KOK best OC in big 10?

[HAWKEYESTATE4ever]

I like KOK, and have a great deal of respect for him. He knows more about the game than I ever will. I just hate trolls. I WISH I had enough free time to be able to do the childish crap that these guys do. well, maybe not... but you get my point.

Also, if he got banned wouldn't this thread go bye bye?

 

[TChawk]

I think he is up there

No, not even close sorry.

 

[Hawks1]

I see it like this, the most vocal fans if I remember right a few years back were saying things about norm not blitzing enough and that he is too old or whatever BS they would recite from what they read on websites. And now that this defense has matured and know their assignments you don't hear any of that.

Same thing with the offense in 2002 I think it was we broke out the jailbreak screen and your players were executing not just that play but most of the plays.

When things aren't going our way people have to blame someone.

 

[tubahawk]

This is a tough question. The type of offense Iowa runs gets critiqued constantly. Iowa's offensive scheme is fairly straight forward. It is not going to win a lot of offensive accolades or wow the statisticians.

So does the scheme determine whether or not the OC is good? In order to be a "good" OC do you need to be able to run a variety of schemes? My opinion is the overall offensive philosophy is set by Ferentz but the execution is left up to O’Keefe. This year the execution has been pretty darn solid.

At the end of the day KOK is the right fit for what Ferentz wants to do offensively at Iowa. He's not a highly sought after OC, but for the most part he takes care of his piece of the Iowa football puzzle. One of his biggest weaknesses as OC (although it has improved greatly over the last 2 years) is clock management when calling plays (i.e. getting the plays into the huddle on time).

I still don't think KOK is a good QB coach. Tate, Christensen and Stanzi have all been inconsistent and underperformed in my opinion.

Iowa could do worse for an OC, but I wouldn't lay claim that we have the best OC either.

 

[okeefe4prez]

By the way, what is okeefe4prez's stand on our OC? Did he used to defend O'Keefe quite a bit and thus the handle? I've always wondered about this. Wasn't sure if the name was in jest or serious.

Totally in jest, brah. If O'Keefe became President our country would be better off, but our football team would suffer. I put the Hawks above the country any day, but if we got into a hot nuclear war, O'Keefe's occasional (like once every 6 games or so) propensity to take a little too long to get the play in might not make for the kind of guy we want with his hand hanging over the red button.

 

[okeefe4prez]

I still don't think KOK is a good QB coach. Tate, Christensen and Stanzi have all been inconsistent and underperformed in my opinion.

Tate's sophomore year was amazing. All O'Keefe. His junior year, we turned over the whole d-line and the D was kind of bad, but Tate did fine (Hawks record not good due to D, though). His senior year, he was injured almost the whole year. Christensen had his arm overstrengthened in the weight room, that was all Doyle's fault. Stanzi was an unheralded recruit no one wanted, he has a great W-L record and is one of the better QBs in the B10. What more do you want? Oh yeah, O'Keefe should be turning out a Peyton Manning, Joe Montana and John Elway every 2 or 3 years.

O'Keefe has been a top notch QB coach and I would put him amongst the greats, like Spurrier, in that regard. Remember how good Banks and Chandler were? If Reiners would have had another year of eligibility under O'Keefe, dude would probably still be playing in the League.

 

[tubahawk]

O'Keefe's occasional (like once every 6 games or so) propensity to take a little too long to get the play in ...

I see what you did there.

 

[Hawks1]

Totally in jest, brah. If O'Keefe became President our country would be better off, but our football team would suffer. I put the Hawks above the country any day, but if we got into a hot nuclear war, O'Keefe's occasional (like once every 6 games or so) propensity to take a little too long to get the play in might not make for the kind of guy we want with his hand hanging over the red button.

that was good, made me laugh

 

[spudhawk]

I am with Tuba here. I would like to see a dedicated QB coach.

As far as scheme I think that Iowa's scheme is perfect for the Big Ten, weather and could become a recruiting advantage. NFL people don't like to evaluate off of the spread. Look at how many WRs Michigan sent to the NFL that are still in the league when Campbell was coaching there. I see that trend happening here. It is possible that Iowa has two NFL ready QBs on the roster in Stanzi and Vandenberg. I believe that DJK, McNutt, and K. Davis will all have a very good chance hear their named called during their respective draft weekends. It is likely that Reisner will hear his name called after this season. Vandervelde has been playing very well this season and if he can stay healthy will at least get a chance to make a team. Reiff, Zusevics, Ferentz and MacMillan all are likely to get looked at if they avoid catastrophic injuries.

KOK deserves much of the credit for that development. He has done a better job of getting plays in the last two seasons. I also think his play- calling has been much less predictable. Rarely does a formation give away a play anymore and if it does they are likely setting something up for a shot downfield.

In short good players make coaches look good. We have good players right now on both sides of the ball and are fairly veteran at the skill spots on offense. Having just the second 3 year starter in the Ferentz era probably has helped this season also.

 

[tubahawk]

Tate's sophomore year was amazing. All O'Keefe. His junior year, we turned over the whole d-line and the D was kind of bad, but Tate did fine (Hawks record not good due to D, though). His senior year, he was injured almost the whole year. Christensen had his arm overstrengthened in the weight room, that was all Doyle's fault. Stanzi was an unheralded recruit no one wanted, he has a great W-L record and is one of the better QBs in the B10. What more do you want? Oh yeah, O'Keefe should be turning out a Peyton Manning, Joe Montana and John Elway every 2 or 3 years.

O'Keefe has been a top notch QB coach and I would put him amongst the greats, like Spurrier, in that regard. Remember how good Banks and Chandler were? If Reiners would have had another year of eligibility under O'Keefe, dude would probably still be playing in the League.

Chandler and Banks were both Junior transfers; not guys O'Keefe developed. Most of Banks success was becasue he could run when the play went to he-ll.

Stanzi is still to be determined, but according to passer rating I believe both Tate and Christensen regressed under O'Keefe's tutelage.

 

[Mac50702]

Chandler and Banks were both Junior transfers; not guys O'Keefe developed. Most of Banks success was becasue he could run when the play went to he-ll.

Stanzi is still to be determined, but according to passer rating I believe both Tate and Christensen regressed under O'Keefe's tutelage.

Christensen was never that good from the get go, and it was not KOK's fault that the teams in 05/06 just did not want to play. If we were to get another offensive coordinator, we would still run the same offense that we run now.

 

[tm3308]

Chandler and Banks were both Junior transfers; not guys O'Keefe developed. Most of Banks success was becasue he could run when the play went to he-ll.

Stanzi is still to be determined, but according to passer rating I believe both Tate and Christensen regressed under O'Keefe's tutelage.

Where are you getting your statistics? According to the NCAA, Drew Tate's efficiency numbers were as follows:

2004: 134.67
2005: 146.35
2006: 130.89

Bear in mind that he was hurt for much of 2006, and also was throwing to Dominique Douglass and Herb Grigsby, as opposed to Clinton Solomon and Ed Hinkel.

Christensen never seemed to have the right attitude to succeed here. Stanzi has made tremendous improvements since arriving on campus. If you can't deduce that much, I'm not sure why you would expect anyone to take you seriously.

 

[tubahawk]

Where are you getting your statistics? According to the NCAA, Drew Tate's efficiency numbers were as follows:

2004: 134.67
2005: 146.35
2006: 130.89

Bear in mind that he was hurt for much of 2006, and also was throwing to Dominique Douglass and Herb Grigsby, as opposed to Clinton Solomon and Ed Hinkel.

Christensen never seemed to have the right attitude to succeed here. Stanzi has made tremendous improvements since arriving on campus. If you can't deduce that much, I'm not sure why you would expect anyone to take you seriously.

What do you mean where am I geting my stats?

First, I said "I believe", I didn't say it was fact.

Second, 130.89 is lower than 134.67. Therefore, Tate regressed from his first year in 2004. You can make an argument that injuries had an impact on that. It's a fair argument.

Third, why did you leave out Christensen's & Stanzi's QB rating stats?

2006 - 141.5
2007 - 116.9
2008 - 117.2
2009 - 133.6 (At Eastern Illinois)

Again 117.2 is less than 141.5. He regressed.

Ricky Stanzi

2008 - 134.8
2009 - 131.6
2010 - 176.8

In the two completed years, Ricky has regressed. So far Ricky has shown great strides from last year to this year. I never said he hasn't. I said its still to be determined. The year isn't finished. My point was that KOK does not have a history of strong QB improvement. And when you look at passer rating I believe it reinforces my opinion.

 

[tm3308]

What do you mean where am I geting my stats?

First, I said "I believe", I didn't say it was fact.

Second, 130.89 is lower than 134.67. Therefore, Tate regressed from his first year in 2004. You can make an argument that injuries had an impact on that. It's a fair argument.

Third, why did you leave out Christensen's & Stanzi's QB rating stats?

2006 - 141.5
2007 - 116.9
2008 - 117.2
2009 - 133.6 (At Eastern Illinois)

Again 117.2 is less than 141.5. He regressed.

Ricky Stanzi

2008 - 134.8
2009 - 131.6
2010 - 176.8

In the two completed years, Ricky has regressed. So far Ricky has shown great strides from last year to this year. I never said he hasn't. I said the jury is still out. The year isn't finished. My point was that KOK does not have a history of strong QB improvement. And when you look at passer rating I believe it reinforces my opinion.

Christensen had a grand total of 35 attempts in 2006, so that's not exactly a good sample. His uptick in 2009 is hardly indicitive of anything. He was at Eastern Illinois. He wasn't facing Big Ten defenses.

Stanzi's slight decrease in rating in 2009 had to do with an increased workload, whether real or perceived on his part. Without Greene to fall back on, Stanzi had to do much more for the offense. He has shown considerably better decision-making this year, and I don't expect that to change. When Stanzi puts his mind to fixing something, it gets fixed.

So if this year continues the way it's started, then KOK is 2 for 3, IMO. And that's not too bad.

 

[HAWKEYESTATE4ever]

Are you guys arguing in a thread that was started by a DB?

 

[tubahawk]

Maybe.... okay.... guilty.