Ferentz: Northwestern loss ‘most representative’

DP5555 said:
I'm not sure some of you understand what Kirk is getting at when he says "most representative".

He's saying when looking at both Iowa and Northwestern he saw two teams that were very evenly matched talent wise. One team won 10 games and the other won 4. His point being that the difference in win totals is in the execution. This is the way Kirk coaches. He will use Northwestern's team last year as an example for the Iowa team this year. For example... "Northwestern isn't any more talented than us, and they went out and won 10 games last year. Why? Because they did the little things it takes to win. They made big plays on offense when they had the chance. They got off the field on defense in key moments. They made big plays when they needed to."

In short, when given the chance Northwestern executed and Iowa laid an egg. Now obviously as fans we can all point out things aside from execution that are vastly different between the two teams. For starters, NW is running an explosive offense and they have the players to fit their schemes perfectly. NW also has a coach who is very willing to take chances. Iowa is trying to run a more explosive offense, but thus far it has resulted in short passes and almost zero big plays. Plus it doesn't seem like the Hawkeye players fit the system very well.

Those things jump out at me as big differences between the two teams aside from a simple lack of execution on the Hawkeyes part. Maybe the two teams are pretty close in terms of talent, but unfortunately talent isn't the only thing that matters. You have to find a way to apply it.
Click to expand...

One thing Kirk failed to mention is Northwestern's superior coaching staff. Particularly when comparing the head coaches between both programs. I'm not even a Kirk hater but the difference between the 2 head coaches of Iowa and Northwestern is huge. Fitz is one of 3-5 guys in the country who could do what he has done with Northwestern.
 
Fitz is a scumbag. He was a dirty player back in the day who was exposed for who he was in the nfl training camps. Now he is a dirty coach.
 
DP5555 said:
I'm not sure some of you understand what Kirk is getting at when he says "most representative".

He's saying when looking at both Iowa and Northwestern he saw two teams that were very evenly matched talent wise. One team won 10 games and the other won 4. His point being that the difference in win totals is in the execution. This is the way Kirk coaches. He will use Northwestern's team last year as an example for the Iowa team this year. For example... "Northwestern isn't any more talented than us, and they went out and won 10 games last year. Why? Because they did the little things it takes to win. They made big plays on offense when they had the chance. They got off the field on defense in key moments. They made big plays when they needed to."

In short, when given the chance Northwestern executed and Iowa laid an egg. Now obviously as fans we can all point out things aside from execution that are vastly different between the two teams. For starters, NW is running an explosive offense and they have the players to fit their schemes perfectly. NW also has a coach who is very willing to take chances. Iowa is trying to run a more explosive offense, but thus far it has resulted in short passes and almost zero big plays. Plus it doesn't seem like the Hawkeye players fit the system very well.

Those things jump out at me as big differences between the two teams aside from a simple lack of execution on the Hawkeyes part. Maybe the two teams are pretty close in terms of talent, but unfortunately talent isn't the only thing that matters. You have to find a way to apply it.
Click to expand...

Its sounds like you're saying KF thinks NW has better coaching (since we're equal talent wise).
 
Originally posted by FreedComanche
Hope you don't mind me inserting numbers to empahisize that they all three overshadow player execution, and are much more important to winning games. Please tell us you aren't buying the ferentz spin. Every time his team sucks he blames player execution instead of taking responsibility. I've always hated that about him.
Click to expand...

So you're saying if Iowa has an explosive offensive system, players who fit in the offense and a coach who takes risks, the Hawkeyes are going to win ballgames even if the players can't execute the basic fundamentals of blocking, tackling, passing and catching? I'm glad to see logic is highly prevalent here at Hawkeye Nation.

Originally posted by FreedComanche
But I think they could have had a winning season last year if schemes and coaching were different.
Click to expand...
What? You mean a pro style offense that would have fit our typically less athletic players better? I seem to remember having that. Everyone wanted change then, too.
 
Iowa handled NW in Kinnick in 2011,but got handled at Ryan Field in 2012.....so suddenly Fitz is a dominant coach over KF? KF is 5-6 vs NW....not great,but hardly being dominated.

Fitz teaches his d-backs to come up and target opposing rbs helmets after they are stood up at the line...like they did with Shonn Greene in 2008 at Kinnick,concussing Shonn,causing a fumble,and knocking him out of the game. Just watch NW d-backs...they get a running start and aim high for rbs who are stood up at the line...dirty tactic.

As for KF...I think he is singling out NW for a reason....Barnett circled Iowa back in the late 90's...now it is our turn to circle NW...if we beat NW,Minny,and ISU...we will have a solid season.
 
Coach A- Runs a good offense that defenses have trouble with at a school that is very hard to recruit at makes 500k

Coach B- Runs a offense that takes the top talent in the country to be good and is not good at said offense and Makes 3.3mil

Now I know you dont know the names of these coaches but which would you rather have?
 
OUTofTOWNHAWK said:
Coach A- Runs a good offense that defenses have trouble with at a school that is very hard to recruit at makes 500k

Coach B- Runs a offense that takes the top talent in the country to be good and is not good at said offense and Makes 3.3mil

Now I know you dont know the names of these coaches but which would you rather have?
Click to expand...

Nominated for dumbest post of the day.

Both of your points are false. I realize you're trolling here, but you gotta do better than that OOTH.
 
DP5555 said:
I'm not sure some of you understand what Kirk is getting at when he says "most representative".

He's saying when looking at both Iowa and Northwestern he saw two teams that were very evenly matched talent wise. One team won 10 games and the other won 4. His point being that the difference in win totals is in the execution. This is the way Kirk coaches. He will use Northwestern's team last year as an example for the Iowa team this year. For example... "Northwestern isn't any more talented than us, and they went out and won 10 games last year. Why? Because they did the little things it takes to win. They made big plays on offense when they had the chance. They got off the field on defense in key moments. They made big plays when they needed to."

In short, when given the chance Northwestern executed and Iowa laid an egg. Now obviously as fans we can all point out things aside from execution that are vastly different between the two teams. For starters, NW is running an explosive offense and they have the players to fit their schemes perfectly. NW also has a coach who is very willing to take chances. Iowa is trying to run a more explosive offense, but thus far it has resulted in short passes and almost zero big plays. Plus it doesn't seem like the Hawkeye players fit the system very well.

Those things jump out at me as big differences between the two teams aside from a simple lack of execution on the Hawkeyes part. Maybe the two teams are pretty close in terms of talent, but unfortunately talent isn't the only thing that matters. You have to find a way to apply it.
Click to expand...

And that's Iowa's biggest ******* problem right there.
 
Xerxes said:
One thing Kirk failed to mention is Northwestern's superior coaching staff. Particularly when comparing the head coaches between both programs. I'm not even a Kirk hater but the difference between the 2 head coaches of Iowa and Northwestern is huge. Fitz is one of 3-5 guys in the country who could do what he has done with Northwestern.
Click to expand...



Currently, this argument is a very good one. Kirk is stuck in transition mode while Fitz has known exactly what he wanted to do for quite some time. This makes it easier to recruit players that fit your system. Kirk and Co. continued recruiting the same type of kids they always have, and then hired GD to come in and change the passing system. In year one it was painfully obvious we didn't have players that 1. Knew his system very well and 2. Fit his system very well.

Bottom line is Kirk haters are going to find a way to turn every single topic against him until he proves otherwise. In the grand scheme of things I think Kirk is much more respected as a head football coach than Pat Fitzgerald. However, things are starting to sway in Fitz's direction there. Kirk needs to make things work.
 
DDStretch said:
So you're saying if Iowa has an explosive offensive system, players who fit in the offense and a coach who takes risks, the Hawkeyes are going to win ballgames even if the players can't execute the basic fundamentals of blocking, tackling, passing and catching? I'm glad to see logic is highly prevalent here at Hawkeye Nation.


What? You mean a pro style offense that would have fit our typically less athletic players better? I seem to remember having that. Everyone wanted change then, too.
Click to expand...


I mentioned this as well in my inital response and he didn't care to elaborate... can't win a game no matter what strategy is initiated if your players aren't executing. It's just Freed's way of blaming everything on Ferentz like he always does.
 
DDStretch said:
So you're saying if Iowa has an explosive offensive system, players who fit in the offense and a coach who takes risks, the Hawkeyes are going to win ballgames even if the players can't execute the basic fundamentals of blocking, tackling, passing and catching?
Click to expand...

Nope not saying that at all. But I think you knew that.

Creating a good offense is a bit like master contracter building a house. He has to have a good blue print (offensive scheme). He then has to have a good foreman (o.coord) who can keep the crew (players) in line. All three are very important, but if you just have a good crew (players) and not the other two above, odds the house won't get built. And if it does get built, it will be a poorly built house.

If you don't have a good offensive scheme or good o. coord, most of the time it won't matter how well your players execute because the players won't be put in the best position for them to execute and succeed.

Now I do realize that if you got very superior talent to your opponent, it won't matter how good the scheme or o. coord are. But that is rarely the case in.

FreedComanche
 
FreedComanche said:
Nope not saying that at all. But I think you knew that.

Creating a good offense is a bit like master contracter building a house. He has to have a good blue print (offensive scheme). He then has to have a good foreman (o.coord) who can keep the crew (players) in line. All three are very important, but if you just have a good crew (players) and not the other two above, odds the house won't get built. And if it does get built, it will be a poorly built house.

If you don't have a good offensive scheme or good o. coord, most of the time it won't matter how well your players execute because the players won't be put in the best position for them to execute and succeed.

Now I do realize that if you got very superior talent to your opponent, it won't matter how good the scheme or o. coord are. But that is rarely the case in.

FreedComanche
Click to expand...



I think we get what you're saying... the problem is you said that player execution isn't near as important as coaching decisions and what type of scheme you're running. Why did you say that? Well because it supports your opinion that everything is Ferentz's fault.

The truth is player execution is just as important. The Spurs have the best basketball coach in the game in Greg Popovich. He routinely makes effective in game adjustments that you just don't see out of other coaches in the NBA. Now if they don't go out and execute it doesn't mean a damn thing who's in charge. All three aspects are equally important to winning games.
 
One of the things as far as execution goes IMO, goes hand in hand with the fact that in terms of experience this was one of the youngest teams KF has had. We all knew it, and KF even acknowledged such prior to the season starting. Not allowing it to be an excuse, but I think people's opinion is that we under preformed last year and I simply don't think thats the case. I think we did the best with what we had. That said KF's responsible for bring in players to his system as well and while I think it was obvious how the youth showed last year, it's also his repsonsiblity to develop players so they're ready when it's their turn and unfortunately I didn't think that happened last year.
 
I dont think we really know how good the talent was last year because nobody including the coaches seem to grasp the offense.
 
DP5555 said:
I think we get what you're saying... the problem is you said that player execution isn't near as important as coaching decisions and what type of scheme you're running. Why did you say that? Well because it supports your opinion that everything is Ferentz's fault.

The truth is player execution is just as important. The Spurs have the best basketball coach in the game in Greg Popovich. He routinely makes effective in game adjustments that you just don't see out of other coaches in the NBA. Now if they don't go out and execute it doesn't mean a damn thing who's in charge. All three aspects are equally important to winning games.
Click to expand...

I honestly did not have ferentz in mind when I wrote that. I was involved with organized football for a about 8 years, and I couldn't stand it when I was with a coach that made it hard for his players to succeed. For example, a dumb or/or predictable offense.

Of course player execution is important, but if you have a dumb offensive strategy; you can have players execute well and still not be successful. That was my only point. It really had nothing to do with ferentz.

But don't get me wrong. I'm still very critical of him in many aspects.

FreedComanche
 
To me, any talk coming from Kirk or the players simply does not matter. WHat will matter will be what we see on the field. You can talk all you want about how "hard the players are working" etc. Stuff you want to hear, but nobody truly knows how this bunch of 18-22 year olds will perform once the season starts. The one positive: We can't be any worse than last season. Keeping the faith Kirk can turn this around again for a third time .... The clock is ticking Kirk ...
 
I went to the NW game last year. Just a flat out embarassment. Playing there is like playing at a morgue, especially at 11AM. Our team played like they should have been in one. I live relatively close to stadium and took off just after half rather than watch that hot garbage. When Kirk's attitude is that the game was representative of the season, I agree. Just flatout terrible, poor effort, abysmal scheme, abysmal coaching. A repeat this year and things will be very ugly at Kinnick for Kirk and Gary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top