Gamefilm: Coaches?

[PeoriaHWKI]

Each week we see articles on here and the players get graded on their performance. I wouldlove to see an additonal article on the coaches and their play calling. If we are going to grade these young men for their performance why don't we do the same for the coaches who put them in particular situations

 

[olddude]

Got to admit that is not only fair but a good idea.

 

[WindyCityHawkI]

That is an awesome idea, but no way it will happen. That would only add fuel to the fire when everyone saw -10's for the coaches ratings every wk. There is a reason we are so bad in close games and so bad against bad teams. That stat of us being 19-9 when favored by double digits since 2006 while the rest of the big 10 is 210-15 is mindboggling. We continue to lose to terrible teams and the coaches get a free pass and never answer for anything. Minnesota is 4-20 their last 24 games with 2 wins vs Iowa, yet Kirk continue to talk about how they are a good team? Give me a break.

 

[JonDMiller]

Other than talking about preparedness or lack there of on offsides, not trying to score points at end of half, things like that, I think it would be hard.

You don't know what plays are called...you don't know what the play call was that was checked out of...you don't know what defense was called, you don't know if the blitzer went where he was supposed to go, etc.

I think that would be impossible to do.

 

[DuffMan]

Come on JD quit making excuses and sucking up to the man that signs your paychecks. We all know it would be easy to grade playcalling.

If the play works its +-0 (the players made it work) and if the play doesn't work its -10.

 

[CRHawk2002]

Jon-
At some point you will have to chalk some of these close losses to inferior teams up to the coaching staff. You seem to always give credit to the coaching staff when we win or play well, but in situations like this you back pedal and make excuses for the coaching staff. Two years in a row we have gone to Minnesota as double digit favorites and in both situations they were very critical games. Both years the players lacked intensity, play-calling was less then inspiring, and there was no sense of urgency. I would like to see you be more critical of the coaching staff.

I am a big Ferentz supporter, and I hope we can turn this around. But this loss was as much his fault, as it was the players.

 

[BALDIES7980]

Is Jon your guys Mommy or something?
He has his opinions and has been critical to a degree.
Why does he need to go on a witch hunt like others do?
You have your opinions and have the opportunity to voice them(thanks to Jon) so find some other way to back your opinions or get some balls and go see Barta yourself.
I don't like some things as much as many others but it is still just a football game.
Every time a game starts there is a winner and a loser so better than 50% is in the positive.
This scenario plays out every week somewhere and with the volume of whineing that goes on these days do you really think people pay attention to it?
The truth is this has gone on for quite some time at Iowa and frankly it hasn't changed so do you keep ******** to KF(which hasn't worked) or do you question his boss because its HIS job to recognize this stuff and try to help make KF better.
His contract doesn't matter. Nor does his "power" within the program.
If those are a problem then its another line item on Barta's report card to get rid of him and find someone who will simply work with his people to be the best they can.
Get a hold of a booster that has Barta's attention to some degree and let them know how you feel.
Badgering Jon to bolster your argument is petty and not helping the problem.

 

[jo12208]

He is a PR agent. Nothing more. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

[aaronzuriel]

Grading the coaches would be very easy.

For instance the loses to Wiscky last year after the fake punt and this year after Minny and the off-sides fiasco... big time F's... for FAIL.

The Pitt game earlier this year when the staff went to hurry-up.. P for Pass and A plus for a victory.

Jon it's obvious we can't grade each and every play and the Coach's performance... ie their execution. (Since the Coach (and players) always talk about execution)

We can grade them on game turning coaches decisions that result in a Win or a Loss.

 

[twinlaker]

Jon I heard you on air yesterday talking about Iowa's winning percentage the last 3,5 and 10 years or so. I didn't see anybody comment on it here on the site and I wish you could post here for those that didn't hear you.
I think people may need to be re-educated. Great rant yesterday.... got me fired up in a positive way! Go Hawks!

 

[whammer33024]

Jon-
At some point you will have to chalk some of these close losses to inferior teams up to the coaching staff. You seem to always give credit to the coaching staff when we win or play well, but in situations like this you back pedal and make excuses for the coaching staff. Two years in a row we have gone to Minnesota as double digit favorites and in both situations they were very critical games. Both years the players lacked intensity, play-calling was less then inspiring, and there was no sense of urgency. I would like to see you be more critical of the coaching staff.

I am a big Ferentz supporter, and I hope we can turn this around. But this loss was as much his fault, as it was the players.

i believe jon has done some criticizing of the coaching staff. what he was saying is that it would be hard to break down positive and negative plays for the coaching staff. a play works do you get a +1? what warrants +/-?

 

[BSpringsteen]

Here you go buddy... I have your gamefilm right here:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8QNFFWLVMs&feature=related]Lego Train crash Maersk - YouTube[/ame]

 

[hoffahawk]

Other than talking about preparedness or lack there of on offsides, not trying to score points at end of half, things like that, I think it would be hard.

You don't know what plays are called...you don't know what the play call was that was checked out of...you don't know what defense was called, you don't know if the blitzer went where he was supposed to go, etc.

I think that would be impossible to do.

Seemed to have an idea on things with this from the O breakdown- which I also tend to agree with:

JVB had issues reading the blitz and adjusting for it. Minnesota’s defense showed blitz very early a few times and JVB called audibles to short quick hitters. The problem was, it looked like Minnesota intentionally showed blitz to try and induce the audible and then backed out of it and were in good position to stop short passes. To be fair, this is probably more of a schematic and coaching issue than anything else.

 

[NeilDiamond]

A big ******* "F". Done.

 

[herky01]

Gamefilm did mention coaching at the bottom of the last paragraph, and not in a positive light.

 

[PeoriaHWKI]

I am not trying to throw Jon uner the bus. In fact he does a great job of giving us this website to voice our opinions. I just wanted to get more info and to see if we would be willing to take on that project.

I do think you can grade them on play calling or lack there of, clock management, critical decisions, etc.

I think people would eat it up. Capn K may not like it but he gets paid millions so who cares if he can't handle some critiscm.

 

[hawkeyegamefilm]

Grading coaching decisions is significantly more difficult in most cases. There are a few times you can make clear cut critiques or laud the coaches for their good decisions. Much of the time you can't make a generalized statement with any real authority. Not knowing the play-call or some of the big picture game plan details it's hard to be critical of decisions.

That said there were some interesting decisions/situations I saw in this game. I'll try to out-line them from a neutral point of view as best I can:

1) The on-side kick: This was has been tread pretty heavily already so I'll refrain from beating the dead horse.

2) Jason White being used on the last series: He does play on special teams(KR, Punt team) but it's a much bigger spot-light to be asked to run routes and catch passes in a 2 minute drill. In the coaches defense they have been using him a fair amount in that package all year long. He caught some passes in that look earlier this year so it's not like it's a complete surprise he was in. White is a guy who has worked hard as part of the Iowa program and it seems like the coaches want to give him a shot to contribute in an area where he's got some ability. If he had a history of dropping passes or failed to run good routes I could see a stronger indictment of the coaching staff for this call. To my recollection he hasn't had any major issues in that department though. For all we know he's been lights-out in that package during practice all year long.

3) JVB and blitzes: This was an issue for Ricky Stanzi during his time at Iowa as well. Frankly it's an issue for many QBs at the college level and many young QBs in the NFL struggle with it. The fact that a short-side corner blitz has gotten to JVB repeatedly is pretty glaring to me though. Short side CB blitzes is one of the more common blitzes around for some obvious reasons. It may be more on JVB though and not the coaching staff. I can't say for sure one way or the other. Due to Stanzi struggling in the same area I find it pretty likely at least part of the blame lays with the coaching staff.

4) Coker carrying the load: Kirk has talked about balance being important on the offensive side of the ball. It's hard for me to understand why he's so reluctant to use any other RB throughout the game in general this season. Maybe the back-ups aren't getting it done in practice, I really don't know. Not letting Coker come off after one of the big runs lets you know how deep this problem runs. In this case I'm a little more forgiving due to being on the road with no proven back-up behind him. With Coker being so effective I can see why they wanted him in the game. Trusting inexperienced RBs is definitely not a strong point for this staff, but at some point they've got to improve the depth behind Coker. Piling on one guys shoulders wears them down and even great players make more mistakes when they're tired. As each week has gone by I think this has probably bothered me more and more. Maybe the return of McCall will help mitigate this. I've got more questions than answers on this subject.

 

[racerhawk]

Coker asked to come out a couple of times and the coaches left him in. I think that's interesting.

Do those who watched it on TV, do you recall when Coker gave the "take me out" sign to the sidelines, but then stayed in? I do.

He did a fantastic job, but maybe as Minny wore down in the latter part of the 1st Q and then late in the 3rd, they could've unleashed a fresh set of legs on that tired D and we could've broken it open. Coulda, woulda...anyway, on to next week.

 

[PeoriaHWKI]

Absolutely saw it and thought it was interetsting. He was winded. He had that one huge run where he almost looked like a defensive lineman rumbling down the field. Was he winded? I hope he isn't that slow.

 

[seepig]

Jon-
At some point you will have to chalk some of these close losses to inferior teams up to the coaching staff. You seem to always give credit to the coaching staff when we win or play well, but in situations like this you back pedal and make excuses for the coaching staff. Two years in a row we have gone to Minnesota as double digit favorites and in both situations they were very critical games. Both years the players lacked intensity, play-calling was less then inspiring, and there was no sense of urgency. I would like to see you be more critical of the coaching staff.

I am a big Ferentz supporter, and I hope we can turn this around. But this loss was as much his fault, as it was the players.

And it's about to happen again at Purdue Remember what Rihanna said "Here's to the freakin weekend...oh let the Jamison sink in..." We are going to need alot of whiskey over the next 4 weekends folks it aint gonna be purty.