theboat
Well-Known Member
what were the numbers in 2004? They had to be 50/50 at best.
Is Weisman a 25 carry per game back??
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
what were the numbers in 2004? They had to be 50/50 at best.
1hawkeye1
Well-Known Member
FB in the NFL is going the way of the Edsel.
thejumper5
Well-Known Member
According to that site, Iowa threw the ball 384 times and ran the ball 414 times. Now, Drew Tate had 89 rushing attempts for -76 yards. If we assume that most, if not all, of those rushing attempts were designed pass plays, that means that Iowa actually called more passes than runs that year, something that was likely also the case in 1999 and 2000 when the numbers were also really close. I was just passing along the raw numbers in my last post.
Here are run % and offensive scoring rank in the Big Ten since 2001. There's a strong correlation between running % and scoring for Iowa. Wisconsin is also almost always towards the top in scoring and 65-70% run.
Note: I did forget 2003 in a previous post so we have went above 60% 4 times since 2001 and those were the top 4 scoring years under KF.
2001 60% 1st
2002 64% 1st
2003 62% 5th
2004 52% 7th
2005 52% 7th
2006 50% 8th
2007 54% 11th
2008 62% 2nd (3rd if including Nebraska)
2009 54% 11th
2010 55% 7th
2011 52% 6th
2012 51% 11th
Last edited:
FreedComanche
Banned
Curious what everyone thinks about the above numbers.
thejumper5
Well-Known Member
I think there are two ways to interpret the numbers. Either Iowa is scoring more because they run more, or they're running more because they score more. I'm inclined to think the second scenario is the case, and there are two reasons why I think the causation would be in that direction.
First, they score more when they're in the red zone more, and I think it's likely that when they're in the red zone, they run the ball in more. Second, they score more causing larger fourth quarter leads. When they lead in the fourth quarter, they run the ball more to kill the clock. An extra 3-5 runs per game in the red zone and in the fourth quarter make a huge difference in terms of percentages.
thejumper5
Well-Known Member
To go along with this, when Iowa trails in the 4th quarter--likely because they've failed to score the rest of the game--they have to pass the ball to try to get back into the game.
I think if we made a conscious decision to get above 60% it would help our scoring. It should be our strength most years because of the natural talent in the midwest. Wisconsin is around 65% every year and also toward the top in scoring most years (with similar talent). Wisconsin under Bielema appeared to be very consciously trying to run the ball in more situations to get to the 65%.
Last edited:
Iowa has to have an effective running game to be an effective offense. Partially due to the fact that Kirk loves to run the ball, partially due to the fact that he has had serious trouble getting B10 level QBs and WRs to Iowa City while he has been able to pull in solid/good recruits at the OL and RB spots.
Did you not see the giants win the super bowl just 18 months ago with two big burly fullbacks, and lets the the H-back position as a FB.
There are still a lot of deep I-formation running teams in the NFL who use a fullback on a good percentage of plays.
I think you are right on the money. Going to use some round numbers here. If the Hawks can get off 75 plays a game and we see a split of 25 passing plays to 50 running plays then you would have a 66% run to 33% pass ratio.
KF likes balance and the passing game should check in at around a 60% completion rate. Last Saturday the yards per carry averaged right around 5 and completions around 10. So you need 2 rushing plays for every completion to be balanced. As the receiving corp gels, and add a big gainer or two over the top to the mix, we might see the passing yards average approach 15. So 15 / 25 passing @ 15 yds avg = 225. Put in 50 running plays averaging 5 yds/carry and you get 250 yds rushing netting 475 total yards
.A 60% distribution doesn't give enough meaningful carries to backs farther down the list w/ a collection of 50 carries.
A 50% distribution works out to 25, 13, 6, 3 with a remainder of 3.
Some of Rudock's runs aren't planned and he is the #3 rusher right now. 6 sounds about right for him. So they call his number 3 times and he ad libs 3 times. Don't know if I would take many away from MW. One thing to consider is that those runs are spread around w/ the rotation. It's not like he is pounding for an entire half or even series so the 25 carry load seems reasonable for him. I could see them ramp up for LD over the next few games so he might get 9 or 10 carries in Ames and I hope they get JC up to 7 or 8.
From the way I see it at least 65% of the plays are going to be on the ground planned or otherwise. If they can up the tempo slightly and get 80 plays off then the percentage might approach 60% but I doubt we see it go below that.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
One thing to remember....
Correlation doesn't equal causation. Just because our best years in scoring come in the years that we had the highest run ratio, doesn't mean that we scored more because we ran. In fact, it was most likely the opposite. We ran more because we scored more. Most teams, with the lead, will run the ball to milk clock. Most teams that are behind will pass the ball more to attempt to come back. Typically under Ferentz, our best scoring years came in years where we were equally good at running and passing the ball so the defense couldn't key off of one thing. Then, when we got the lead, we would milk the clock with running plays. So normally we will be 50/50 thru 3 quarters in the run/pass ratio and then run the heck out of the ball in the 4th quarter leading to a final ratio of about 60/40.
Correlation doesn't equal causation. Just because our best years in scoring come in the years that we had the highest run ratio, doesn't mean that we scored more because we ran. In fact, it was most likely the opposite. We ran more because we scored more. Most teams, with the lead, will run the ball to milk clock. Most teams that are behind will pass the ball more to attempt to come back. Typically under Ferentz, our best scoring years came in years where we were equally good at running and passing the ball so the defense couldn't key off of one thing. Then, when we got the lead, we would milk the clock with running plays. So normally we will be 50/50 thru 3 quarters in the run/pass ratio and then run the heck out of the ball in the 4th quarter leading to a final ratio of about 60/40.
eyekwah
Well-Known Member
Field position will greatly influence how many carries a back will get. From the Iowa's goal line to the forty and from the 15 yd line to the opponents goal line is where Weisman should get his carries. Between Iowa's 40 and the opponents 15 yd line is where the other corp of backs can best be used.
PimScutney
Well-Known Member
The real question is with Daniels and Canzeri healthy, SHOULD he be a 25 carry back.
Watching that Hayden Press conference was the singularly most amazing thing I have seen on this website in the many many years I have been here.
I grew up during the Hayden ERA and attended football camp at Iowa in HS. I remember a VERY brief private conversation I had with Hayden. He said, "son whateva ya do, don't date the Girls that do." Translate, stay away from $luts.
Well, I think running the ball a lot works in college, just look at Wisconsin. Wisconsin's stated goal if you listen to Barry Alvarez is to run the ball a lot and they are above 60% every year (usually around 65% or more).
Wisconsin has finished in the top 4 in scoring in the Big Ten 8 out of the past 10 years. Wisconsin finished 1st (3 times), 3rd (2 times), and 4th (3 times) in the the last 10 years 2003 to 2012. The last 5 years they have been 4th, 1st, 1st, 1st and 4th in scoring. Iowa has been top 4 in scoring only 1 time in the last ten years.
Last edited:
DTF
Well-Known Member
He can't sustain it. Against the better competition he is the guy that should pound it early and wear the defense down for the others. Ideally he should be at FB. But until Daniels can tote the rock for 20+ carries he will be our number 1 back. And as the number 1 he is an 18 carry guy. I see the best division being 18 for Weisman, 12 for Daniels, 8 for canzeri, 3-4 for bullock, and 4-5 for rudock. Rudock should have a couple scrambles and a couple designed runs a game to keep teams honest.
weisman's numbers come from a combination of two things. 1) teams sell out on the run so when he gets through the 1st level he has no one left to tackle him. If he had breakaway speed to go with the power (ala Shonn Greene) then he would have and above 6 or 7 ypc because he wouldn't get caught from behind. Daniels I think will have that. The best iowa backs have a combo of power and speed...Shonn Greene, jewel Hampton (still wonder how good he could have been at Iowa), Fred russell (little bowling ball). 2) I honestly think the line has been better for Weisman than people realize. They got him the yards he had against msu. You don't have to send people backwards 10 yds to be a good blocker. Sometimes it is just being smart enough to keep a guy from making a tackle. Remember how good our running game was after the left side got injured? Msu the line was 100% and really finding a groove. Then at psu that all changed.
Weisman is healthy and that helps. The line will get better and that helps. But he isn't going to put up 5 ypc against the teams like osu, mich, and even msu (didn't do it last year). The need for a home run threat is too much to keep giving him the ball 25 times. I actually think it is better for the team to take half or a full step back by using a different tb so he can play FB and we can take 4+ steps forward at that position. When he was at FB the holes were huge.
weisman's numbers come from a combination of two things. 1) teams sell out on the run so when he gets through the 1st level he has no one left to tackle him. If he had breakaway speed to go with the power (ala Shonn Greene) then he would have and above 6 or 7 ypc because he wouldn't get caught from behind. Daniels I think will have that. The best iowa backs have a combo of power and speed...Shonn Greene, jewel Hampton (still wonder how good he could have been at Iowa), Fred russell (little bowling ball). 2) I honestly think the line has been better for Weisman than people realize. They got him the yards he had against msu. You don't have to send people backwards 10 yds to be a good blocker. Sometimes it is just being smart enough to keep a guy from making a tackle. Remember how good our running game was after the left side got injured? Msu the line was 100% and really finding a groove. Then at psu that all changed.
Weisman is healthy and that helps. The line will get better and that helps. But he isn't going to put up 5 ypc against the teams like osu, mich, and even msu (didn't do it last year). The need for a home run threat is too much to keep giving him the ball 25 times. I actually think it is better for the team to take half or a full step back by using a different tb so he can play FB and we can take 4+ steps forward at that position. When he was at FB the holes were huge.
