Ferentz 3.0 What can we expect??

[deanvogs]

Interesting. KF used to be a toady to KOK, and now GD is a toady to KF. How do you guys know that?

Whoa.....I'm not one who said KF is a toady to KOK??? I'm the one that bangs the drum that it starts at the top, not at the coordinator level. Many try to credit success to Norm, and while he did an outstanding job, the credit/blame goes to the guy at the top in my book.

Oh, and I don't know the inner workings. I'm just guessing by looking at GD wide open offense pre Kirk, and looking at KOK wide open offense pre Kirk. Just putting 2 + 2 together is all. Kirk likes his offense run a certain way, as it has looked the same for the last 14 years.

 

[Golfer]

I have posted this a few times in other threads, I will repeat one last time and then quit beating the drum. Weisman has 937 yards rushing this year. He had 815 last year. Of those 1752 yards, probably 90+% have come on outside zone. Like most zone running teams (i.e. just about every NFL team and most college team's that run a pro-offense), Iowa's primary running play is outside zone. It is not meant to be a sweep, it is meant to break off-tackle with an alley heading towards the sideline. When it works (think Weisman's 11 yd near-TD against Neb, or his 22 yd run on the icing drive against Mich), that is exactly what happens. When the D can maintain their gaps, it gets strung out and goes for little or no gain. Many fans think the play that gets strung to the sideline is an outside zone, and the 10 yard gain off-tackle is something different. They are the same play. You can tell by watching the initial line steps and the manner in which they work off their double-teams.

Inside zone is intended to take advantage of a defense over-pursuing to outside zone. Initial line steps are similar but usually not as wide, and the O-line will try to drive more up-field as opposed to sealing their man to the inside. The crease usually opens to the backside, whereas the outside zone crease is an alley towards the sideline on the play-side.

Iowa will occasionally run some iso or power, but their outside zone is their bread-and-better and accounts for most of their yards. Not to go all, "Know the game!" on you, but fans that criticize the Weisman outside zone for never working are just plain wrong and are demonstrating a lack of understanding of the game.

I agree with the above, but when we're in short yardage, the delayed hand off to the second back as a play call still kills me. Even when it works. Saturday after it worked twice (once for a TD), the guy next to me asked me if I was ok.

It is completely irrational on my part, but I hate that play. It has nothing to do with the running scheme, or our trap blocking, but I wanted to vent, and now I feel better.

 

[HawkeyeTech]

(2) we are not Ferentz haters. We love Iowa football, want excellence, and we (I) believe some other coach than Ferentz can bring excellence to Iowa football. Might not even take 3-4 years (or ever) as some lament. See the example of Wisconsin and coach Gary Andersen... 1 year.

All I can say about that statement is, wow, are you really that clueless? LOL, Bielema really left the cupboard bare for Anderson, eh? But I suppose you'll say that you just meant it doesn't necessarily have to get worse before it gets better. Whatever.

 

[CP87]

I had to abbreviate some of your post, so I can't prove everything about your post, and CP87's posts are wrong, but: (1) sometimes the blocking of the outside zone sweep breaks down, and someone OTHER than Weiseman has a better chance of outrunning the defense. Canzeri's 40 yard run against Nebby comes to mind..

I am glad you had to abbreviate the quote, that would have been embarrassing had you proven everything about my post wrong.

You are correct that Canzieri has a better chance of outrunning defenders if blocking breaks down (his run at Nebby is certainly NOT an example of this since Iowa destroyed the entire right side of Nebraska's defense and Canzieri did not have a defender within 5 yards of him until he had run 30 yards). Likewise, Weisman has a better chance of running through tackles if blocking breaks down. For examples, see here (1:45 and 2:40 for the clearest examples)...

[video=youtube;K-GUnmAg-1Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=K-GUnmAg-1Y#t=99[/video]

So they have different strengths. However, my point was never that Weisman is superior to Canzieri (I have stated that Canzieri should probably have an increase in his workload due to his explosiveness). My point was that people who claim that the outsize zone to Weisman never works are wrong, and demonstrably so. Likewise, those that think Weisman should only run inside zone and Canzieri run outside zone lack an understanding of zone running schemes. To my knowledge you have never made such claims, but many others have.

 

[CP87]

I agree with the above, but when we're in short yardage, the delayed hand off to the second back as a play call still kills me. Even when it works. Saturday after it worked twice (once for a TD), the guy next to me asked me if I was ok.

It is completely irrational on my part, but I hate that play. It has nothing to do with the running scheme, or our trap blocking, but I wanted to vent, and now I feel better.

I am with you, I don't like outside zone in short yardage. Not a big fan of power either, due to the delay and the guard pull.

 

[1standgoalat1]

...I'm just guessing by looking at GD wide open offense pre Kirk, and looking at KOK wide open offense pre Kirk. Just putting 2 + 2 together is all. ...

2 and 2 can be put together different ways. Perhaps GD "saw the light'" when he realized he didn't have the talent he had at Texas. Somebody could guess that KF's offensive philosophy is based on his recruiting and coaching strengths. It's worked. Many have failed at Iowa..

 

[Golfer]

I am with you, I don't like outside zone in short yardage. Not a big fan of power either, due to the delay and the guard pull.

Something I hope we see less of as we get the type of players to run the GD offense. This is a KoK play, although I see plenty of other teams run it. We've been doing less of it, which is encouraging.

 

[HomerChampless]

Andersen inherited White, Gordon, Stave, Borland and a team that had been to 3 straight Rose Bowls. Ferentz inherited Randy Reiners, 250lb offensive linemen, a linebacker that threatened to give the play book to the rest of the B1G and a team that was coming off a 3-8 season.

Which is also my point... This year, for example, the new coach would inherit a lot of Iowa talent. IMO, new coach would put that talent to better use.

 

[HomerChampless]

CP87.. yes, Iowa's left side destroyed that side of Nebby's line on Canzeri's long run. Hypothetically, how far would Weisman have run before tackled on that play, and how far did Canzeri go? Bowling ball through tacklers wasn't a factor on the play because Iowa's O line created such a big hole. You know, sometimes you got to draw these guys pictures before they understand... and they still don't understand (or want to).

 

[CP87]

CP87.. yes, Iowa's left side destroyed that side of Nebby's line on Canzeri's long run. Hypothetically, how far would Weisman have run before tackled on that play, and how far did Canzeri go? Bowling ball through tacklers wasn't a factor on the play because Iowa's O line created such a big hole. You know, sometimes you got to draw these guys pictures before they understand... and they still don't understand (or want to).

I am not sure what you think I am missing. I have agreed that Canzieri has strengths, and also mentioned that Weisman has other strengths that can also come in handy. But none of that pertains to my original post, which stated that people who claim that the outside zone to Weisman never works are demonstrably wrong, and in many cases do not seem to understand what an outside zone is.

You seem to be creating a debate that did not exist and has no antagonist.

With regards to how far Weisman would have went, he definitely would have made it inside of the 10. It is possible that he would have gotten pushed out at the 10, and it is possible that he would have run through the tackle and scored (we have seen quite a bit of that from him). It is impossible to know for certain.

You seem to be working within this world where everything that you believe is absolute, and anyone with a differing opinion is irrational. You do not seem to have an interest in discussion (making points, providing facts, occasionally conceding points, etc.); you simply make absolute claims (sometimes implicitly, sometimes explicitly) with no backing, repeated with increasing volume. Thus, there is probably not much point in continuing this. Have a good day.

 

[CJSHawk]

Throw in some Daniels that I hope is the next Shonn Green, and our offense could raise some eyebrows. We're never going to be a Baylpr but I definitely wouldn't mind putting up a few more points.

I'm interested to see how the running back situation shakes out next year. By burning Daniels redshirt you have to think he's in the mix with Canzeri and Weisman. Markel Smith and CJ Hilliard will probably redshirt so what happens with Bullock, Malloy, and Hill? Malloy's status with the team is in question. Does Hill accept a position switch? How will the coaches use Bullock?

 

[HomerChampless]

nm...

 

[HomerChampless]

[

I am not sure what you think I am missing. I have agreed that Canzieri has strengths, and also mentioned that Weisman has other strengths that can also come in handy. But none of that pertains to my original post, which stated that people who claim that the outside zone to Weisman never works are demonstrably wrong, and in many cases do not seem to understand what an outside zone is.

You seem to be creating a debate that did not exist and has no antagonist.

With regards to how far Weisman would have went, he definitely would have made it inside of the 10. It is possible that he would have gotten pushed out at the 10, and it is possible that he would have run through the tackle and scored (we have seen quite a bit of that from him). It is impossible to know for certain.

You seem to be working within this world where everything that you believe is absolute, and anyone with a differing opinion is irrational. You do not seem to have an interest in discussion (making points, providing facts, occasionally conceding points, etc.); you simply make absolute claims (sometimes implicitly, sometimes explicitly) with no backing, repeated with increasing volume. Thus, there is probably not much point in continuing this. Have a good day.

Guess I'm forced to quote all your post, hum? What are you saying, then, about Weisman running the outside sweep, CP87? That's he's good running the outside sweep?? What's more important, IMO, is: who're the Iowa RBs liable to get the BEST results running the outside sweep, the most yardage (since you've quoted Weisman's yardage stats in your OP). The answer isn't Weisman (unless it's KF ultra-conservative offense, and KF's preference to run between the tackles), it's Bullock, or Canzeri. Just as Weisman gets the best yardage among other Iowa RBs between the tackles and in short yardage situations. Weisman isn't bad, he's just not the best suited Iowa RB to gain yardage on the outside sweep. Need more pictures?

 

[HomerChampless]

Interesting. KF used to be a toady to KOK, and now GD is a toady to KF. How do you guys know that?

It's always been the other way around. KOK a toady to KF and GD a toady to KF. And the reason: for one, duh, ultra-conservative offense, from KOK and from GD. Now, who wants ultra-conservative offense? Did KOK, considering his history? Does GD, considering his history?

 

[HomerChampless]

you have said before that you hate ferentz. i even asked if you actually hated him, which you replied you did. changing your tune a bit?

What I've said before is: I want Ferentz fired as Iowa coach. That's not hating him. I want excellence for Iowa football, and I realize Ferentz is NOT going to achieve excellence as the coach of Iowa football, so Ferentz must, IMO, be gone. Unfortunately, you don't see that this is about Iowa football and not about Curt Ferentz.

 

[NCHawker]

Originally Posted by NCHawker



I've abandond the idea, after 14 years, that Iowa is going to be a wide open flashy offense. What I've come to expect is efficent offense that gets hidden yards through special teams all built of sound defense. I'd love to see a bit more wide open (Like MSU) but that will come with talent I think.

huh?

Not that MSU is wide open but they appear to be more aggressive and creative that the hawks on offense.

 

[NCHawker]

I think we've seen the general framework on offense. This year we leaned on the run because whe have an all-american left tackle and a decent O-Line. So it makes sense to run behind B.S. and an extra tight end. It is a strength relative to the passing game.

As Iowa gets better receives and the system gets more familiar, I think we'll see a lot more agility in the passing game - more adaptable - more creative - and more productive.

The run plays will be the same. The passing game should continue to mature over the next couple of years.

I think that talent and experience will dictate just how explosive (sorry to use that word) the offense is.


I'm not sure we'll always see as much blitzing as we have in November of 2013. It will depend on the opponent and the skills of the players on defense.

 

[LASBUR]

I have a hard time seeing Iowa being mutch better next year if BS goes pro. OL down TE about the same. WR better on experince. QB better, RB better but maybe not a better result. DL better LB down DBs about the same if Lomax comes back I think we have to count on the easier scheduel to get anymore wins It will also be tough to have much more injury free year

 

[SpiderRico]

What I've said before is: I want Ferentz fired as Iowa coach. That's not hating him. I want excellence for Iowa football, and I realize Ferentz is NOT going to achieve excellence as the coach of Iowa football, so Ferentz must, IMO, be gone. Unfortunately, you don't see that this is about Iowa football and not about Curt Ferentz.

What is your opinion of "excellence"? Winning a National Championship? In the last 20 years, how many different teams have won a national championship?

Nebraska
Michigan
Alabama
LSU
Notre Dame
Miami
Oklahoma
USC
Ohio State
Tennessee
Texas
Florida
Florida State

Am I missing any? So basically in the last 20 years, there have been a total of maybe 13 different teams that have won a National Championship. If you go back another 20 years, it's pretty much the same exact teams.

If you're not talking National Championships, then what are you referring to, because Ferentz has done everything else that would be an indicator of excellence except that.

Win a conference championship? Check. Two of them in fact.
Go to a BCS bowl game? Check. Two of them.
Win a BCS bowl game? Check.
Have a winning record in bowl games? Check.
Have an overall winning record in the conference? Check
Garner multiple top 10 rankings? Check
Garner multiple top 25 rankings? Check
Beat Top 10 teams? Check
Beat Top 5 teams? Check

So tell me, other than a National Championship, which ain't ever coming to Iowa....what else does he have to do to "achieve excellence" in your opinion?

 

[Xerxes]

I am not sure what you think I am missing. I have agreed that Canzieri has strengths, and also mentioned that Weisman has other strengths that can also come in handy. But none of that pertains to my original post, which stated that people who claim that the outside zone to Weisman never works are demonstrably wrong, and in many cases do not seem to understand what an outside zone is.

You seem to be creating a debate that did not exist and has no antagonist.

With regards to how far Weisman would have went, he definitely would have made it inside of the 10. It is possible that he would have gotten pushed out at the 10, and it is possible that he would have run through the tackle and scored (we have seen quite a bit of that from him). It is impossible to know for certain.

You seem to be working within this world where everything that you believe is absolute, and anyone with a differing opinion is irrational. You do not seem to have an interest in discussion (making points, providing facts, occasionally conceding points, etc.); you simply make absolute claims (sometimes implicitly, sometimes explicitly) with no backing, repeated with increasing volume. Thus, there is probably not much point in continuing this. Have a good day.

This is the perfect description for nearly every poster on this board and every message board in existence.