Fairly certain shotgun is just a formation where the QB is lined up 5 - 7 yards behind center, not a full system like the spread.
I can tell you what Iowa's offense needs.
- Thread starter Adam
- Start date
Fairly certain shotgun is just a formation where the QB is lined up 5 - 7 yards behind center, not a full system like the spread.
Adam
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure what you are saying here?
I'm saying that shotgun is only a formation. It has to do with where the QB lines up. A formation is not a system, like the Spread option that Oregon runs. The spread is run out of the shotgun formation. They were linked. You don't have to run spread to be in a shotgun set. But you do need to be in a shotgun set to run spread.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_offense
A Clayborn or a Roth presence on the defense, constantly disrupting...making dynamic plays...would help this offense a lot, offering short fields and many opportunities.
Over this season, not so much...
Along the same line...what are the odds of a top 20 team losing by 25 while at the same time getting two pick six plays in the game?
Over this season, not so much...
Along the same line...what are the odds of a top 20 team losing by 25 while at the same time getting two pick six plays in the game?
HawkeyeDenis
Well-Known Member
When you don't execute it doesn't matter what your scheme is. It won't work. Iowa's problem was dropped passes, penalties. (Wirf had two that I know of alone), bad plan. The young guys have to understand, one mistake is a drive killer. One penalty, one dropped pass etc.
Stanley needs to place the ball better. And when he gets a ball to the receiver's they need to catch it. Too often Stanley's passes are behind the receiver. Or in the case of the interception, a strait flat trajectory pass. There is plenty of blame to go around.
I would expect that Iowa will do much better against Purdue. For Iowa is at home. Two. Purdue doesn't have the athletes that Wisconsin does. Purdue's defensive line is average. I think they have one oversized tackle. If, big if! Iowa plays hard, this game should be a blowout.
Stanley needs to place the ball better. And when he gets a ball to the receiver's they need to catch it. Too often Stanley's passes are behind the receiver. Or in the case of the interception, a strait flat trajectory pass. There is plenty of blame to go around.
I would expect that Iowa will do much better against Purdue. For Iowa is at home. Two. Purdue doesn't have the athletes that Wisconsin does. Purdue's defensive line is average. I think they have one oversized tackle. If, big if! Iowa plays hard, this game should be a blowout.
Pittsburgh is like 20th in rushing in the NFL. They average 3.6 ypc, not exactly great.
How about a head coach with the nads to do something besides running into the middle of the line 75% of the time with a 190lb running back who's really good in space?
Adam
Well-Known Member
You are using numbers from half a season as your sample size. That is disingenuous bro.
Adam
Well-Known Member
The drops are to me the biggest controllable variable that is helping to shoot this offense in the foot. The fact is that I know that the Iowa staff emphasises catching the ball. It is part of the reason that we don't get a lot of RAC because our receivers are taught to make the possession catch over worrying about yards after. They focus on it so much so that I believe they are getting deep into the young receivers heads. Let's say you get 1 ball thrown to you all game and then you drop it. You don't get anymore targets for the game and now you are stressing instead of just playing. The easiest way to fix this is throw the ball 5-7 times a game to your top targets. This allows them to get more comfortable and just do naturally what they do.
I don't even watch NFL, just curious. To be fair though, Wadley might be better out of the shotgun but hes probably the only Iowa RB like that in 20 years.
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
I think playing more shotgun is fine, but, as others have pointed out, it's a multi-factorial issue that can't be judged in a vacuum. For instance, reading the blitz and hitting hot routes is easier said than done with a first-year starter at QB and young first-year starters at tackle. Wisconsin's success with the 3-4 is predicated on multiple blitz packages that are well-disguised. When you combine that with beefy defensive linemen, even experienced O-lines and QBs struggle. Also, to make it work, the receivers and QB have to independently read the defense to know where the openings in the zone will occur. That takes a lot of preparation and experience.
Also, when the pressure is effective, a good DC will have his LBs and DBs squat on the short routes. In a sense you get baited into throwing right into coverage. A better option would be to "pump and go" with double moves to make them pay for squatting, but that takes another second or two, so, again, the protection has to be solid.
With a year of seasoning I would expect better reads by Stanley and the receivers, better game planning by BF and better communication and cohesion on the part of the O-line. Will it be enough to beat Wiscy? Probably not, but hopefully we will at least be more competitive.
Also, when the pressure is effective, a good DC will have his LBs and DBs squat on the short routes. In a sense you get baited into throwing right into coverage. A better option would be to "pump and go" with double moves to make them pay for squatting, but that takes another second or two, so, again, the protection has to be solid.
With a year of seasoning I would expect better reads by Stanley and the receivers, better game planning by BF and better communication and cohesion on the part of the O-line. Will it be enough to beat Wiscy? Probably not, but hopefully we will at least be more competitive.
