Iowa's offense

[NCHawker]

There is a narrative that Iowa must continue to evolve (or something) their offense if they have a chance to beat Wisconsin...and or win the West. So I'm trying to understand exactly what that means in X and O language. I think it means less I formation with a fullback, but if I were pressed I could not clearly articulate what changes should be talking place.

If any of you X and O people think you know...please share it. I'll presume you are more knowledgeable about football than the staff that is in place....or you've bought into a new approach that they have not bought into yet.

All I know is averaging low 20's per game is pretty lame, ranking in the 90s' is pretty lame.But I don't know whats' to be done.

 

[homes]

Keeping with your evolution based query, I like to think the average fan, like me, takes a more rudimentary/Cro-Magnon approach to solving problems, such as - Score More Points, Just Do That!!

 

[ChosenChildren]

The OL must improve. That's it, folks

 

[NikeHawk21]

The OL must improve. That's it, folks

I agree that the Oline needs to improve, but Wirfs and Jackson were all conference and Linderbaum was Honorable mention as well. I know our guards struggled but there is no way they were that stinking bad and those other three were all conference good. It’s just not possible to me.

I maintain that a big part of this is a scheme/coaching issue. Over the last several years people have figured out how to destroy our zone running plays.

For the amount of NFL linemen Iowa has produced, and you look at the rushing stats over the last several years, something doesn’t add up. To me it’s pretty easy to see that’s a scheme problem then.

 

[SpiderRico]

For me, it means a few things:

1. Get rid of the fullback and go to more 11 and 12 personnel in order to clean out the box and give cleaner lanes for the running game.

2. Use more tempo. Not necessarily no huddle, but a little more "giddy-up" within the possession.

3. Don't be afraid to go more bunch sets, diamond sets, or other "non-traditional" sets to confuse the d-backs and get a WR running free.

4. USE THE MIDDLE OF THE FIELD!! Posts, slants, square-ins, seams, etc.

5. Use zone blocking as a change of pace rather than the bread and butter. Back in the 90's and 00's, when middle and inside linebackers were 250-260 lbs and DL were slow as molasses, zone blocking was great because you could cause a mismatch using a smaller OLs speed and athleticism. Now, with defenses smaller and faster, zone blocking is mostly mitigated because those guys can just shoot gaps all day long. So a gap or hat-on-hat blocking scheme where you just envelop the defense seems to be working better these days.

6. By using the middle of the field more, you can employ more of a dual threat QB because he doesn't necessarily have to be able to zing the field-side out route with regularity. This gives the opposing D an extra guy they have to account for which just opens things up even more.

 

[okeefe4prez]

I know our guards struggled but there is no way they were that stinking bad and those other three were all conference good. It’s just not possible to me.

Go back and rewatch the games without the energy of the moment. Watch the middle of the line. It's that bad, dude. It is really hard to cover up an inadequacy on the line. If you have one bad guy, the defense will throw all the pressure at him. And after two drives, it starts getting in their heads. The center starts to worry about pick ups. The tackles get worried about turning their guy over on a stunt and become susceptible to the OLB blitz. The whole operation just turns to shit when guys stop playing assignment football and there were a lot of plays where that happened this year because our 3 studs had a helluva lot of plays where they were trying to account for other assignments.

It's like having a shitty corner on defense. The other team is just going to throw at that guy until the defense does something about it. Then, when they start cheating the safety up, they open another hole.

 

[NikeHawk21]

Go back and rewatch the games without the energy of the moment. Watch the middle of the line. It's that bad, dude. It is really hard to cover up an inadequacy on the line. If you have one bad guy, the defense will throw all the pressure at him. And after two drives, it starts getting in their heads. The center starts to worry about pick ups. The tackles get worried about turning their guy over on a stunt and become susceptible to the OLB blitz. The whole operation just turns to shit when guys stop playing assignment football and there were a lot of plays where that happened this year because our 3 studs had a helluva lot of plays where they were trying to account for other assignments.

It's like having a shitty corner on defense. The other team is just going to throw at that guy until the defense does something about it. Then, when they start cheating the safety up, they open another hole.

I understand it was bad, but the lack of the run game has been a problem now dating back several years. Did you see Jon Miller’s tweet about Iowa offensive ranks?

The point of my post is that this has been an ongoing problem for years throughout many different groupings of players. I know our coaches can coach oline fundamentals and I know we’ve had talented guys that have made it to the NFL. Again to me all roads lead to this being a SCHEME problem.

 

[okeefe4prez]

I understand it was bad, but the lack of the run game has been a problem now dating back several years. Did you see Jon Miller’s tweet about Iowa offensive ranks?

The point of my post is that this has been an ongoing problem for years throughout many different groupings of players. I know our coaches can coach oline fundamentals and I know we’ve had talented guys that have made it to the NFL. Again to me all roads lead to this being a SCHEME problem.

Look, I don't want to disrespect the guys who have played at Iowa, but we have basically had MAC level WRs for years. Our offense has seen 9 man fronts for years. The line ain't as good as it was back in the day. When you can't make a team pay for loading the box and you have just an okay and not stellar o-line and you have purely average or slightly above average RBs toting the rock a bunch of the time, your run game is going to suck. I think the personnel is slowly evolving so that teams are going to get torched if they load the box against us and BF will right the ship.

 

[NikeHawk21]

Look, I don't want to disrespect the guys who have played at Iowa, but we have basically had MAC level WRs for years. Our offense has seen 9 man fronts for years. The line ain't as good as it was back in the day. When you can't make a team pay for loading the box and you have just an okay and not stellar o-line and you have purely average or slightly above average RBs toting the rock a bunch of the time, your run game is going to suck. I think the personnel is slowly evolving so that teams are going to get torched if they load the box against us and BF will right the ship.

Agree to disagree. Wisconsin has had many of the same issues as Iowa in terms of finding talent at WR in the past, but they’ve still dominated teams on the ground who were selling out to stop the run. They found a scheme that works, Iowa’s scheme doesn’t, at least the way it is being used in its current form.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Agree to disagree. Wisconsin has had many of the same issues as Iowa in terms of finding talent at WR in the past, but they’ve still dominated teams on the ground who were selling out to stop the run. They found a scheme that works, Iowa’s scheme doesn’t, at least the way it is being used in its current form.

I honestly think Wisconsin has been materially better than us at o-line and RB. I don't think we're even close to them across all 5 line positions and at tailback.

 

[uihawk82]

There is a narrative that Iowa must continue to evolve (or something) their offense if they have a chance to beat Wisconsin...and or win the West. So I'm trying to understand exactly what that means in X and O language. I think it means less I formation with a fullback, but if I were pressed I could not clearly articulate what changes should be talking place.

If any of you X and O people think you know...please share it. I'll presume you are more knowledgeable about football than the staff that is in place....or you've bought into a new approach that they have not bought into yet.

All I know is averaging low 20's per game is pretty lame, ranking in the 90s' is pretty lame.But I don't know whats' to be done.

#1, get the running game back up to at least top 40 or so. Posters have put up running stats and rankings in all of KF's years and you can see it was much better in the first 10 years. Defenses are too fast for Iowa's outside zone and the opponents try to penetrate any crack in the line as soon as possible to mess up that blocking scheme.

I rewatched the Nebby game a few times and in the first half when Goodson was running well the outside zone was used on a couple times. It was all inside zone, double teams and getting to linebackers and some pulling and trapping blockers. There were some nice holes and Goodson was seeing and getting through them.

#2 As someone said use the middle of the field more in the passing game. Yes it can sometimes be more risky if a ball is tipped or a receiver tips a ball up to lead to interceptions but if the scheme is right at least one receiver can be very open. Look at the end of the Nebby game how open our guys were, some of which might have been because NEbby was guarding the sidelines with little time left in the game, but we should be able to have some route trees with a receiver going 20 yards over the middle each play and another receiver breaking underneath that route to an open area.

3# Use the TEnds.

4#. Practice, Practice, Practice several pass plays for third and short to medium to the point where receivers know how far to go downfield and to get the timing down.

 

[uihawk82]

Also, if the next QB is 10% more accurate than Nate to get more completions that will help. Not bagging on Nate as he improved and made a lot of great throws but that better completion rate just moves the chains so much better.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Also, if the next QB is 10% more accurate than Nate to get more completions that will help. Not bagging on Nate as he improved and made a lot of great throws but that better completion rate just moves the chains so much better.

Good Nate looks like a lock to start in the NFL. Bad Nate makes you want to avert your eyes. It's always hard to know how many of the terrible passes are just him throwing to a spot and the guy not being there, though.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

Not really Xs and Os here, but having a bigger line with a cowbell running back (like Greene, or Wisco's Taylor) would make a difference. Wisconsin has been just been better with the jimmy's and joes and their skill positions and they lean on them with their big offensive lines. Add the suggestions above with a renewed effort on the recruiting front.

 

[IowaTeddy]

I think we all agree with the schematic frustrations, to an extent. But talent is important too. How many WRs, RBs, QBs has Iowa really put into the NFL in the last 5-10 years. Answer = very few. The last RB was Shonn Greene. I can't remember the last WR. At QB, Beathard is a legit backup pro QB, but he's it. If we want to run the ball like Wisconsin, we'll need some NFL caliber running backs like they've got.

As for scheme, I this could be as big and long of a conversation as people want. But the main talking point should be about management of the "numbers game" in run play design and formation. I think a lot of the Fox Sports TV stuff with Urban Meyer is actually pretty cringe. Every single thing he says is an analogy to his national championship year at Ohio Sate. But he has some great points, bringing the fans into a coach's perspective. This video on the origin story of spread power run scheme and RPO is really cool. Urban basically breaks the game down into the one true (ultimate) matchup: Blocking v. Tackling. That's what it's all about. ...How can we design plays and offense to get numbers advantages (more blockers than tacklers) .

You can see how the RPO / spread running teams win, and how Iowa often loses. And I think it's really important to look at Urban Meyer's teams as examples, particularly OSU and Florida. Those were two incredibly prolific offenses and they were built on a mix of power and speed utilizing run concepts. The point is, they were running teams. Hell, Tim Tebow could literally barely throw the football.

Iowa's current run design is stuck in an old notion of what "run plays" are supposed to look like. Long story short, our formations and personnel groupings crowd the box. This leads to free tacklers in the backfield.

 

[uihawk82]

Good Nate looks like a lock to start in the NFL. Bad Nate makes you want to avert your eyes. It's always hard to know how many of the terrible passes are just him throwing to a spot and the guy not being there, though.

Yes, Nate is an enigma but I have seen him make a lot of throws where it looks like the receiver may have took a little different angle which makes it incomplete. That being said if Nate gets the right coordinator, a run game, and pass protection and better QB coaching (maybe it is his footwork or shoulder angles opening up sometimes, who knows) he might impress.

 

[uihawk82]

I think we all agree with the schematic frustrations, to an extent. But talent is important too. How many WRs, RBs, QBs has Iowa really put into the NFL in the last 5-10 years. Answer = very few. The last RB was Shonn Greene. I can't remember the last WR. At QB, Beathard is a legit backup pro QB, but he's it. If we want to run the ball like Wisconsin, we'll need some NFL caliber running backs like they've got.

As for scheme, I this could be as big and long of a conversation as people want. But the main talking point should be about management of the "numbers game" in run play design and formation. I think a lot of the Fox Sports TV stuff with Urban Meyer is actually pretty cringe. Every single thing he says is an analogy to his national championship year at Ohio Sate. But he has some great points, bringing the fans into a coach's perspective. This video on the origin story of spread power run scheme and RPO is really cool. Urban basically breaks the game down into the one true (ultimate) matchup: Blocking v. Tackling. That's what it's all about. ...How can we design plays and offense to get numbers advantages (more blockers than tacklers)

 

[okeefe4prez]

better QB coaching

He's already getting the best in the business, pal.

 

[NikeHawk21]

I honestly think Wisconsin has been materially better than us at o-line and RB. I don't think we're even close to them across all 5 line positions and at tailback.

I would agree Wisconsin has out recruited us at those positions, but again to me that’s not the whole story. The differences between the two teams is astounding, where the recruiting differences, at Oline is marginal, they’ve had way better backs for sure. Again I still think a big part of the problem has been schematic.

 

[KCHawkeye]

I agree that the Oline needs to improve, but Wirfs and Jackson were all conference and Linderbaum was Honorable mention as well. I know our guards struggled but there is no way they were that stinking bad and those other three were all conference good. It’s just not possible to me.

I maintain that a big part of this is a scheme/coaching issue. Over the last several years people have figured out how to destroy our zone running plays.

For the amount of NFL linemen Iowa has produced, and you look at the rushing stats over the last several years, something doesn’t add up. To me it’s pretty easy to see that’s a scheme problem then.

Scheme/Coaching issues. Yazzzz!