Iowa Football: What are you looking forward to?

Eda said:
Why do you suggest that KirFer would've changed QB's in the middle of the season? Does he have a track record of doing that in the past?

One could make an arguement that if KirFer's hand was forced and he was feeling pressure, then he would've made a change at a coordinator position.

I also wonder why you don't think KirFer would make adjustments (in personnel, scheme, coaches, approach, etc)? Do you seriously think he doesn't want to win?
Click to expand...
I think he's more in love with the fundamentals of conservative football than winning. How else can you (or he) justify the "that's football" comment?
 
HawkeyeMHA said:
Excuses from sunshine camp as to why he isn't as good as they all thought?
Click to expand...
You're talking about consistency, aren't you, 'cause he's already proven he has the talent. If you consider the little bit of time he played, IMO, he's proven consistency, too.
 
Last edited:
HomerChampless said:
You're talking about consistency, aren't you, 'cause he's already proven he has the talent. If you consider the little bit of time he played, IMO, he's proven consistency, too.
Click to expand...

He's consistently inconsistent. What, exactly, has he shown that will actually make a difference in W/L record? Everyone says JR missed throws, or CJB can "throw receivers open". First, there is no guarantee CJB makes all his throws--in fact, percentage-wise, it would seem to indicate he'll be no different. And "throwing a receiver open"? Either a receiver has the skills to get open or he doesn't.

I have no problem with the guy. I just haven't seen anything that says we will improve, or have a better record, etc. We still have GD. End of story.
 
Eda said:
Why do you suggest that KirFer would've changed QB's in the middle of the season? Does he have a track record of doing that in the past?
Technically, yes, he does -- 1/4 through the season, he benched Jake Christensen, his 15-game starter, and changed to Ricky Stanzi. Of course, this was only after forfeiting the Pitt game on his "gut feeling" that Jake Christensen was still the guy that "gave us the best chance to win" and a tremondous amount of arm-twisting by Ken O'K. So, I guess one could argue derKirkFer does not willingly have this kind of track record.

One could make an arguement that if KirFer's hand was forced and he was feeling pressure, then he would've made a change at a coordinator position.
HUH?? It was CJB and his father that went rogue with public comments that blatantly implied he would be transferring if he was not honestly given the opportunity to take over the starting job. derKirkFer now not only had external pressure to play the better QB (which he could scoff at because it was coming from ignorant fans) but now it was validated by publicized internal pressure from the actual QB in question.

This doesn't even consider the addtional external pressure from virtually every college football announcer and analyst that watched Iowa play and questioned derKirkFer's decision to limit CJB's play. Nor the additional internal pressure from that G.d. G.D. Of course, since this was silenced by the walls of Fort Kinnick, it didn't exist and could be denied, while handled internally.

Bottom line, why would you replace a coordinator, whom you had vehemently praised at every public opportunity, when it was the player making waves?

I also wonder why you don't think KirFer would make adjustments (in personnel, scheme, coaches, approach, etc)? Do you seriously think he doesn't want to win?
Click to expand...

Seems to contradict how you implied in your first question that derKirkFer not only does not but should not make personnel and schematic changes in the middle of the season. That debate aside, from opposing players' and analysts' comments over the years to situational decisions regading down, distance, field position and clock, derKirkFer is notorious for his steadfastness in schematic and strategic predictability. Sure, he's talked about verticality and play-makers but, when push came to shove, he inevitably reverts to his dogma:
- seniority over talent;
- risk outweighs reward;
- defensive field position is as important as scoring;
- hope for opponent mistakes rather than sieze (let alone, create) opportunities for your team's beneift.

I honestly believe he wants to win. I'm completely convinced he's oblivious to how his mismatched personnel to scheme execution and scripted situational strategies that disregard game-flow create inherent obstacles to his team's chances to win.

One hopes it is unintentional and he is merely blinded by his dogma. However, that would mean he is a complete fool of a coach. One the other hand, if you believe he is not a fool of a coach, then it tends to mean he is more concerned with executing his strategy and scheme and hoping that winning should be a by-product. That's not really "wanting" to win but rather not wanting to lose.
 
STILLBUSTER said:
Seems to contradict how you implied in your first question that derKirkFer not only does not but should not make personnel and schematic changes in the middle of the season. That debate aside, from opposing players' and analysts' comments over the years to situational decisions regading down, distance, field position and clock, derKirkFer is notorious for his steadfastness in schematic and strategic predictability. Sure, he's talked about verticality and play-makers but, when push came to shove, he inevitably reverts to his dogma:
- seniority over talent;
- risk outweighs reward;
- defensive field position is as important as scoring;
- hope for opponent mistakes rather than sieze (let alone, create) opportunities for your team's beneift.

I honestly believe he wants to win. I'm completely convinced he's oblivious to how his mismatched personnel to scheme execution and scripted situational strategies that disregard game-flow create inherent obstacles to his team's chances to win.

One hopes it is unintentional and he is merely blinded by his dogma. However, that would mean he is a complete fool of a coach. One the other hand, if you believe he is not a fool of a coach, then it tends to mean he is more concerned with executing his strategy and scheme and hoping that winning should be a by-product. That's not really "wanting" to win but rather not wanting to lose.
Click to expand...

The conserative approach works better when you have the talent to back it up. Bama can go conserative because they put more talented players on the field. I would rather Kirk and the players to give it all on the field and lose by 30 than try to keep it close the whole game and lose by 17.
 
STILLBUSTER said:
Seems to contradict how you implied in your first question that derKirkFer not only does not but should not make personnel and schematic changes in the middle of the season. That debate aside, from opposing players' and analysts' comments over the years to situational decisions regading down, distance, field position and clock, derKirkFer is notorious for his steadfastness in schematic and strategic predictability. Sure, he's talked about verticality and play-makers but, when push came to shove, he inevitably reverts to his dogma:
- seniority over talent;
- risk outweighs reward;
- defensive field position is as important as scoring;
- hope for opponent mistakes rather than sieze (let alone, create) opportunities for your team's beneift.

I honestly believe he wants to win. I'm completely convinced he's oblivious to how his mismatched personnel to scheme execution and scripted situational strategies that disregard game-flow create inherent obstacles to his team's chances to win.

One hopes it is unintentional and he is merely blinded by his dogma. However, that would mean he is a complete fool of a coach. One the other hand, if you believe he is not a fool of a coach, then it tends to mean he is more concerned with executing his strategy and scheme and hoping that winning should be a by-product. That's not really "wanting" to win but rather not wanting to lose.
Click to expand...

Stanzi/JC does not make a track record when you compare it to KirFer's tenure (see McCann/Banks, JVB/anyone, JR/CJB). You contest the switch needed to happen sooner; but JR wasn't the reason we lost all those games last season.

As for the pressure and his hand being forced by the Beathards, I don't completely buy it. Maybe it had a little to do with a switch, but I doubt it had as much to do with it as people make it out to be. When has KirFer ever bowed to a player (and his dad) like this. KirFer isn't getting fired (at least not until the buy outis under $10mil, IMO), so there's not pressure there. The point that was bought up in the OnIowa podcast (which I mentioned) was that if he was under pressure, then you'd see a coordinator change.

These past two seasons KirFer has gone for it on fourth down more than I can remember, the raider package was added in the middle of the 2013 season (after OSU, if I recall correctly), we've run the jet sweep and those quick swing passes much more than I can remember doing, and there has been plenty of underclassmen playing more and more lately. As for defensive field position... There's a LOT of coaches that will play that game. Just because you may not like it or wouldn't do it if you coached; doesn't mean it's a bad strategy.
 
Eda said:
Stanzi/JC does not make a track record when you compare it to KirFer's tenure (see McCann/Banks, JVB/anyone, JR/CJB). You contest the switch needed to happen sooner; but JR wasn't the reason we lost all those games last season.

As for the pressure and his hand being forced by the Beathards, I don't completely buy it. Maybe it had a little to do with a switch, but I doubt it had as much to do with it as people make it out to be. When has KirFer ever bowed to a player (and his dad) like this. KirFer isn't getting fired (at least not until the buy outis under $10mil, IMO), so there's not pressure there. The point that was bought up in the OnIowa podcast (which I mentioned) was that if he was under pressure, then you'd see a coordinator change.

These past two seasons KirFer has gone for it on fourth down more than I can remember, the raider package was added in the middle of the 2013 season (after OSU, if I recall correctly), we've run the jet sweep and those quick swing passes much more than I can remember doing, and there has been plenty of underclassmen playing more and more lately. As for defensive field position... There's a LOT of coaches that will play that game. Just because you may not like it or wouldn't do it if you coached; doesn't mean it's a bad strategy.
Click to expand...
There is a lot of truth in this post^^^. But I have to wonder if the dye is already cast with KF and it's too late to change it. Recruiting has not been good and I believe it has as much to do with KF's coaching philosophies and his inability to loosen up when it comes to his players. He has so much history working against him on the recruiting trail, that I don't think it would take too much negative recruiting to convince me that I don't want to play for him.
I do think KF is feeling some pressure. I don't think I've ever seen him grant the media so much access to his assistant coaches in the past. I think that's a direct result of some pressure to put someone in front of the fans that might change their opinions on the upcoming season. KF sure can't.
As for KF going for it on 4th down more than you can remember, that's 100% accurate and I thought it was real change. After listening to the coaches discuss our punting game more than any other part of the team, I'm starting to feel like it had more to do with no faith in the punter and less to do with KF wanting to score points.
 
Eda said:
Gee, a switch at QB could be considered a pretty significant change (especially when you have a 2yr starter returning). Whether or not you want to say it wasn't kirfer's preference or desire to do that is up for debate; but unless you have him saying his hand was forced the debate will be a lot of projection, leaps, and speculation (see the Miller and Deace podcast as example).
I'd also say there were PLENTY of exciting games last year. Oh hi NW, Indiana, Wiscy, Pitt, Maryland, or Purdue. The majority of the Nebby game was fun, as was the last 6 minutes of BallSt.
The season didn't produce as many wins as one wanted, but there was still a lot of excitement to come from it. If you can't get up for Hawkeye football, then I hope you have a big yard bro.[/QUOTE]

^^The bolded part was very well put. It makes me think a little differently about last year and say 'yes I was disappointed losing two games (Maryland and Nebby) that I thought could have been wins' and look at it like 'geez we had a lot of really good plays, a lot of excitement and that Nebby game was great until the last 10 minutes and we had a bad 2 qtrs and 2 great qtrs against Maryland....". I still get up for Iowa football. But I still cant get over the ISU loss (bad conservative coaching) and the Minny meltdown to totally buy in on KF again. I will watch with enthusiasm but only cautious optimism.
Click to expand...
 
I'm just looking forward to college football season. There's nothing I'm really looking forward to with the Iowa team.
 
lightning1 said:
As for KF going for it on 4th down more than you can remember, that's 100% accurate and I thought it was real change. After listening to the coaches discuss our punting game more than any other part of the team, I'm starting to feel like it had more to do with no faith in the punter and less to do with KF wanting to score points.
Click to expand...

The kicking game was pretty scary the first few games also.
 
MiniMoeHawk said:
Iowa's playbook is the old school Tecmo Bowl. You only have to guess 1 of 4 plays. Pretty easy really.
Click to expand...

Love the tecmo. Just zig zag across the field and your scoring err time. Hey, wait a minute....do you think derp Davis know about this technique?
 
HawkeyeMHA said:
Love the tecmo. Just zig zag across the field and your scoring err time. Hey, wait a minute....do you think derp Davis know about this technique?
Click to expand...


Or, is it more like this?

ku-xlarge.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top