Husker GameFilm: Vandenberg Analysis
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
I don't watch enough college football to know the answer to this, but maybe someone out there in the Interwebs can enlighten me. Does Iowa have any offensive coach that could reasonably be expected to provide meaningful input in the press box on gameday? What do other teams do? I know there are head coaches that call their own offense, so naturally they are on the sideline, but I presume they are at least talking to their O-Coordinator in the press box. Does anyone know who O'Keefe is hooked into besides Ferentz on the head set? It's impossible to see the things GameFilm sees real time from the sidelines. Aren't we at a point where we at least have to consider having Ken try to call a game from up high so he can see what is going on?
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
I totally agree. Very helpful analysis.
I also can't understand why KOK and KF can't see that teams are sitting on short routes and it looks like they have 13 players out there.
The Nebby and PSU games were similar in some ways. It seemed like Vandy couldn't throw beyond ten yards...like there was a force field there or something.
It's interesting that Dennard was sitting on short routes, but we couldn't capitalize on it.
That analysis summed up what I thought while watching the game. Iowa could have done more to catch Nebraska off guard, but Vandenberg had opportunities and didn't make the most of them. He seemed to be throwing high all day, and most of the big receptions of the day came on great catches by receivers (McNutt over shoulder, Keenan Davis great catch to a ball thrown behind him, Herman juggling catch near the sidelines).
Coker actually ran the ball pretty well in the first half. But I get the feeling that Nebraska felt comfortable crowding the line and daring Vandy to pass.
Coker actually ran the ball pretty well in the first half. But I get the feeling that Nebraska felt comfortable crowding the line and daring Vandy to pass.
hawkeye2011
Well-Known Member
Actually they were daring Iowa to go ahead and run the ball. They kept two deep safeties and played man or match up man underneath. This is definitely the time to run the football. You have a numbers advantage.
We did run the ball relatively effectively and were doing a good job up front. It is however tough to drive the ball down the field by consistently picking up small chunks of yardage. Sooner or later you have a break down in execution and you are behind the chains. We don't execute well enough. Plus we don't really have a dynamic play making running back that makes explosive plays.
azhawkeyefan
Well-Known Member
Quote:
However, the trend of poor production from the passing game as the season wears on seems more like a schematic issue. Iowa’s passing offense isn’t very sophisticated. They use very little formation variety and the route combinations are pretty static. As a season goes on teams see what you’re doing on film every week and if you don’t change something up, add sub packages, or disguise your plays, you’re going to struggle to throw. It makes it that much more difficult to “execute†when you stack the odds against yourself in terms of using a limited scheme.
This is the most concerning thing to me regarding this coaching staff. This analysis is coming from an "expert" in GameFilm, not a hack message board poster such as myself. I understand that our conservative nature in gameplanning has kept us close in many games where we have been outclassed in talent. However as a fan I'd just like to see us deviate from this *just a little*. I'm not asking for wholesale changes in coaches, schemes, etc, just a little variety and originality. We saw that in the no-huddle offense earlier this season. We went to that offense in desperation down 3 scores late against Pitt, and the Iowa coaches kept up with that wrinkle for the next week. Then Penn State happened and they completely abandoned it.
However, the trend of poor production from the passing game as the season wears on seems more like a schematic issue. Iowa’s passing offense isn’t very sophisticated. They use very little formation variety and the route combinations are pretty static. As a season goes on teams see what you’re doing on film every week and if you don’t change something up, add sub packages, or disguise your plays, you’re going to struggle to throw. It makes it that much more difficult to “execute†when you stack the odds against yourself in terms of using a limited scheme.
This is the most concerning thing to me regarding this coaching staff. This analysis is coming from an "expert" in GameFilm, not a hack message board poster such as myself. I understand that our conservative nature in gameplanning has kept us close in many games where we have been outclassed in talent. However as a fan I'd just like to see us deviate from this *just a little*. I'm not asking for wholesale changes in coaches, schemes, etc, just a little variety and originality. We saw that in the no-huddle offense earlier this season. We went to that offense in desperation down 3 scores late against Pitt, and the Iowa coaches kept up with that wrinkle for the next week. Then Penn State happened and they completely abandoned it.
hawkeye2011
Well-Known Member
It is concerning, but it seems like Iowa is having an identity crisis of sorts offensively.
They truly believe in what they do (pound the rock, play action, conservative, take care of the football, Time of possession, win the field position battle).
However right now they don't execute at a high enough level for this to work. Throw in the fact that we may not have the horses to do it.
I think they tried to break out of it at times, but could never seem to gain any sort of identity or get anything going and would revert back to what was comfortable for them.
Realistically speaking Wisconsin is not that drastically different from us from a philosophical stand point offensively. The difference is they absolutely MAUL people up front, and they have backs that can take it to the house.
It certainly didn't hurt to add in the RW dimension this season.
I do know with certainty that Iowa explored different things in the off season. I know for a fact that the offensive staff spent time with the Green Bay Packers offensive staff to get some ideas.
I just don't see where any concepts were utilized. We went 5 wide empty more than usual, but we did it with some odd personnel groupings. I have no issue with sloting a TE, but we don't have a real athletic guy with great ball skills to do it. We put Marcus Coker out as well at the end. Just seems odd, and not gaining much of an advantage or using personnel best.
I wish KF would look at one of his mentors: Bill Belichick
He is a defensive guy. But has quietly molded himself into a pretty darn creative offensive coach out of necessity. They have adapted year after year on offense to take advantage of what they have. They continue to be very creative and taking advantage of match ups.
Of course it doesn't hurt to have two of the best TE's to ever play and they are both 22 years old.
azhawkeyefan
Well-Known Member
Absolutely agree here. From a macro level, the Patriots organization under Belichick has kept the same philosophy and system, however on the micro level (things like playcalling, schemes, formations) they are willing to change those to adapt to the personel on hand. That is all I'd like to see us do. I think we can all agree that Ferentz and co. run a fantastic overall program. Gameday, eh, not so much lately. I know that the players need to execute, but that excuse has been thrown out there for 2 straight years now. If the players aren't executing over and over, then that becomes a trend, and that falls upon the coaches to correct.
BLKNGOLD48
Well-Known Member
Really enjoyed GameFilm's analysis all year long, thank you.
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
Could the lack of success the last 7 years be that more and more teams can use our schemes againust us where in the early years they were learning?
Maybe - but I do agree what our passing system is archaic and we really need some new coaching on offense.
Ofcourse it will never happen
Maybe - but I do agree what our passing system is archaic and we really need some new coaching on offense.
Ofcourse it will never happen
JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
I have come to the conclusion that based on Iowa's passing schemes, when they get an empty first down play or negative, they are so likely to punt because when they are in third and long, the formations and routes they run are easier to cover because they rarely flood the field with receiving targets and when they do choose to do that, they are running plays they rarely run during the course of the game and therefore probably don't spend a lot of time on it in practice.
Other teams, when faced with these situations, are still running their usual offense sets, therefore have a higher rate of familiarity with them and thus a better chance of converting them
Other teams, when faced with these situations, are still running their usual offense sets, therefore have a higher rate of familiarity with them and thus a better chance of converting them
Ihawk209
Well-Known Member
Glad that you brought this up. Has anyone looked into where the Hawks rank (B1G or nationally) in 3rd down conversions?
big10fan
Well-Known Member
Jon, after 13 years in, don't you think they'd have a little bit more variety. You can run the same play from different formations to throw the D off. Why don't we? Real head scratcher.
hawkeye2011
Well-Known Member
Jon hit the nail on the head in that it is imperative this offense stays ahead of the chains.
Iowa has thrown a lot on first down this year (quick game/hitch) more often than going down the field. This is an attempt to gain that critical 4 yards you have to get in order to be successful.
The problem becomes when you throw an in-completion and put yourself in a second and 10.
Here you start to see just how uncomfortable KOK and Iowa become. They don't trust throwing it, and running it usually results in another uncomfortable 3rd and medium to long.
3rd down in a painful struggle for Iowa.
Then the next series it seems like they want to commit to running it on first down and end up in some 3rd an medium to long again.
They really seem uncomfortable on offense this year. When we convert a 3rd down it almost seems as if I witnessed a miracle.
Iowa has thrown a lot on first down this year (quick game/hitch) more often than going down the field. This is an attempt to gain that critical 4 yards you have to get in order to be successful.
The problem becomes when you throw an in-completion and put yourself in a second and 10.
Here you start to see just how uncomfortable KOK and Iowa become. They don't trust throwing it, and running it usually results in another uncomfortable 3rd and medium to long.
3rd down in a painful struggle for Iowa.
Then the next series it seems like they want to commit to running it on first down and end up in some 3rd an medium to long again.
They really seem uncomfortable on offense this year. When we convert a 3rd down it almost seems as if I witnessed a miracle.
skinnykilmer17
Well-Known Member
We were 60/149 or 40% on 3rd down conversion this year per UI website. Don't know how this ranks nationally.
silvanthalas
Well-Known Member
And this goes right back to opponents saying how easy it is to prepare for Iowa.
wartknight
Well-Known Member
67/120 nationally.
wartknight
Well-Known Member
Whoa- Just checked and the Iowa D is 102 in the nation in 3rd down conversions given up this year.
