Punter U? Nah. Anywhere that rolled Rastetter out for more than a quarter worth of punts doesn't get that title for at least ten years. Remember when he hit like a fifty yard roller and everyone thought for exactly ten minutes that the sport psychologist fixed him?
Iowa will never be anywhere near a top 10 nationally when it comes to running backs. I mean…wow
Shonn Greene says kiss my ass. Freddy Russell to. You obviously don't get the post or reasoning. I will spell it out for u when get to my computer.
What part of top 10 nationally don’t you understand? I was the biggest russell fan that existed and he was a great college back. Did nothing in the nfl. And a top 10 list is flooded with nfl backs playing multiple years. You are a homer. I fully get that we have to have great backs in order to be successful. But it hasn’t been happening. I mean, just look at last year. The best running back on the team didn’t start until several games in. But that’s been common with ferentz through the years…at least offensively. You know what would help the running game ? A better passing offense and more quickness in the backfield (like russell). Ferentz falls in love with the power backs. We rarely get the talent anymore that takes it 50-plus to the house like freddy or banks. He’s thrown many a quick running back away because they fumbled early never to be heard from again
I absolutely hate when I have to revert back and explain the meaning of posts to simpletons. The whole point I am making is with Iowa's style on offense and philosophy, to be successful and a top program, they they really need to be at the top of the RB list. This plays into their philosophy of running the ball, controlling the line of scrimmage and winning the TOP. It ALL plays into what they want to do. If they do that, they should have a RB towards the top. If not, they will end up 100+ in offense.
And I literally agreed with you. Sorry about missing your point. It’s not clearly spelled out in your post IMO
Not a problem. Here’s to hoping for five-wide and running lanes for the next russell/banks.
What I think he meant by saying that Iowa not being in the top 10 is a problem is that it's a problem for Iowa. Not in that the list maker made a mistake not including them. I took what he said same way you did at first but when he started defending it I think I get what he meant by that.
If Iowa coulda traded for Wisconsins Rbs and overall running game for the duration of KFs tenure.... That'd have been a major problem for everyone else. That woulda made up for a mediocre passing game and hell opened it up just that much more. Is what it is
But the question is, trade for the RB's or the O-line play?
It's also a scheme issue. Wisconsin has traditionally run a power scheme while we have always ran a zone scheme under Kirk. Coaches have gone back and forth over the years as to which one is more effective, but in a zone scheme you have to recruit and develop athletes that can work effectively in space. What has been somewhat devastating for our line in recent years is the lack of respect for our passing game. That has allowed defenses to simply "crash" the LOS with LBs and safeties with impunity. That will always disrupt a zone scheme. If you can't make that strategy pay via the pass, your offense is simply going nowhere.
I haven't read the article, but I guess it boils down to definition of the term. If end results define TEU, then Iowa is the clear winner over the past 10 years or so. If it is college production, then I'm not sure.
