KF talks: No Huddle here to stay?

[hawkeyebob62]

Yes, you are right about KOK and KF differing on who should've started between Stanzi and Christensen. I remember listening to "Sound Off" after that game where Christensen was left in after Stanzi ran a series. Jon Miller opened the show with, "Jake Christensen has been given all the chances that any head coach needs to determine if a qb should be your starting qb. Jake Christensen has proven he's not a Big 10 starting qb."

Even Zabel agreed with him on that. When Jim Zabel doesn't think you should be a hawkeye starting qb, you should not be a hawkeye starting qb.

Thinking back that that time period, that decision from kf was one of the tipping points for him concerning what I think of him as a hc. I mean, it was so super obvious to everyone that Christensen should not have been in there!

FreedComanche

To some degree, totally correct. But...

Christensen WAS showing some improvement. He was managing and audibilizing better, throwing a tad "softer", and wasn't "harming" the team. And Stanzi, at that stage, WAS making some dangerous throws. In the end, Stanzi gave us a better chance by virtue of a better vertical/downfield passing game. The deep threat, with DJK, Brodell, et. al., was truly a "threat", for the most part. That opened up the box, SG went wild, and we all know the rest of the story.

I don't think KF was "overly loyal" to Jake, he just wanted to give him every chance possible. Lest we forget, Christensen did a creditable job leading us to victory over ISU, and Stanzi had thrown several INTs. But in the end, Christensen's shortcomings allowed teams to continue to load the box.

 

[HomerChampless]

Leaving Allegheny College at the end of 1997, KOK had an offense that was spread and no-huddle before spread and no-huddle was in vogue.

Who influenced whose playcalling? I say KF, who's a conservative coach, influenced KOK's (and most likely Davis' playcalling as well). KF didn't want no-huddle after the success of Pitt, so there was no more no-huddle in the 2011 season. Facts are facts

 

[Makavelihawk]

Leaving Allegheny College at the end of 1997, KOK had an offense that was spread and no-huddle before spread and no-huddle was in vogue.

Who influenced whose playcalling? I say KF, who's a conservative coach, influenced KOK's (and most likely Davis' playcalling as well). KF didn't want no-huddle after the success of Pitt, so there was no more no-huddle in the 2011 season. Facts are facts

Common sense is stupid.

 

[HawkeyeMHA]

If KF wants someone in he game, they are going in the game, regardless of any pregame protocol about who plays

 

[LASBUR]

We all know he has the power to do this. But other than QB I dont think he does. Do you have reason to think otherwise ?

If KF wants someone in he game, they are going in the game, regardless of any pregame protocol about who plays

 

[HawkeyeMHA]

No, I'm just saying the power is there for sure. But your right, I think when it comes to game time player decisions he is very much hands off.

 

[Eda]

Leaving Allegheny College at the end of 1997, KOK had an offense that was spread and no-huddle before spread and no-huddle was in vogue.

Who influenced whose playcalling? I say KF, who's a conservative coach, influenced KOK's (and most likely Davis' playcalling as well). KF didn't want no-huddle after the success of Pitt, so there was no more no-huddle in the 2011 season. Facts are facts

It's true... Facts ARE facts. But I don't see any facts in your second paragraph.

 

[Makavelihawk]

It's true... Facts ARE facts. But I don't see any facts in your second paragraph.

What? What in that paragraph isn't fact? You have two aggressive, versatile, primarily spread offensive coordinators that became conservative, pro-style offensive play callers under KF. he no-huddle did all but disappear after the Pitt comeback. So again, what isn't fact in that paragraph?

 

[LASBUR]

The No huddle wasnt a main cog in our offense back when we played Pitt. It was used because we were down 3 scores in the 4th qt. Just like it has been used anytime we needed a late score. Last year it just wasnt ready. Heck the recivers could barly get lined up in the right spots in a huddle offense. Let just wait and see what happens this year

 

[Eda]

What? What in that paragraph isn't fact? You have two aggressive, versatile, primarily spread offensive coordinators that became conservative, pro-style offensive play callers under KF. he no-huddle did all but disappear after the Pitt comeback. So again, what isn't fact in that paragraph?

Go back and watch the games from last year. The no huddle was used on occasion. As needed for late scores (as Lasbur mentions), but also during random times early in he season. UNI pops right to the top of my head.
Furthermore, to suggest it as a FACT that KirFer nixes any no huddle is stupid. You're not at the team meetings nor involved in the gameplanning. Perhaps it's a collective decision by all involved that since the players aren't picking up the offense, a no huddle would not be a good idea.

I will agree that the no huddle was used sparingly last year, but it was NOT nonexistent.

You're opinion and/or speculation is not a fact.