DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Rudy rudy rudy rudy.
Is there another Weisman sitting down right now?
- Thread starter SpiderRico
- Start date
Rudy rudy rudy rudy.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
Bingo. Of course Ferentz "thinks" he's playing the best players. But we've seen him make those miscalls before.
Just as he "thinks" he's playing a low risk strategy which gives his team the best chance to win. It doesn't.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Look, Ferentz is human and makes mistakes just like anyone else. I have no issue with that. What I do have an issue with is the insistence, by Jon and others on here, that he's never made a mistake in matters of personnel. That's a ludicrous contention to make. It's happened before and it will happen again because no one is a perfect judge of talent.
And not once have I made the contention that any player is definitely better or worse than another player. What I've said is that, given our record of 2-2, with one of those losses being to the 116th ranked team, at home, there are certainly areas of concern that MIGHT make sense to be addressed by one of the other 85 scholarship players (or even walk-ons) that are currently on the team. Yes, it's possible that some of those changes may fall flat on their face, but how is that any worse than what's already happened?
And not once have I made the contention that any player is definitely better or worse than another player. What I've said is that, given our record of 2-2, with one of those losses being to the 116th ranked team, at home, there are certainly areas of concern that MIGHT make sense to be addressed by one of the other 85 scholarship players (or even walk-ons) that are currently on the team. Yes, it's possible that some of those changes may fall flat on their face, but how is that any worse than what's already happened?
BSpringsteen
Well-Known Member
First off, not everyone can practice great, because for the most competitive people, having real competition lets them take it to another level that can't be simulated.
Secondly, let's decide that Bullock doesn't get hurt. They say that Mossad is tearing it up in practice, but yet it takes our top two RB's to get hurt for him to see a meaningful snap? We're not even running many two back sets to feature two backs that are "practicing well."
It's not that I doubt that Mossad eventually gets in, it's that I doubt that he becomes the starter or the feature back, when it is apparent to anyone watching that is exactly what he should be, and if he does, it is sometime in the next few weeks.
Look at Biels. Do you think a freshman is practicing better than Danny O'Brien? Do you think he has a better command of the offense, or is a better leader? Probably not, but he made the change.
I don't doubt Kirk is putting players out there that in his mind gives them the best chance, it's that I doubt he will actually bench a player that isn't getting it done.
And no where is it more apparent than at QB. Does James give us the best chance to win? Maybe he does, but he is also not winning. He is the QB - the captain of the offense and the single player most able to affect the game.
I realize I am coming from a place of ignorance, but I have a hard time believing that any of our other QB's could be worse.
Secondly, let's decide that Bullock doesn't get hurt. They say that Mossad is tearing it up in practice, but yet it takes our top two RB's to get hurt for him to see a meaningful snap? We're not even running many two back sets to feature two backs that are "practicing well."
It's not that I doubt that Mossad eventually gets in, it's that I doubt that he becomes the starter or the feature back, when it is apparent to anyone watching that is exactly what he should be, and if he does, it is sometime in the next few weeks.
Look at Biels. Do you think a freshman is practicing better than Danny O'Brien? Do you think he has a better command of the offense, or is a better leader? Probably not, but he made the change.
I don't doubt Kirk is putting players out there that in his mind gives them the best chance, it's that I doubt he will actually bench a player that isn't getting it done.
And no where is it more apparent than at QB. Does James give us the best chance to win? Maybe he does, but he is also not winning. He is the QB - the captain of the offense and the single player most able to affect the game.
I realize I am coming from a place of ignorance, but I have a hard time believing that any of our other QB's could be worse.
BSpringsteen
Well-Known Member
You are 100% correct about this, Garmon too... but Weisman hadn't seen any meaningful time yet, and then rushes for over 200 yards.
That's a problem.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Its not a problem. He was playing FB because thats where he best helped the team. At the time we had productive RBs and him playing FB gave us our best 11 on the field which is exactly what so many of you claim ti be wanting. You guys are actining like he was wasting away on the bench, he wasnt. He saw significant action and was being utilized in short yardage and passing situations as a runner and receiver.
Im now convinced that people complaining about the best players not playing are merely doing so from residual butt hurt from some HS coach not playing them in HS when they could have easily taken state given the chance.
whammer33024
Well-Known Member
so now you want iowa playing 3 running backs? they were playing a TRUE FRESHMAN at running back because he earned the time. but i'm sure you already knew that
I don't question that weisman should be the starting running back. I question why he only had 2 carries in the 1st 2 games. Those 2 carries were enough for me to know that he gave us our best chance to score on 1st and goal from the 3 against Iowa state. I think that's an example of not using to right personal at the right time. Running him in that situation doesn't mean he has to become our primary back.
BSpringsteen
Well-Known Member
DBAHawkFan
Well-Known Member
But don't you see, the FB isn't used in the Iowa offense except for lead and pass blocking. To give them a few carries a game would be slightly unpredictable.
What I don't get is back in 2009 we would bring in Wegher for goal line situations, as he had the ability to go over the pile.
Yet nearly every other year we've stuck with our primary RB. Now Coker made sense to stay in as he was a big RB. But against ISU, against NIU, and any other time we get inside the 5 yard line.....wouldn't it make sense to put your big back in that situation?
I think a lot of fans would like to see smarter subs, not just random.
What I don't get is back in 2009 we would bring in Wegher for goal line situations, as he had the ability to go over the pile.
Yet nearly every other year we've stuck with our primary RB. Now Coker made sense to stay in as he was a big RB. But against ISU, against NIU, and any other time we get inside the 5 yard line.....wouldn't it make sense to put your big back in that situation?
I think a lot of fans would like to see smarter subs, not just random.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I'm now convinced that people that continue to use the term "butt hurt" are speaking from a perspective of experience.
BSpringsteen
Well-Known Member
Or you know, design your offense around the talent that you have.
If you have two legit RB's, and one is 240 lbs and can basically be his own blocker, and the other guy is a speed guy, why not play and run them both so that teams don't know what to expect. If you have a third guy, as amazingly enough, Iowa has had more often than not, why not put one in the slot and run jet sweeps from there.
The whole point is that we have the ability to not be predictable, and yet we always are.
If you have two legit RB's, and one is 240 lbs and can basically be his own blocker, and the other guy is a speed guy, why not play and run them both so that teams don't know what to expect. If you have a third guy, as amazingly enough, Iowa has had more often than not, why not put one in the slot and run jet sweeps from there.
The whole point is that we have the ability to not be predictable, and yet we always are.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Yup. All were critical.
And his blocking has been pretty stellar also.
To cite Wiesman,who went from walk onto starting at FB over those who had more experience with the program, and then went to starting RB after injuries, as an example of KF not playing his best players is ******* stupid.
BSpringsteen
Well-Known Member
That's not what I am suggesting.
Let us also not forget that while he was a walk on to Iowa, he received a scholarship to a Div 1 program, and was 1st team all state in high school.
I'm just suggesting that we had a talent that wasn't being utilized optimally in the current system, not that he is better or worse than other guys we have.
I was thinking about this the other day. I think JVB works better in the shotgun, so why not mix in some shotgun no huddle with Bullock (when he gets back) and then use Weisman when JVB is under center? Both are good runners, so no team could say that one formation is strictly a run or pass formation. Can we also get rid of the bubble screen? They are a waste of a down. I thought when GD got here, we would see more quick slants and maybe a little more shotgun.
Stanzi
Well-Known Member
This says a lot about Kirk. It says he's loyal to a fault, which we've always known. There is no way JVB deserves to keep starting without hesitation. He is currently the worst QB in the B1G. Even when he has all day to throw he's still missing his receivers or throwing the ball away for no apparent reason. I don't know what happened to him, but he just doesn't have it this season.
Stanzi
Well-Known Member
I do love your blind, unquestioning faith, and refusal to even consider that Ferentz doesn't do everything well.
Here is the thing. I wrote about this in another thread.
KF's program is based on running fewer plays with perfect execution. To get to the point of perfect execution, you need to do something over and over. There is only so much time to do this off season, so most of this learning comes in season. Hence, once a player gets set into a position, they are going to get the lion's share of the limited snaps, because that is what they will need to eventually get to the level of perfection KF wants.
So, if you don't get the job in summer, you are pretty much out of luck until someone gets hurt or shows that they are not learning.
Other teams run a lot more plays and personnel sets. They don't need players to perform perfectly throughout the game, but only within a select group of plays. These types of teams base their offense on creating mismatches by isolating certain players in certain situations. This is different than the Iowa system which is based on every player being more fundamentally sound than the other player. That is why you only see young guys get on the field at Iowa when it is absolutely necessary and why fewer guys get reps.
KF's program is based on running fewer plays with perfect execution. To get to the point of perfect execution, you need to do something over and over. There is only so much time to do this off season, so most of this learning comes in season. Hence, once a player gets set into a position, they are going to get the lion's share of the limited snaps, because that is what they will need to eventually get to the level of perfection KF wants.
So, if you don't get the job in summer, you are pretty much out of luck until someone gets hurt or shows that they are not learning.
Other teams run a lot more plays and personnel sets. They don't need players to perform perfectly throughout the game, but only within a select group of plays. These types of teams base their offense on creating mismatches by isolating certain players in certain situations. This is different than the Iowa system which is based on every player being more fundamentally sound than the other player. That is why you only see young guys get on the field at Iowa when it is absolutely necessary and why fewer guys get reps.
