Iowa Targeting January for New OC

HuckFinn said:
About every coach I have heard in interviews mentions execution as a key to victory. Seems to me that is a completely true reference. As to the “throwing players under the bus” claim, most every coach will say that the coaching staff must do a better job of preparing the players.
Click to expand...

It’s like me getting smoked in a race by an Olympic sprinter and saying I need to execute my race. Ignoring the fact there is no chance I could ever win due to inherent talent levels.

The offense is mediocre talent that is coached poorly in a bad system. We are so predictable we have to win every 1v1 for a successful play.
 


I really enjoy Mike McDaniel. The guy is goofy and quirky, but players love him. But this speech he gives really resonates with me. I think often when things don't go right we point fingers. Excuses fly. Was it the players? Was it the coaches? And so on.

In some ways, KF takes a lot of heat for what transpires during the season. Rightfully so. He's the head coach. Some things he owns up to more than others. (Insert: the Brian situation)

You see in Coach McDaniel's speech he talks about calling a "great play" and "bad play". He talks about execution and many things.

KF is definitely not as savvy as Coach McDaniel, but in certain ways he does similar things with the how the team is very focused and unified. You hear many of our Hawkeye kids talk and they are bought in to the culture. Those are the intangibles that don't show up in the win/loss or stat sheets. Or do they?

With our subpar offensive output the last two years, and the media focus on it along with the nepotism issue, we won 8 games in 2022 and 10 games this year with the hope of winning 11. I don't think you do that without having a unified team and great culture.

Hawkeye fans have enjoyed a fair amount of success the last 25 years with KF at the helm. Same philosophy basically from Year 1 to now. Whomever the OC is, I imagine they will align mostly with what KF has already laid out. But you never know, maybe we will see a few more wrinkles and some different looks.

I apologize, I probably got a bit off topic, but I think you guys will at least enjoy the McDaniel video.
 
HuckFinn said:
About every coach I have heard in interviews mentions execution as a key to victory. Seems to me that is a completely true reference. As to the “throwing players under the bus” claim, most every coach will say that the coaching staff must do a better job of preparing the players.
Click to expand...
I think you're spot on. I'm nothing more then a fan with no personal experience, but as a coach in any sport knows if the players aren't getting it done (and you know when they aren't) there's little "coaching" can do. That said throughout the season, I'd listen to the washed up walk-ons podcast on a regular basis and that was there biggest argument. They credited/blamed the struggles on the line and the offense as a whole players simply not getting it done as much as they did on the play calling and coaching deficiencies.
 
hawkinn3 said:
It’s like me getting smoked in a race by an Olympic sprinter and saying I need to execute my race. Ignoring the fact there is no chance I could ever win due to inherent talent levels.

The offense is mediocre talent that is coached poorly in a bad system. We are so predictable we have to win every 1v1 for a successful play.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, but at the same time if the players are capable of playing at a level higher then that of what they are playing at it's just as much on them. If you're a 11 second (being generous) sprinter in the 100 against guys running sub 10 second times and start running a 12, regardless of the competition then its as much on you. I think that's the problem we see, and what I referenced in my previous post. Our offense, or lack there of, is bad and there is no denying it. The majority of that I would agree is the scheme and mentality of the staff, but our defense is absolutely keeping us in games and getting it done. If our offense has the capability of playing at a higher level and are holding back it's still on the coaches, but they're equally to blame.
Our offense sucked, but at the same time there isn't a doubt in my mind that the players couldn't have found a way to move the ball 15 yards, despite the play calling or schemes, to get into field goal range to win the Minnesota game. I think that is where it comes down to execution. Even with a historically bad offense there's some games that we should have performed better offensively then we did and I don't think it's always about poor coaching.
 
wwhawk said:
My take on KF's presser: Just like each of the past 3 years, where a thorough review of the program was promised, as the offense sank lower and lower until finally reaching literally the bottom rung of total offense yards per game by a wide margin, with the assessment unalterably being: we just need to have better execution and get everyone healthy. No changes in the offensive offense are needed, no changes in coaches are needed either, and none will happen. BF would still be the OC if it was up to KF.

KF to those of you wanting change: pound sand. Maybe you forgot that we won the mild mild B1G West two of the last 3 years and almost won it the 3rd year. (The fact that we were completely uncompetitive against OSU, PSU and MI gets conveniently ignored by KF. In those two title games the scores were 42-3 and 26 -0 ( a combined 68 to 3) with the Hawks never reaching the red zone in the shutout loss. The PSU score was 31 - 0 this year. More punts than first downs. The OSU score last year was 54 - 10, with the IA TD being scored by our defense.

KF harps on the importance of "complimentary football", and yet has an offense that is the polar opposite of Phil Parker's awesome D. KF preaches the ultimate importance of "ball security", and yet played Deacon "Benny" Hill, each and every snap since he was called upon early in the season, even with statistics showing Hill was #1 in the QB nation for being at risk of causing a turnover. Joey Labas, who won the bowl game last year, with zero turnovers and a TD pass, never was given a single snap all season, and he's very understandably gone.

Don't get me wrong: Love, love, love the D and Special Teams. THEY won 10 games this season, in spite of the offense, rather than in anything remotely resembling "complimentary football." Proud of those two amazing units winning 10 games. But for the team to at least be competitive against MI, PSU, OSU and now WA, OR, UCLA and USC being added to the mix, and the mild, mild West being a thing of the past, changes to the offense must be made. Not talking "air raid", but something other than up the gut, and a 3 yard out on 3rd and 9. And on other than obvious passing downs, please don't go 5 wide, leaving no one in the backfield with the statue QB, such that the D knows with 100% certainty that the Hawks are going to pass.

IMHO the bottom line is that to be competitive going forward, the new OC has to have at least some freedom to run his own offense, or the definition of insanity will again be met: doing the same thing over and over again, and hoping for a different outcome.
Click to expand...

To be fair, a lot of teams lose that badly when they're facing top 10 or 5 teams, that is not unique to Iowa. Michigan did that to every team on their schedule. Iowa has faired well against USC recently, always did well against Washington & UCLA in the 80's and it's not like Iowa hasn't been successful against the upper half SEC teams they've had to play in bowl games over the last couple of decades. This idea that Iowa is suddenly not going to compete was something I seriously considered but I think it's become more of an echo chamber used to scare Iowa fans for what's next. On3 ranked Iowa's recruiting class #8 out of 18 yesterday. That's not "not being able to compete" fellers. If Iowa maintains it's staff, I hope and prey Iowa continues to do the same thing over and over and over and I will hope it continues to yield the same results. I like winning over 70% of our games for a decade - sign me up for that outcome.
 
NorthKCHawk said:
This is true and not true. KF let Davis change things quite a bit. Shot gun, horizontal passing, more west coast type of philosophy. He even brought his own verbiage.

Brian mostly returned things to the old KOK offense, but not completely.

I think the conservative philosophy of KF will always be present (do not turn the ball over, run the ball, get in good punting position, "complimentary football"), but a new OC will be allowed to implement new concepts and ideas.

The more I think about this the most important thing Iowa must get in an OC is someone with a plan to recruit and develop playmaking QBs in whatever system is played. Davis, for all of his faults, went out and found, recruited and developed CJ (who is the most successful NFL QB in the KF era by far). KOK had Banks, Tate, and Stanzi. BF was never able to develop the QB position. It was his downfall. If I am KF, that is the only question I am asking these candidates: tell me how you are going to find and develop a legit QB.
Click to expand...
Asking a former center to develop qb’s never made any sense to most anyone that knows anything about football…
 
Remember back when things were great and Hayden Fry ran things? He'd lose his top 3 or 4 players every year early to the NFL early and then he'd just replace those players with better players and have 3 or 4 more underclassmen leave the next year early and wash and repeat. That was when Iowa really had it rolling. This Kirk fraud just likes to run into a brick wall over and over and over and expect different results guys. It's the definition of insanity, look it up.
 
oldhawk12 said:
Asking a former center to develop qb’s never made any sense to most anyone that knows anything about football…
Click to expand...
So you're suggesting you know more about football then Brian Ferentz and Kirk Ferentz lol. I'm positve you put your pants on backwards at least twice a week.
 
InGoodCo said:
So you're suggesting you know more about football then Brian Ferentz and Kirk Ferentz lol. I'm positve you put your pants on backwards at least twice a week.
Click to expand...
When my kid was 3 years old or so he had a pair of Lightning McQueen underwear. He wore 'em backwards and refused to turn 'em the right way around because then he couldn't see the picture of Lightning McQueen on the ass. Life was simpler back then.

Moral of the story, wearing your drawers backwards can be fun within a very narrow set of circumstances.
 
KF should hire both Philbin and Chryst and kick Barnett to the curb. Let Philbin and Chryst bareknuckle it out to decide who gets to be OC and who gets to be Oline coach.
 
InGoodCo said:
To be fair, a lot of teams lose that badly when they're facing top 10 or 5 teams, that is not unique to Iowa. Michigan did that to every team on their schedule. Iowa has faired well against USC recently, always did well against Washington & UCLA in the 80's and it's not like Iowa hasn't been successful against the upper half SEC teams they've had to play in bowl games over the last couple of decades. This idea that Iowa is suddenly not going to compete was something I seriously considered but I think it's become more of an echo chamber used to scare Iowa fans for what's next. On3 ranked Iowa's recruiting class #8 out of 18 yesterday. That's not "not being able to compete" fellers. If Iowa maintains it's staff, I hope and prey Iowa continues to do the same thing over and over and over and I will hope it continues to yield the same results. I like winning over 70% of our games for a decade - sign me up for that outcome.
Click to expand...

I remember Washington and UCLA handling Iowa pretty easily in the Rose Bowl games in the 80's.

In addition to what you say above, Iowa has a pretty decent record for the BIG crossover games against the east competition so has been pretty competitive against the so called tougher BIG teams. As you state, Iowa has had pretty good success against SEC teams.

Iowa may not win every game going forward in the landscape of the BIG, but all other teams know Iowa is going to be competitive and definitely be in the game. If they get that offense figured out, who knows what tier other programs will look at Iowa as in the conference.

The fact is, Iowa is one unit away to fix to be a complete team. It's going to be competitive in the BIG, no doubt, but Iowa should be able to compete right with them.
 
Last edited:
oldhawk12 said:
Asking a former center to develop qb’s never made any sense to most anyone that knows anything about football…
Click to expand...

I kinda agree. We see coaches cross over and coach a different position group that they played in the past, but I think QB is a bit different and really needs to be a coach who played the position.
 
Fryowa said:
When my kid was 3 years old or so he had a pair of Lightning McQueen underwear. He wore 'em backwards and refused to turn 'em the right way around because then he couldn't see the picture of Lightning McQueen on the ass. Life was simpler back then.

Moral of the story, wearing your drawers backwards can be fun within a very narrow set of circumstances.
Click to expand...
Lol. I'm imaging how uncomfortable that would be.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
I remember Washington and UCLA handling Iowa pretty easily in the Rose Bowl games in the 80's.

In addition to what you say above, Iowa has a pretty decent record for the BIG crossover games against the east competition so has been pretty competitive against the so called tougher BIG teams. As you state, Iowa has had pretty good success against SEC teams.

Iowa may not win every game going forward in the landscape of the BIG, but all other teams know Iowa is going to be competitive and definitely be in the game. If they get that offense figured out, who knows what tier other programs will look at Iowa as in the conference.

The fact is, Iowa is one unit away to fix to be a complete team. It's going to be competitive in the BIG, no doubt, but Iowa should be able to compete right with them.
Click to expand...
Washington did but UCLA did not. Remember, indeed no Iowa should ever forget, Ronnie Harmon-the guy with the most carries and fewest fumbles lost 3 or 4 fumbles, the replays show he just let go of the ball, going into the end zone on a couple and also dropped a TD pass. Since Harmon was a shady fucker that hang around gamblers and took illegal money in college it's kind of hard not to assume the obvious.

Heard Chuck Long discussing. The interviewer said something about UCLA's points. Chuck said we could have rolled 70 on them if it wasn't for Harmon.
 
oldhawk12 said:
Asking a former center to develop qb’s never made any sense to most anyone that knows anything about football…
Click to expand...
It'd have been one thing if the guy had some experience with it and worked his way up to it more. But he was fast tracked to OC and handed the QB coach hat. He is probably a great class room teacher. I bet BF is good at that. And motivator. Kids do seem to love the guy. But yeah as far as the fundamentals of playing the position of QB at this level he couldn't be qualified for it.

If BF had stayed more focused on the Oline and running game aspect of things I bet he'd be good at that. But as far as the passing game goes and play calling he was so so poor at that. He'd hit maybe one good play call a game in the passing game most weeks. You gotta do a hell of a lot better then that nowadays. Not that you gotta scheme guys wide open all the time. But you gotta put defenses in tough spots with covering your best guys one on one. We rarely do that...
 
Teddy said:
Washington did but UCLA did not. Remember, indeed no Iowa should ever forget, Ronnie Harmon-the guy with the most carries and fewest fumbles lost 3 or 4 fumbles, the replays show he just let go of the ball, going into the end zone on a couple and also dropped a TD pass. Since Harmon was a shady fucker that hang around gamblers and took illegal money in college it's kind of hard not to assume the obvious.

Heard Chuck Long discussing. The interviewer said something about UCLA's points. Chuck said we could have rolled 70 on them if it wasn't for Harmon.
Click to expand...
Still a sore spot for me.... Not surprised if it is for Chuck. Not even a little bit. Wish Fry woulda yanked Harmon after the 2nd one. But Harmon was a stud he had no way of knowing he was going to pull that shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top