If Running Game Doesn’t Improve...

[revkev73]

You forgot to use as evidence of their demise that they won 9 games last year and came darn close to a couple more wins. But, hey! Don't let me confuse you with the facts.

I didn't use the word demise or even think it, Kirk ball is a bit above average, often dominating the chaff and being outplayed and hoodwinked by the tough teams. Great bowl win last year, however! Two in a row!

 

[uihawk82]

A team and program we often compare our style to is Wisconsin, if you look at what they’ve done on the ground compared to us the last 7-10 years the two teams aren’t even close.

UW has had better RBs for sure, but I’m not sure the Oline’s have been that much different. Even if UW has had a slight edge in OL the difference in the success of the two running games is astounding.

Do you ever wonder how UW can run the ball with that kind of success when everyone and their brother knows they are going to run the ball?

Over the years, last 10-15, Wisky's O linemen have been about 20 pounds heavier that Iowa's. they play a more straight ahead power running game along with more pulling linemen and trapping techniques from what I have seen. I think Wisky has tried to run the ball more per game to tire out opponents and really get that yardage in the last 20 minutes of games.

You make a good point as does the OP about so much zone blocking on most all running plays leads to the opposition trying to attack. I think the hawks can still use zone blocking but need to use about 10-15% counter run action plays with pulling linemen, and also some trapping run action which includes more straight ahead power blocking.

Mix it up to mix up the defense.

 

[uihawk82]

There is nothing wrong with the zone blocking scheme as a system. If there was, it would not still be used across college and professional football today. Hell, everyone was raving about the Rams' zone scheme last year.

Yes, I wish I remember what website it was but these analysts did slow motion dissection of the Rams blocking and it was beautiful to see all the combo blocking, zone schemes, with blockers coming off their combo blocks to reach a linebacker or safety.

 

[Fryowa]

Jesus, are you still trotting THAT out? "It's the fans and the donors who are at fault"

Not the fans. Donors.

The major ones make the decisions. If you don’t believe that I’ve got some coastline to sell you in Idaho.

 

[uihawk82]

I’m not saying that points don’t win ball games, nor am I saying that it matters how you score points. It doesn’t. Points are points.

What I am saying, is that if this team could hit even average (for the conference) offensive numbers it would consistently vie for Big Ten titles. Certainly in the West. I’m also saying that there’s no excuse for a program with this amount of facilities and resources behind it to perform below at least average on one side of the ball for as many years as it has.

That problem is exacerbated by good-enoughers like @HuckFinn , because those kind of people make up the donor base and are perfectly happy with one game over .500 in perpetuity. And we’re now locked in to another 25 years of “good enough.”

You are saying the same thing most of us have for many years concerning Iowa's offense. KF plays so close to the vest conservative that it sets up these average to poor offensive numbers. Hell if Iowa were to hit one more 30 yard pass per game and one more 40 yard pass per game Iowa's numbers would look great, they would probably avg about 4-6 more points a game, and it would open up the running game.

We have been clamoring for this for years the Banks, Nathan Chandler, Tate, and Stanzi would make more big pass plays.

KF conservatism is what is keeping us from winning more games and winning more championships. Why were not throwing it deep on NW last year is beyond me. I know BF and KF probably thought their short passing strategy in that game might have worked but deeper passes would have loosened up the NW defense and other defenses.

 

[hwk23]

I’m convinced there are a number of little things Iowa does that other teams have figured out. The problem is I’m not sure we know they know. For example, Iowa usually audibles to the short side of the field because the defense puts most of their players centrally. Stanley may as well shout “we’re going to run away from your numbers” to the defense because that’s what they hear or at least it seems so.

 

[earlkoppelman]

I don't think that there is necessarily a problem with the outside zone. Unless that is the only play, which it has at least been the predominant play for many years.
You don't have to throw out the baby with the bathwater but using some power running sets and some counters / traps / misdirection would certainly be helpful.
If the opposing team knows what is coming, they will stop it more often than not, regardless of personnel or precision.
If the Hawks / coaches can mix things up, there is no reason the running game can't be successful with the personnel in play.

Very Predictable Play-Calling by Coaching Staff Make it Very Hard No??

 

[revkev73]

You are saying the same thing most of us have for many years concerning Iowa's offense. KF plays so close to the vest conservative that it sets up these average to poor offensive numbers. Hell if Iowa were to hit one more 30 yard pass per game and one more 40 yard pass per game Iowa's numbers would look great, they would probably avg about 4-6 more points a game, and it would open up the running game.

We have been clamoring for this for years the Banks, Nathan Chandler, Tate, and Stanzi would make more big pass plays.

KF conservatism is what is keeping us from winning more games and winning more championships. Why were not throwing it deep on NW last year is beyond me. I know BF and KF probably thought their short passing strategy in that game might have worked but deeper passes would have loosened up the NW defense and other defenses.

Creative, go for it, pull the trigger, take the shot to win the title vs:

Safe, job preserving, contract enhancing, legacy padding, family future providing, above average, bowl attending.

Two philosophies of coaching. The Iowa fan base and the big donors are for the most part, content with what we have it seems.

 

[SCHawkeye2]

You forgot to use as evidence of their demise that they won 9 games last year and came darn close to a couple more wins. But, hey! Don't let me confuse you with the facts.

Iowa was 5-4 in the B10
Suggests there is room for improvement when we play our peers.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

If the running game doesn’t take a serious jump forward this year and is still below average, does anyone else feel it’s time to ditch the zone blocking scheme?

I know there are still some question marks about our running backs and at Oline, but I’ve kind of been in the camp it’s time to move on from the zone blocking scheme for a few years now.

The problem to me is the amount of negative run plays the zone blocking scheme produces. Teams have realized if they play downhill and aggressive linebackers can shoot the gaps and blow up our running plays in the backfield. A two or three yard loss on first down is devastating to a drive.

What say you?

i've wondered this myself for some time. however, i don't think it is as straight forward as our blocking scheme. a major piece of our puzzle is running into 8+ man fronts routinely, in fact, i believe that is game planned as part of the strategy to run clock and limit offensive possessions. i don't think it matters which blocking scheme you utilize if you routinely run into 8+ man fronts and don't pass the ball to make the lbs/dbs turn their backs to the LOS and keep the defense honest. having said that, if you look at WUs, they do run into 8+ man fronts, but they also will use 7 OL's on running plays and just line a up a couple off the LOS to be a legal formation. 7 OL's, qb, wr, rb and a TE. that way they have OL's against lbs or a S; whoever is in the box. iowa ain't smart enough to do that, though.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

I’m convinced there are a number of little things Iowa does that other teams have figured out. The problem is I’m not sure we know they know. For example, Iowa usually audibles to the short side of the field because the defense puts most of their players centrally. Stanley may as well shout “we’re going to run away from your numbers” to the defense because that’s what they hear or at least it seems so.

I'm pretty sure we know what they think we know and are aware of what we know that they don't know. The question becomes do they know what we don't know about what they know.

 

[earlkoppelman]

Creative, go for it, pull the trigger, take the shot to win the title vs:

Safe, job preserving, contract enhancing, legacy padding, family future providing, above average, bowl attending.

Two philosophies of coaching. The Iowa fan base and the big donors are for the most part, content with what we have it seems.

You hit NAIL on the Head. Power and $$$ Speak Loud and Clear huh?? Darn I Say..

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I’m convinced there are a number of little things Iowa does that other teams have figured out. The problem is I’m not sure we know they know. For example, Iowa usually audibles to the short side of the field because the defense puts most of their players centrally. Stanley may as well shout “we’re going to run away from your numbers” to the defense because that’s what they hear or at least it seems so.

I've also noticed that opposing teams on defense show blitz forcing Iowa into the audibles which then cornholes Iowa into a play the defense wants to defend, or chopping down the number of play options to plays they want to gamble to defend. Mich St. does this very well against Iowa. They many times get them to change to a play they would rather defend.

Maybe Iowa should sometimes just go with the called plays to offset this a bit and keep the defense guessing.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I'm pretty sure we know what they think we know and are aware of what we know that they don't know. The question becomes do they know what we don't know about what they know.

I don't they know.

 

[peerok]

I'm pretty sure we know what they think we know and are aware of what we know that they don't know. The question becomes do they know what we don't know about what they know.

Oh, I don't know about that.

 

[revkev73]

i've wondered this myself for some time. however, i don't think it is as straight forward as our blocking scheme. a major piece of our puzzle is running into 8+ man fronts routinely, in fact, i believe that is game planned as part of the strategy to run clock and limit offensive possessions. i don't think it matters which blocking scheme you utilize if you routinely run into 8+ man fronts and don't pass the ball to make the lbs/dbs turn their backs to the LOS and keep the defense honest. having said that, if you look at WUs, they do run into 8+ man fronts, but they also will use 7 OL's on running plays and just line a up a couple off the LOS to be a legal formation. 7 OL's, qb, wr, rb and a TE. that way they have OL's against lbs or a S; whoever is in the box. iowa ain't smart enough to do that, though.

The goal of any competition is to try to force the opponent into doing what he/she/they aren't comfortable doing. If a tennis player has a weak back-hand, that's where you hit it most of the time. If a batter has trouble with the curve, give a heavy diet of the curve. Iowa has been forced or chosen to run against teams that anticipate run (safe run plays of course) and key their players to cover run first, plug the gaps, take risks and leave openings against the Iowa pass. In the recent past few years, with so many close losses, Iowa hasn't had much success balancing and taking what the defense is willing to give, has a HC who is risk averse, and hasn't had much talent that can get open anyhow. Iowa ends up playing offense on its heels while the defense, as the game goes along, gains confidence and cripples Iowa's super safe game plan. The TE position has been used often as an extended run hybrid, to some success, but perhaps underused given two first round draft picks, for example. Will Iowa change how they coach? Adjust? They have one of the most experienced QBs in the country and seem to have much deeper and better WR talent? If Iowa has a nice run/pass talent balance, will Kirk risk using it or will it be another "Restrictor Plate" season of what could have been, but wasn't? The season could be interesting to see how it plays out. Often Kirk and son and others nibble on more risk but the default setting of safe/punt is deeply imbedded it seems. Historically, and given Kirk's tenure/age, talent on the team, if I was him, I would take the gloves off and go for a full risk, full throttle season, might not be that many more opportunities. And with a changed philosophy, ass kicking season, what better time to move on and open the slot for the newly creative OC and HC in waiting.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Not the fans. Donors.

The major ones make the decisions. If you don’t believe that I’ve got some coastline to sell you in Idaho.

Wait about ten years, after "The Big One", and I'll take ya u on that coastal property. Unless Mt. Rainier also blows, in which case, hold on to any & all property you own just east of the Rockies

 

[Ree4]

Come on, they can't be 4th in the conference in ppg just because they have a good defense. Their D certainly helps and puts them in good position, but the O was decent (not great) at putting points on the board. And the O tries to put the D in good position, as well.

I agree with your basic point that the D carries this team (and has for the vast majority of the last 2 decades), but yards per game is a pretty meaningless stat. Not only is it influenced by drives per game, and hence style of play of both teams offenses and defenses, but yards without points are meaningless.

You know who really loves Iowa's yards per game stat? Cornhusker fans. They love to tout that 90th best offense in the nation vs. their 25th. Meanwhile, Iowa scored 1.2 more ppg than Nebbie.

You, Tk, a few others and I had a good conversation awhile back about the importance of yards per game vs points per drive and other metrics, efficiency stats mostly. I agreed with you and he tended to side with fry. I feel that yards per game are incredibly unimportant, especially with our slow, grind the clock type of play style.

One could even argue that yards per play isn't a great metric that this team is shooting for. Are big plays awesome? Of course, but they have downsides too. The defense is coming back on the field, you didn't have a chance to wear down the opponent and use our superior strength and conditioning program to our advantage. If Kirk could grind out exactly 4 yards per play on offense I'm sure he would be extremely happy. Be in control and grind out the clock. Not saying I necessarily agree with it, but I feel that's part of his overall philosophy.

https://www.hawkeyenation.com/forum...-do-you-like-me-now.84537/page-7#post-1759004

 

[Ree4]

Over the years, last 10-15, Wisky's O linemen have been about 20 pounds heavier that Iowa's. they play a more straight ahead power running game along with more pulling linemen and trapping techniques from what I have seen. I think Wisky has tried to run the ball more per game to tire out opponents and really get that yardage in the last 20 minutes of games.

You make a good point as does the OP about so much zone blocking on most all running plays leads to the opposition trying to attack. I think the hawks can still use zone blocking but need to use about 10-15% counter run action plays with pulling linemen, and also some trapping run action which includes more straight ahead power blocking.

Mix it up to mix up the defense.

You're absolutely right, Wisconsin has used a power run game for a long time, while Iowa has used more finesse schemes

 

[uihawk82]

i've wondered this myself for some time. however, i don't think it is as straight forward as our blocking scheme. a major piece of our puzzle is running into 8+ man fronts routinely, in fact, i believe that is game planned as part of the strategy to run clock and limit offensive possessions. i don't think it matters which blocking scheme you utilize if you routinely run into 8+ man fronts and don't pass the ball to make the lbs/dbs turn their backs to the LOS and keep the defense honest. having said that, if you look at WUs, they do run into 8+ man fronts, but they also will use 7 OL's on running plays and just line a up a couple off the LOS to be a legal formation. 7 OL's, qb, wr, rb and a TE. that way they have OL's against lbs or a S; whoever is in the box. iowa ain't smart enough to do that, though.

Actually you do not need to put your extra O linemen off the LOS in the backfield. The rules say no more than 4 players in the backfield on offense but the rules do not limit how many on the LOS. you could have 10 men on the LOS and just a halfback/QB in the backfield to run and throw.

The only reason to put only 7 on the LOS is so you have the maximum number of eligible receivers.