Kirk Ferentz Believes Hawkeye Offense Will Make Strides in '18

It's been Kirk's Offense for 18 years yet he blames it on new coaching...What college team has 7 months with "new coaches" and uses that as an excuse? There are teams with coaching turnover all the time through college football and they all rank better then 130+ in D1 football. What a Dbag. Pretty sure we were also on the plus side of turnover margins in most games. The offense was only as good as the abysmal play calling. A few drops or over throws shouldn't be blamed on a loss when you run the same 5 plays every game.
 
GotTimDodge said:
Kirk is amazing at saying so much, and at the same time saying nothing.
Click to expand...


When you need to provide a direction that, and we know that there are things that are not always true, and there is also
SpiderRico said:
You do realize that Alabama’s turnover in this years Nat’l Title Game was its first since the 2011 title game? A period of 6 title games. There’s a reason...because Saban prioritizes that above everything.

Teams at plus 1 TO win 75% of the time. Plus 2 wins at 90%. Plus 3 is like 99%. It’s the single biggest determiner of wins and losses. But yeah, let’s worry about style points instead of W and L.
Click to expand...


WY -2 = W
ISU +1 = W
NSTU E = W
PSU +1 = L
MSU -2 = L
IL +2 = W
NW -1 = L
MN -1 = W
OSU +4 = W
WUs +1 = L
PU -2 = L
kNU +3 = W
BC +3 = W

When we were +1 in turnovers, we went 1-2. When we were -1 in turnovers, we went 1-1. When we were +2, we went 1-0. When we were -2, we went 1-2. Iowa seems to have been atypical is the % when turnover margin was 2 or less. I mean, we were +1 vs WUs and that was a total ass-whoopin'. At some point, you have to stop leaning on turnovers as the key to wins and losses; scoring points is the key to wins and losses.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
When you need to provide a direction that, and we know that there are things that are not always true, and there is also



WY -2 = W
ISU +1 = W
NSTU E = W
PSU +1 = L
MSU -2 = L
IL +2 = W
NW -1 = L
MN -1 = W
OSU +4 = W
WUs +1 = L
PU -2 = L
kNU +3 = W
BC +3 = W

When we were +1 in turnovers, we went 1-2. When we were -1 in turnovers, we went 1-1. When we were +2, we went 1-0. When we were -2, we went 1-2. Iowa seems to have been atypical is the % when turnover margin was 2 or less. I mean, we were +1 vs WUs and that was a total ass-whoopin'. At some point, you have to stop leaning on turnovers as the key to wins and losses; scoring points is the key to wins and losses.
Click to expand...
Just enough wins for the half million dollar bonus.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
When you need to provide a direction that, and we know that there are things that are not always true, and there is also



WY -2 = W
ISU +1 = W
NSTU E = W
PSU +1 = L
MSU -2 = L
IL +2 = W
NW -1 = L
MN -1 = W
OSU +4 = W
WUs +1 = L
PU -2 = L
kNU +3 = W
BC +3 = W

When we were +1 in turnovers, we went 1-2. When we were -1 in turnovers, we went 1-1. When we were +2, we went 1-0. When we were -2, we went 1-2. Iowa seems to have been atypical is the % when turnover margin was 2 or less. I mean, we were +1 vs WUs and that was a total ass-whoopin'. At some point, you have to stop leaning on turnovers as the key to wins and losses; scoring points is the key to wins and losses.
Click to expand...
While I agree that turnover margin has a good correlation to W/L for a game, turnover margin does not really show the disruption to an offense. It would have been more relevant to this conversation to just show offensive turnovers. Sure we might have been +1 for a game, but that does show how impactful it was to the offense if they still turned it over 3 times but took it away 4.
 
GesterHawk said:
While I agree that turnover margin has a good correlation to W/L for a game, turnover margin does not really show the disruption to an offense. It would have been more relevant to this conversation to just show offensive turnovers. Sure we might have been +1 for a game, but that does show how impactful it was to the offense if they still turned it over 3 times but took it away 4.
Click to expand...

which really goes to my point that you can't rely on the turnover margin as a measuring tool of how success your offense is. I mean, Rick Six threw 6 pick 6's in one season and I believe we won all of those games. WUs threw 2 pick 6's to us and still beat the shit out of us. Scoring should be the ultimate measuring stick of your offense. But, because kirk's philosophy is so conservative and by design we limit offensive possessions, it is tougher for us to overcome losing the turnover battle. While on the flip side, giving yourself more offensive possessions gives you more opportunities to overcome your mistakes.
 
DDThompson said:
Show me, Kirk. Show me.
Because I heard all kinds of talk about splitting AW out wide, in the same backfield as Butler, TEs split wide, ... if it happened then it was show pieces the opposition didn’t take seriously.

Don’t tell me about. Just so it.

And I don’t care about national statistical rankings. Other P5 conferences play differing styles of football. Group of 5 plays lower level of talent.

Show me what Iowa did in conference. Now there’s a statistical ranking that matters.

And in 7 of 9 games the offense was below average to pathetic.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the intent to split Wadley and utilize him with Butler took a detour with Butler's injury. Maybe not...
 
ArvadaHawk said:
which really goes to my point that you can't rely on the turnover margin as a measuring tool of how success your offense is. I mean, Rick Six threw 6 pick 6's in one season and I believe we won all of those games. WUs threw 2 pick 6's to us and still beat the shit out of us. Scoring should be the ultimate measuring stick of your offense. But, because kirk's philosophy is so conservative and by design we limit offensive possessions, it is tougher for us to overcome losing the turnover battle. While on the flip side, giving yourself more offensive possessions gives you more opportunities to overcome your mistakes.
Click to expand...
But there definitely is a correlation to turnovers and W/L record. There will be outliers, like the season of Rick Sixes, but they are just that, outliers.

I do agree scoring should be the measure of an offense. I get disgruntled when people harp about yardage. There are many factors outside of the offense's control when it comes to yardage - defensive take aways and special teams play are the big ones.
 
Does bitching about Ferentz help you guys sleep at night? Or do you just like beating your heads against the wall?
 
smitharooney said:
My favorite was when everytime a corner back got scorched opposite Jackson he would bench him but yet he was fine with running vandenberg out there to do nothing
Click to expand...
hawkeyebob62 said:
I'm sure the intent to split Wadley and utilize him with Butler took a detour with Butler's injury. Maybe not...
Click to expand...
hawkeyebob62 said:
I'm sure the intent to split Wadley and utilize him with Butler took a detour with Butler's injury. Maybe not...
Click to expand...
Its me.Also Iowa Surfer.Many many times I uttered Split Mr.Akrum waay wide.Then think Decoy.Butler hurt yes.Don Patterson said same thing.Bottom line: Like wasting Ronnie H.no? Why bother huh? Oh pray for surf huh?
 
GesterHawk said:
But there definitely is a correlation to turnovers and W/L record. There will be outliers, like the season of Rick Sixes, but they are just that, outliers.

I do agree scoring should be the measure of an offense. I get disgruntled when people harp about yardage. There are many factors outside of the offense's control when it comes to yardage - defensive take aways and special teams play are the big ones.
Click to expand...

so i think we are saying the same thing. you must overcome your mistakes and score points. my opinion is giving yourself more opportunities to score, by manufacturing as many offensive possessions is better than less opportunities.
 
I'm optimistic that they'll improve. QB QB QB. If Stanley improves his pocket presence knowing when to tuck it and run once in awhile or throw it away instead of taking a sack it'll help a ton. Not to mention his completion percentage. Granted some of that his on the receivers we had a ton of drops at what seemed like killer times. Be it on 3rd downs or what would have been a huge play.
Even losing Daniels I think the Oline will be good. They won't be what they coulda been but I don't think they'll stink. I think Iowa having 2 RBs that showed they can play plus that Byron from FL and Geil coming in I think we have a good stable of backs. Toks I'm not sure what to think whatever procedure he had done seems pretty hush hush.
TEs will be a huge strength and using them all sorts of ways will be a huge mismatch in our favor. I hope Beyer can get in the mix more. Seeing him get in the bowl game makes me think he made strides this year during bowl prep. I'd almost throw him in more with the WR group. Unless he's gotten bigger he's about the same size as Lazard I believe 6'5 220ish. So if just one WR can make a step up that could put them over the top better. Be it Smith or IKM. Smith is more physically built for it I dunno if IKM can take the pounding of running routes over the middle more or not. I think Easley is who he is and 50-60 catches for 5-600 yards is about what we'll get out of him again.
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
I'm sure the intent to split Wadley and utilize him with Butler took a detour with Butler's injury. Maybe not...
Click to expand...
Maybe. Maybe not. I doubt it.

We didn’t see much of the other things other than for show.

We didn’t see it after Butler’s return.

And before Butler’s transfer it was to be AW and Young as thunder and lightning — and who showed he’s no wilting daisy.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
When you need to provide a direction that, and we know that there are things that are not always true, and there is also



WY -2 = W
ISU +1 = W
NSTU E = W
PSU +1 = L
MSU -2 = L
IL +2 = W
NW -1 = L
MN -1 = W
OSU +4 = W
WUs +1 = L
PU -2 = L
kNU +3 = W
BC +3 = W

When we were +1 in turnovers, we went 1-2. When we were -1 in turnovers, we went 1-1. When we were +2, we went 1-0. When we were -2, we went 1-2. Iowa seems to have been atypical is the % when turnover margin was 2 or less. I mean, we were +1 vs WUs and that was a total ass-whoopin'. At some point, you have to stop leaning on turnovers as the key to wins and losses; scoring points is the key to wins and losses.
Click to expand...
Go look at the Big 12 if you think scoring points is the key. Ask Oklahoma how much scoring a Rick load of points helped against Georgia. How about Alabama? They are pretty low scoring compared to some other prolific offenses at the top, yet how many championships do they have again? I get what you’re saying, and in Iowa’s case there were absolutely some games they needed more points and the same goes for Michigan, but to say that points is the key is ignorant to some of the best teams in the sport.
 
BrianFerentzForPresident said:
Go look at the Big 12 if you think scoring points is the key. Ask Oklahoma how much scoring a Rick load of points helped against Georgia. How about Alabama? They are pretty low scoring compared to some other prolific offenses at the top, yet how many championships do they have again? I get what you’re saying, and in Iowa’s case there were absolutely some games they needed more points and the same goes for Michigan, but to say that points is the key is ignorant to some of the best teams in the sport.
Click to expand...

it worked for Georgia in that game. Brian, which team has won every single football game, since the games inception?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top