Iowa's offense

[uihawk82]

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

Sarcasm I hope.

 

[uihawk82]

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

KOK was not a QB coach at the Dolphins

 

[Caddy]

KOK was not a QB coach at the Dolphins

KOK is Kirk's pal, and is getting paid a lot of money to underperform. Nate hasn't improved at all really. Same issues he has had since day 1. So what exactly is KOK doing? Trying to help baby Ferentz call plays?

 

[ChosenChildren]

Offensive rankings are meaningless. This is a tired narrative.

We lost 3 games by 14 points.

We also won the following close games:

Iowa State 18-17
Purdue 26-20
Minnesota 23-19
Illinois 19-10 (it was 16-10 and Illinois had the ball late in the 4th quarter at their 40 with a chance to win the game)
Neb. 27-24

Iowa could have been 12-0. They also could have been 4-8. Ferentz has constructed his teams to keep it close. Possess the ball. Don't turn it over. Play sound defense and don't give up big plays (Iowa is near the top in the nation in not giving up explosive plays). Don't commit dumb penalties. Teams rarely blow Iowa out. It is a PLAN, based on the talent of the Iowa teams. It is an identity. Fry played the same way. It is the Iowa way. It works. Iowa's offense will be better next year if the overall offensive line is better.

Yes, it is a scheme. A good scheme.

Contrast with Nebraska:

1. They don't possess the ball.
2.They turn it over.... a lot.
3. They give up a lot of big plays.

Nebraska will continue to have LOSING records in the Big Ten with their scheme. It doesn't work in the Big Ten.

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.

100% wrong. Ohio State would win with any scheme. Their players are that good.

Iowa will never win consistently with a spread concept. NEVER. We can't recruit to that scheme. This is the fatal error that Nebraska made. They turned a dynasty into total crap by trying to "open up the offense."

 

[ChosenChildren]

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.

Nebraska is running your scheme. All of the same concepts that Meyer talks about.

They stink and they will continue to stink. They can't recruit the elite athletes that Ohio State recruits. Neither can Iowa.

It is not about the X's and O's. It is about the Jimmys and the Joes.

 

[IowaTeddy]

Offensive rankings are meaningless. This is a tired narrative.

We lost 3 games by 14 points.

We also won the following close games:

Iowa State 18-17
Purdue 26-20
Minnesota 23-19
Illinois 19-10 (it was 16-10 and Illinois had the ball late in the 4th quarter at their 40 with a chance to win the game)
Neb. 27-24

Iowa could have been 12-0. They also could have been 4-8. Ferentz has constructed his teams to keep it close. Possess the ball. Don't turn it over. Play sound defense and don't give up big plays (Iowa is near the top in the nation in not giving up explosive plays). Don't commit dumb penalties. Teams rarely blow Iowa out. It is a PLAN, based on the talent of the Iowa teams. It is an identity. Fry played the same way. It is the Iowa way. It works. Iowa's offense will be better next year if the overall offensive line is better.

Yes, it is a scheme. A good scheme.

Contrast with Nebraska:

1. They don't possess the ball.
2.They turn it over.... a lot.
3. They give up a lot of big plays.

Nebraska will continue to have LOSING records in the Big Ten with their scheme. It doesn't work in the Big Ten.


100% wrong. Ohio State would win with any scheme. Their players are that good.

Iowa will never win consistently with a spread concept. NEVER. We can't recruit to that scheme. This is the fatal error that Nebraska made. They turned a dynasty into total crap by trying to "open up the offense."

Weird hill to die on. Fan forum about our team's (mediocre) offense and you're pushing back with - "our offense is fine the way it is". You're probably the guy that stands up and cheers loudly when we take consecutive knees to run out the 1:30 left on the first half clock in early season games.

Here's my 30k foot view. Iowa is a really good football team. Their defense is great. Their offense is middle of the road. Average the two and what's the result? A "really good football team". That's how it plays out. How could they get better? Improve the defense? Maybe, but that'd actually be difficult because they already play at such a high level. Improve offensive efficiency? Why not have that conversation? And to clarify, I don't think we're going to influence Kirk But I love football and enjoy the dialogue.

To unpack it a little further, do you really think that Iowa opening up their offense with more modern, attacking schemes would harm our defense? To me, that's what you're saying. Do you really believe that? If so, would it negatively impact our defense more or less than our current offense's frequent 3 & outs? How about an offensive scheme that could generate 1 more scoring drive per game (on average)? Imagine the pressure that would lift off our defense, instead of forcing them to defend a 1 score game for the entire 2nd half (against MN, Illinois, Nebraska, etc. etc.) ?

 

[Motigerhawk]

Xs nd Os Im not great at. But there are 1000 offense in college football. I wish we would adjust and be flexible. Put our play makers in position to make plays.

I would like to see Young and Goodson in the backfield together with Mansell lined up in the pistol with Young and Goodson on either side. Imagine what you could do out of an option package with those guys. Throw in the pass option out of it and there you go.

Offenses have evolved in college to te point that they are evolving in the NFL. Yet we are still using the typeof offense seen in the 90s under this regime.

We are such a transition program that we have to adjust almost yearly to our strengths and weaknesses. We seem to be trying put a round peg in a scare hole half the time.

 

[SpiderRico]

I've said this in a previous thread and I'll say it here as well....

This year's offensive issues can really be summed up in one thing.....lack of redzone efficiency. In the previous 4 years, we averaged about a 65% redzone TD %. This year it was 52%. If we were just "average" in the redzone, we are likely 11-1. We were more explosive in the passing game this year than at any time in KF's tenure...we had a total of 32 25+ passing plays. BF has brought the passing game out of the dark ages of the GD regime. Unfortunately, and for reasons I'm not smart enough to know, the running game has significantly regressed. If you had asked me which of those two would have suffered when BF took over, I would have chosen the passing game every time and twice on Sunday. But it's been the exact opposite.

If we can figure out the run game, which should then translate to better redzone TD efficiency, we have the chance to be REALLY good the next 4-5 years because we know the defense isn't going anywhere.

We'll see what happens....but I'm excited as hell for the next 5 year period.

 

[NCHawker]

I'll end with this. you can have a top 10 defense AND a top 30 offense. One does not preclude the other. Some would have you believe that you must pick. Its a false choice.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

[QUOTE="NikeHawk21, post: 1908095, member: 80935"]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.[/QUOTE]


You are gunna have a shitty run game with a lacking O-line. The O-line is what makes the run game.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

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.

Disagree. Wisconsin has always seemed to have formidable WR's or TE's. They have not had the drought that Iowa has had at the WR position.

Just because a team puts up that many rushing numbers isn't because they have shitty WR's, it's because that is what works for them, a team like Wisconsin. A jumbo great line and nice RB's. YOu can't say because Wisconsin puts up such gawdy rushing numbers that they automatically have a crappy receiving game. Not the case.

Any quality Div 1 RB can run thru holes by a great O-line and rip off 6-8 yrds a shot. A lot of RB's would have success in Wisky's offense, not just Jonathan Taylor. It's the line that makes everything happen there.

 

[NikeHawk21]

[QUOTE="NikeHawk21, post: 1908095, member: 80935"]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.

You are gunna have a shitty run game with a lacking O-line. The O-line is what makes the run game.[/QUOTE]
So we’ve had a lacking Oline for the last several years despite having a head coach who is an offensive line guru, an offensive coordinator who was an Olinemen, and we’ve produced several NFL linemen?

Something doesn’t add up in that equation, and that’s my point.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

You are gunna have a shitty run game with a lacking O-line. The O-line is what makes the run game.

So we’ve had a lacking Oline for the last several years despite having a head coach who is an offensive line guru, an offensive coordinator who was an Olinemen, and we’ve produced several NFL linemen?

Something doesn’t add up in that equation, and that’s my point.[/QUOTE]

You are absolutely correct. It is baffling. They put guys in the NFL but seem to have holes as a unit on the field. I was doing a lot of shuffling of players for injuries and various reasons throughout the last season as well.

 

[NCHawker]

Do we dare get our hopes up for this year? I've grown weary of the frustration by 1pm on Saturday.

 

[NCHawker]

Offensive rankings are meaningless. This is a tired narrative.

We lost 3 games by 14 points.

We also won the following close games:

Iowa State 18-17
Purdue 26-20
Minnesota 23-19
Illinois 19-10 (it was 16-10 and Illinois had the ball late in the 4th quarter at their 40 with a chance to win the game)
Neb. 27-24

Iowa could have been 12-0. They also could have been 4-8. Ferentz has constructed his teams to keep it close. Possess the ball. Don't turn it over. Play sound defense and don't give up big plays (Iowa is near the top in the nation in not giving up explosive plays). Don't commit dumb penalties. Teams rarely blow Iowa out. It is a PLAN, based on the talent of the Iowa teams. It is an identity. Fry played the same way. It is the Iowa way. It works. Iowa's offense will be better next year if the overall offensive line is better.

Yes, it is a scheme. A good scheme.

Contrast with Nebraska:

1. They don't possess the ball.
2.They turn it over.... a lot.
3. They give up a lot of big plays.

Nebraska will continue to have LOSING records in the Big Ten with their scheme. It doesn't work in the Big Ten.


100% wrong. Ohio State would win with any scheme. Their players are that good.

Iowa will never win consistently with a spread concept. NEVER. We can't recruit to that scheme. This is the fatal error that Nebraska made. They turned a dynasty into total crap by trying to "open up the offense."

Putting up points and playing great defense are not mutually exclusive.

 

[cincyhawk]

The OL must improve. That's it, folks

Specifically, the interior of the line. In addition, our tight end catching ability needs to be elite for Iowa's offense to excell.

The whole offensive season pivots on the interior line's ability to pick up the Mike blitz and handle the nose, and Petras's ability to thread the needle to tight ends against covering LB. We'll know a lot after the Purdue game.

 

[cincyhawk]

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.

Using the middle of the field leads to more INTs. The middle throw over the lb and in front of the safety is the most difficult read and most difficult throw to make for a qb. Not sure a first-year starter is up for that.

 

[cincyhawk]

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.

Meh. RB, yes. But not line. They run an easier scheme to execute than Iowa. That makes it easier for a mediocre lineman to just bull rush their assignments. They, accordingly, just get really big guys and run them straight at the D. When the D line is more athletic and can slip their blocks on the interior, Wisconsin gets in trouble. See every OSU Wisconsin game, ever.

 

[Northside Hawk]

Six more days to go.

Five till Illinois-Wisconsin.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

So we’ve had a lacking Oline for the last several years despite having a head coach who is an offensive line guru, an offensive coordinator who was an Olinemen, and we’ve produced several NFL linemen?

Something doesn’t add up in that equation, and that’s my point.

You are absolutely correct. It is baffling. They put guys in the NFL but seem to have holes as a unit on the field. I was doing a lot of shuffling of players for injuries and various reasons throughout the last season as well.[/QUOTE]

You are right...with the number of guys we put in the NFL on the oline...it doesn't add up.

I'm not sure it's been a complete lack of good offensive line players...I believe Iowa's issues boil down to depth at the offensive line positions. We don't have enough of them ready to play. I have no doubt if Jackson, Banwart, and Schott don't go down with injuries last year...our offensive numbers look much different. How many sacks did we give up at Michigan and against Penn State? We gave up 11 sacks in those two games. What's even more amazing is that Iowa had a 19 TFL in those games. That's ridiculous and you can't be successful offensively giving up negative plays.

You can call it a coaching or a recruiting issue...whatever you want, but Iowa just doesn't have the depth necessary to compete when injuries force them to juggle the o-line. Now, if you look at this year...I think it's different. Adding Cronk is huge...you now have three solid starters Jackson, Linderbaum, and Cronk, and four experienced players competing for two spots. Kallenberger can play tackle, etc.