbacher might get matched up on a LB some of the time, but by mixing it up, they aren't guaranteed to get that matchup anytime they want.
CRHawk2002
Well-Known Member
With all due respect, we dont have the talent at RB that UW does. Sure it will help if Wegher and Hampton both come back, but those are both huge if's and definitely wouldnt count on them. UW had one of the best Olines in the nation, and 3 rbs that all would have played over Arob in my opinion. As for tweaks, I would think we need to try to get the TE more involved this year. My hope is that fedorwicz has come along enough to make an impact on the field. Reisner had good hands and was a great run blocker, but the hawks missed the big play threat from the TE position. I am also excited to see what Keenan Davis can do. A year to develop our oline, cb's and young linebackers will help us. And I do think the running game will be stronger next year, but not comparable to UW. On D I am just hopeful that Norm and Nielsen are both back.
siestahawk
Active Member
One thing that I would evaluate is KF's automatic decision to always take the ball when we win the coin flip. I do not understand the logic. On one hand it says you have confidence in your offense. However, in most situations it really creates a bit of a handicap for the team in the 4th quarter as the Hawkeye offense is usually trying to score against the wind. When your game plan is already built upon keeping the score close and the necessity for conservative execution, it seems that having the wind advantage on end-of-the-game drives would be helpful to the offense as well as having the opponent driving into the wind would be beneficial to the Hawkeye defense. What am I missing?
mrolympia
Well-Known Member
Kicker-wise what the heck happened to that stud rugby player Jonny Mullings?
"Mullings is a jack-of-all-trades when it comes to special teams play, and one of his skills is in kickoffs. He can consistently put the ball midway into the end zone with over five seconds of hangtime, enabling most D-1 college athletes to get down the field to make a tackle"
Why have we not been playing this guy as a FR if not just on kickoffs initially???
"Mullings is a jack-of-all-trades when it comes to special teams play, and one of his skills is in kickoffs. He can consistently put the ball midway into the end zone with over five seconds of hangtime, enabling most D-1 college athletes to get down the field to make a tackle"
Why have we not been playing this guy as a FR if not just on kickoffs initially???
My personal opinion is that it's not so much the design of the 2-minute drill as it is a failure to make the play calls and clock management decisions confidently and efficiently as the end of the game is playing out. I wonder about the ability of this coaching staff to make decisions in the heat of battle. Don't get me wrong - I love KF and all he's done to make this program a strong one. But the endgame stuff is a problem.
grandmahawk
Well-Known Member
Yeah, this seems to be the crux of the issue here. Kirk harps over and over about execution. And, on some level, you can't really argue with that. But he says very little about adapting schematically.
On the one hand, he's ultimately right that it IS all about execution. That's obviously the way to practice, the way to motivate players to outperform those who perhaps are perhaps faster or stronger than they are. Kirk is all about each player doing his role, performing his assignment, and the team working together as a well-oiled machine. And, to this end, Kirk doesn't just talk this way...he actually believes it. Indeed, while it's hard to tell whether Kirk makes any significant in-game scheme adjustments, most seem to agree that the adjustments are few (other than harping on execution).
On the other hand, it's clear that, in some games (and, this year, a solid half of the games), preaching execution did not work. Whether or not players just didn't execute in those instances (for example, a missed tackle that continues a drive on a late go-ahead TD) or whether an actual change (in formation, in philosophy, etc.) was absolutely necessary...we'll never know. But after a senior-laden, physically-talented team goes 7-5, it becomes hard to find satisfaction or solace in the claim that our losses were all about execution.
One wonders: can't we perhaps have both? Emphasis on execution (obviously you need this) AND schematic/philosophical adaptation? Kirk is obviously smart enough to know this, and I certainly don't think any of these ideas are things they haven't considered; but I guess I wish Kirk would at least acknowledge these things, that maybe it's not all about execution...perhaps that would be the salve we all need after a disappointing season.
