Iowa Football: Is it Execution or Philosophy

JonDMiller said:
Iowa Football: Execution or Philosophy? | Hawkeye Nation

As we begin to take a look back on the 201o Iowa football season that has to be classified as a significant disappointment (you can use your own adjectives), the first thing that pops into my mind are discussions and commentaries from a few years back.

It was middle and end of the 2006 season, the ‘Fat Cats’ year, and I recall spouting a theme week to week: The Iowa offensive philosophy did not match up with the skill set of the personnel it had on the team. I said the same thing in 2007.

On the other hand, Kirk Ferentz was steadfast (more so in 2007) in this simple comment: It’s about a lack of execution.

Meaning, the players were not able to execute the scheme that the coaches believe in and have chosen to be what Iowa football is about, on offense and defense.

Fans were at loggerheads with Ferentz at that time, and when Iowa started the 2008 season 3-3, there were more than a few message board patrons suggesting Iowa needed to begin thinking about heading in a different direction. I disagreed at the time, and certainly do so right now with those few that are letting their emotions cloud their big picture judgement. However, most people are suggesting tweaks of the system and not replacing Ferentz.

When Iowa was 3-3 in 2008, I felt they had a very good team. At that point they began to execute more crisply and consistently. The offensive line came together, Shonn Greene started to deal and the defense was one of the best (at least statistically) since the 1981 unit.

Before the start of the 2009 season, I had the chance to chat with Kirk in a one on one setting, briefly. I told him the things I had been saying and writing the last year or two, prior to the middle of 2008, and saying that I finally bought into his ‘execution’ statement. It’s not as if he cares what I or anyone has to say all that much, but I felt like since I had hammered that opinion so frequently in so many media genres, I at least owed it to him to man up and tell it to his face.

Fast forward to present day, and the current meltdown within the Hawkeye Nation.

I am working on a season timeline, something that will chronicle some key crossroads of the 2010 season, events and incidents that played a part in shaping the fate of this season. There were significant issues that hurt this team’s chances to execute effectively, there were areas where I think the coaching staff let the team down and there were areas where the team let themselves down. It will be up to you to decide which area ‘deserves’ the larger portion of the blame, since the blame game is an absolute guarantee at times like this; folks have to go through that exercise, if for nothing more than their own sanity.

I don’t get too hung up on that, but it will help me to try and analyze why things fell apart so quickly following the 37-6 win against Michigan State, and how this team changed from an offense that converted 51% of its third downs and averaged 34 points to one that scored five offensive touchdowns against Indiana, Northwestern and Minnesota, three of the worst defenses in the conference.

Could it really be as ‘simple’ as losing your #1 & #2 right guards, as Iowa did against Michigan State? Throw in a concussion to Adam Robinson late in the Michigan State game, too.

I will share more thoughts on that front later, but when you are converting 51% of your third downs through two-thirds of your season, along with 34 points, a pace that was on par with the 2002 Iowa offense, and you revert to what we saw over the final four games, there’s no question a lack of execution is a part of the problem. You won't be surprised to learn then that through eight games, Iowa's defense was allowing just 32% of opponent third down conversions. The last four games, when the offense went AWOL on third down, the Iowa defense was on the field more often and allowed 51% of third downs to be converted.

Just how much? How much is due to a ‘predictable’ offensive philosophy? We’ll touch on defensive topics, too.

I am certain we’ll spend the better part of the next nine months waging that debate.
Click to expand...
Both. IMO the schemes and philosophy put the players in a more difficult position and therefore they are prone to having things fall apert like this.
I definately disagree with KF's theory that it is what we have to do to be successful. IMO he has brought the program beyond the point where we don't have the players to do other things.
I have no desire for KF to be replaced or anything like that but he has to wake up and realize you never stop evolving what and who you are and what you do.You are either moving forward or backward there is no static posiion. He had enough experienced players this year to quit being so scared of screwing up and start excelling.Does it matter if you lose by mistakes being conservative or aggressive.
 
Last edited:
Iowa has to be one of the few schools that leaves a base defense on the field no matter what? That philosophy has worked with a good pass rush, experienced LB and experienced FS, SS, DB's. Iowa got no pass rush this year, injuries to the LB and a DC that wasn't able to help out due to health issues. I'm not worried about the defense if Norm is able to come back full time but I do wish that a nickel and dime package was used.

The offensive side of the ball is the biggest mystery to me. I love the system that Iowa runs. A pro style of that relies on a good running game, play action passes and taking care of the ball. The stats say one thing about Iowa's offense this year but the out come of the games say another. Ricky and crew took care of the ball but were still inconsistent. With the weapons on the field this year I thought 30 points a game was just going to be the tip of the iceberg. There has to be some type of new blood on the offensive side of the ball, either a new OC or someone on the staff that has more input into the game plan and execution of it on game days'.
 
Every good team is predictable. Every successful team has things that are their go to plays or formations that make up their philosophy. I don't want Iowa to change their Identity- I would like the basic schemes to remain in place. I love the 4-3 the way the staff runs it. It allows Iowa to develop undersized players into quality and sometimes dominant defensive lineman. That shouldn't change. Heading into this season I thought corner or at least the secondary had a chance to be a strength. Especially after the injury to Tarpinian the lack of Nickel and Dime schemes played by this staff is mystifying to me. Tarpinian and Nielsen were by far the best cover LBs on the team. There is no arguing that. Johnson would probably come in at a distant third. So when we lost our two best cover linebackers wouldn't it make sense to bring in a fifth DB? Wouldn't it make sense to show more than one defense out of this look?
This is the problem I have always had with the staff. Sometimes they will show 18 defenses against a single opponent. Sometimes they will show one look. They can dominate with that one look. But what I want to see is some of the other defenses when the one look isn't working. The lack of scheming that went on to give the front four this season was absolutely stunning. Those pointing out that teams have figured out Iowa are correct. Last season teams didn't have the O-lines to stop us. Obviously they figured out how to react to stunts and what Iowa's line staggers mean.
Some have pointed out that the lack of a pass rush may be a coaching issue and I would tend to agree with this. I believe they are so focused on contain that they have had the aggressiveness that carried them last season taken out of them this year. Iowa played smart defense this season- not tough defense. Iowa over-thought all year long even in the wins.

It is the staff's responsibility to put players in winning positions- that is their only job during the games. They failed 6 times this season. They were bailed out once. They must learn to coach with a killer instinct and that is not a new problem.
 
spudhawk said:
Every good team is predictable. Every successful team has things that are their go to plays or formations that make up their philosophy. I don't want Iowa to change their Identity- I would like the basic schemes to remain in place. I love the 4-3 the way the staff runs it. It allows Iowa to develop undersized players into quality and sometimes dominant defensive lineman. That shouldn't change. Heading into this season I thought corner or at least the secondary had a chance to be a strength. Especially after the injury to Tarpinian the lack of Nickel and Dime schemes played by this staff is mystifying to me. Tarpinian and Nielsen were by far the best cover LBs on the team. There is no arguing that. Johnson would probably come in at a distant third. So when we lost our two best cover linebackers wouldn't it make sense to bring in a fifth DB? Wouldn't it make sense to show more than one defense out of this look?
This is the problem I have always had with the staff. Sometimes they will show 18 defenses against a single opponent. Sometimes they will show one look. They can dominate with that one look. But what I want to see is some of the other defenses when the one look isn't working. The lack of scheming that went on to give the front four this season was absolutely stunning. Those pointing out that teams have figured out Iowa are correct. Last season teams didn't have the O-lines to stop us. Obviously they figured out how to react to stunts and what Iowa's line staggers mean.
Some have pointed out that the lack of a pass rush may be a coaching issue and I would tend to agree with this. I believe they are so focused on contain that they have had the aggressiveness that carried them last season taken out of them this year. Iowa played smart defense this season- not tough defense. Iowa over-thought all year long even in the wins.

It is the staff's responsibility to put players in winning positions- that is their only job during the games. They failed 6 times this season. They were bailed out once. They must learn to coach with a killer instinct and that is not a new problem.
Click to expand...
This post reinforces my thoughts that we don't develop more players when given an opportunity so injuries and grads don't hit us so hard.
I'd say teh coaches probably did have their best experienced players on the field but they weren't the right ones given the opponents vs. players available.
 
I don't deny execution is a factor like Jon states. But any coach can use that as a crutch statement after awhile. At some point in time, the players need to execute and produce the results expected of them. Like it or not, coaching is a performance based profession. You win, or you get fired. At the end of the day, the question will be asked did the job get done? Trends will be analyzed. Xs and Os will be questioned.

It is not easy being a coach (especially at the college and NFL level) but they do get paid handily for what they do. At least they have that to fall back on.
 
I have no qualms with our defensive philosophy. No qualms whatsoever. Sure it can drive you nuts watching the NW's and Indiana's of the world dink and dunk down the field on us, but our defense has a decade long resume that stacks up. Our defense is responsible for much of the success we've experienced over the last decade. Norm Parker is responsible for much of the success we've experienced over the last decade.

Our defense typically has provided characteristics that we can hang our hat on. Not always, but more often than not over the last decade we've been able to stop the run consistently, force teams to play left handed, force teams to be patient, and force teams to settle for field goals. That's who we are, and it's worked more often than not over the last decade. The national rankings in total defense, rushing defense, and scoring defense also show a very nice resume over the last decade.

I refuse to listen to this execution bs in regards to our offense. This offense hasn't been dominant since 2001. This offense hasn't sniffed the top 15 in scoring or total offense since 2001. This offense has a poor resume over the last decade.

Execution smexecution. Our scheme requires NFL talent at too many positions than we are capable of filling year in and year out. There really is no argument here. Look at the numbers over the last decade. Look at how our offense has stacked up nationally over the last decade in scoring offense and total offense. It isn't pretty.

Imagine Iowa Football over the last decade if our offense stacked up nationally like our defense has.
 
briankaldenberg said:
I have no qualms with our defensive philosophy. No qualms whatsoever. Sure it can drive you nuts watching the NW's and Indiana's of the world dink and dunk down the field on us, but our defense has a decade long resume that stacks up. Our defense is responsible for much of the success we've experienced over the last decade. Norm Parker is responsible for much of the success we've experienced over the last decade.

Our defense typically has provided characteristics that we can hang our hat on. Not always, but more often than not over the last decade we've been able to stop the run consistently, force teams to play left handed, force teams to be patient, and force teams to settle for field goals. That's who we are, and it's worked more often than not over the last decade. The national rankings in total defense, rushing defense, and scoring defense also show a very nice resume over the last decade.

I refuse to listen to this execution bs in regards to our offense. This offense hasn't been dominant since 2001. This offense hasn't sniffed the top 15 in scoring or total offense since 2001. This offense has a poor resume over the last decade.

Execution smexecution. Our scheme requires NFL talent at too many positions than we are capable of filling year in and year out. There really is no argument here. Look at the numbers over the last decade. Look at how our offense has stacked up nationally over the last decade in scoring offense and total offense. It isn't pretty.

Imagine Iowa Football over the last decade if our offense stacked up nationally like our defense has.
Click to expand...
When the offense executes as it is supposed to the defense also shines because the pressure is on the opponent.
 
This post sounds like an excuse to keep the status quo. If your fine with no Rose Bowl, no out right B10 championship and a possible occasional BSC bowl game once very 7 years, keep the status quo. And my statement is with the current big ten set up.

Moving to a divisional format, Iowa can't count on any 'co-championship' results to brag about. With no coaching/scheme changes, Iowa will never make it to a B10 championship game much less an NC game.
 
Another point about schemes. Let's like at this from a military perspective. Just because we were able to defeat our enemies in battle using certain tactics back in the late 1700s does not mean that those same tactics would be as effective fighting a war in Iraq and Afghanistan today. A good teacher, coach, and war general needs self reflection on do these tactics make sense for what I am trying to accomplish? Would I send all my troops rushing at the enemy with slow loading firearms for them all to see when the enemy has automatic firing power to counter with? Of course not. Sometimes you have to adapt to your conditions. One tactic that might work for one enemy will be completely wrong for another no matter how well you try to execute it.
 
Last edited:
HawKCP said:
You bring up a good point Jon...or at least I think you do.

Even Ferentz's most ardent detractors would agree that he is nothing if not consistent with his philosophies and this coaching staff changes rarely changes up the play calling.

Yet other teams just figured it out in the latter half of this season? Really? After what 12 years...they are just now figuring out that we're not going to blitz and we're going to strive for 50/50 run/pass split...really?

This coaching staff was good until the 2nd half of this season when they suddenly became overpaid and incompetent...really?
Click to expand...

KOK has not had an "good" offense for 12 years of the Ferentz era. 2002 was probably the best year. Every year, I repeat, every year we are at the bottom offensively. Pathetic.

KOK is the only person in America that can suck at his job for 12 years and still have a job. I'm not saying switch to the spread. I'm saying switch an to offensive coordinator that can both tweak our offense and get better execution. Wisconsin is a run-first pro style team and they still manage to have a good offense once in awhile.

Whether it's execution or schemes, it doesn't matter, they both are f'd under KOK.

Get rid of KOK and do the HawkeyeNation a favor.
 
BALDIES7980 said:
When the offense executes as it is supposed to the defense also shines because the pressure is on the opponent.
Click to expand...

When the offense doesn't execute it also makes things tougher on our defense.

Last year.. the Orange Bowl year.... our offense ranked 89th in total offense and 86th in scoring offense.

We ranked 8th in scoring defense and 10th in total defense.

Our defense was probably one of the top 3 defenses in the nation last year, but a pathetic offense skewed the numbers.

Let's look at 2007 offense shall we?: 109th in total offense, 110th in scoring offense.

I'm going to make a seperate post showing the grotesque differences over the last decade between the national rankings of our defense and offense.
 
I would agree that the offense has underachieved in most seasons but I would disagree that the entire offense has to be stacked with NFL players.

The number one issue with KF's offense which shocks me is the number of poor, undersized O-Lines he has put out on the field over the years. You can typically count on a good offensive team under KF when our line is good. The problem is the O-Line guru does not follow the formula year in year out. He takes a lot of chances with marginal, under-sized guys. They might be tough but they struggle with physicality and leverage on a consistent basis. Negative/minimal yardage plays in the run game and pocket collapse and pressure stiffles many of our drives. Often it only takes one to do so also.

You need three ingredients to produce points in the Big Ten;

Big, physical O-Line = control the line of scrimmage (The Indiana's, NW's, Minny's of this conference cannot play 4 quarters of physical football). You can beat these teams every season with this. You'll also upset some of the big dogs along the way. Every player on the line needs to be a minimum of 6' 4" and 295 lbs. I'm not talking about porkers either,,,,,, but a line full of what we have right now at both tackles this year. Your smallest guy physically plays the center position.

Solid QB = hit just enough passes to keep the chains moving in event of a negative yardage play or penalty and throw the occassional over the top of the defense pass when the safety cheats up into the box

Establish the run = A run / pass mix of 60+% run to pass wins a ton of games in this conference. I'm not saying 100% run,,, more like run/pass mix of 6 to 4 or 6.5 to 3.5. KF's record is absolutely outstanding when we run at least 60% of the time in games.

This formula is time tested in the Big Ten and works almost every year. I would bet the three of the best 5 running teams are at the top of this conference again this year.

Again,,, I'm not upset with the scheme but the personnel recruited and played on the O-Line.
 
I really think it was the absence of Norm Parker, one of the best coaches in college football.

His absence was a loss that was impossible for this team to overcome. It cast a pall over the entire season after the Iowa State game. When you lose your leader, you lose everything.

I don't think you can underestimate how important the defensive coordinator is to a Division I football program. In some ways, he is more important than the head coach.
 
The philosophy (which comes from the head coach) shapes the coaching (all levels of staff) which shapes the execution (which is where the players come in).

If the execution is consistently lacking or the only thing consistent about the execution is it's inconsistency, then the coaching needs to be tweaked. If the coaching can't be tweaked, you need to find coaches who can adjust their coaching to fit the personnel or go back a step and rethink the philosophy.
 
One could argue that while we are spending all of our time focusing on offense and defense philosophy and execution that our special teams was what let us down the most.

Ari - kick ret, punt block, block EP
Wis - block EP, miss FG, long return given up after offsides, and of course the fake
OSU - long return
Min - on-side kick

I'm not saying that our offensive/defensive philosophies are perfect. But you can't win close games against good teams (Ari, Wis, OSU) with all of the lapses listed above.

I believe the Minnesota loss was a culmination of how the season went. The team quit.

Our special teams let us down badly this season.
 
BIG TEN OFFICIAL ATHLETIC SITE - Football

For stat geeks. It really is amazing that we were 7-5 given where we ranked in many categories.

A couple of interesting tidbits among many.

Comparison of Wisky to Iowa since our programs are very similar;

Scoring Offense; Wisky # 1 - Iowa # 6
Passing Offense; Wisky # 9 - Iowa # 5
Rushing Offense; Wisky # 2 - Iowa # 9

Again,,,, using the run to set up big pass plays like we have done in the past. Although the 9th best passing offense in yardage per game they had a league best 9.5 yards per completion. We had a modest 8.5.

Look at the 6 best passing offenses in the league[yds per game];

Indiana, Michigan, NW, MSU, Iowa, PSU.... Boxed only 1 11-1 team

Look at the 6 best rushing offenses in the league[yds per game];

Michigan, Wisky, IL, OSU, MSU, Purdue (5 of 6 going bowling). Boxed all 3 11-1 teams and note IL's decent rebound this year.

I realize this is only one aspect of football but to me a great O-Line and running the football effectively just greases the skids for good and exciting offensive football. We saw it a couple of times this season and in seasons past. The game of course is on a 'bell-curve'.... it does not mean you win every game but how much do your odds improve with a big, physical O-Line and running game.

I think next year's line has a chance to be bigger/more physical with the return of Gettis and McMillan at the guards and assuming we can find some healthy RB's. The only small player up front will be JF but he'll be able to add another 10-15 lbs which will help.
 
HawksFlyHigh said:
Execution is the name of the game. For players AND coaches.

We are in a position to win games because that is the philosophy. Keep it close to the vest, and give yourself a chance to win.

But one of the most glaring stats I have ever seen regarding Iowa and Kirk Ferentz is our win-loss record in close games. It is a large enough sample to size to draw a conclusion.

Ferentz is 7-25 all time in games decided by 5 points or less.

And THAT is a direct correlation to philosophy. And it is a flawed one. When your philsoophy is predicated on the other team making a mistake, rather than forcing the issue and making a play, you're playing not to lose rather than to win.
Click to expand...

Let me add another thought to an excellent post. Not only are we playing not to lose rather than win, we are playing for the other team to lose and not win. We believe if we make them run enough plays they will make a mistake. That is playing for the other team to lose the game and not for us to win the game.
 
Does anyone here feel that either the offensive or defensive schemes put players in a position to maximize their strengths and minimize their weaknesses?

Me neither.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top