Credit to whoever it was (KOK I assume) that came up with the last play, as well as, putting Tony in motion to take the eyes off McNutt to the middle. But I am still shaking my head on some of the play calls KOK threw out there on both red zone attempts. We had second down and a foot to go on the first red zone attempt and he calls a play action pass when Stanzi's numbers were atrocious, and then we get stuffed on third down. Then, on the second red zone attempt, he calls for a run on third and goal at the ten. I realize our running game was about the only thing working for the offense before that last amazing drive but why did he abandon it on the first red zone attempt, when it was more than necessary to run? And why did he go with the run when it was, maybe not necessary, but not logical on the second red zone attempt? I've had a lot of complaints about KOK but these two play calls about put me over the top. I'm wondering if anyone else was wondering these same things and maybe someone with a different perspective can convince me why it was a good idea to go with the calls he made. Nonetheless, Hawks 8-0!!
KOK Play calling
- Thread starter hawkeye36
- Start date
woodyk1
Well-Known Member
I think the running on the 3rd and goal at the ten was conservative and they didn't want a turnover when they could take the lead. They gave it to the defense to try and hold them and unfortunately, it didn't work. At least they gave us enough time to come back and win. Whew!
JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
Just know that whenever we want to question KOK's play calling, and philosophy, that comes down from Kirk. They know their formula
woodyk1
Well-Known Member
Agreed, Jon. Kirk definitely has the final word and his philosophy will be conservative most of the time. We can't argue this year, can we?
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
I had issues with the 2nd and 3rd down play calls on the first foray inside the 5...the 2nd down play action wasn't too bad, but we had 6 inches to go. I would have liked to have seen something straight ahead and challenge our guys to blow them off the ball. On 3rd down and 6 inches, I don't understand why you run a stretch play. Robinson is fast, but he's no Reggie Bush. I would have liked to have seen something go up the middle on that one too.
But I'm not going to complain too much...8-0 and one of the best finishes in Hawkeye history!
But I'm not going to complain too much...8-0 and one of the best finishes in Hawkeye history!
GoHawks1123
Well-Known Member
On that goal line series I think every Hawkeye fan was screaming at the TV for a Wegher dive over the goal line.
woodyk1
Well-Known Member
Not sure Wegher was completely healthy at the time.
If that's the case, what's the need for O'Keefe on the coaching staff? Just kidding.
However, this week and last week at Wisconsin, the Hawks have run the ball almost twice as much as they've passed the ball. Two weeks ago against Michigan where Iowa had, I beleive, 34 running plays and 38 pass plays, it's the only game when they scored 30 points. That's much more balanced.
I know RS is prone the interceptions the more he throws, but we also get better offensive results with more throws from him or so it seems.
Looking at the stats tonight, before the final drive Iowa had thrown 18 times. Against Wisconsin RS threw 23 times with a little better results offensively. Against Michigan, throwing more resulted in 30 points.
Do you think Iowa can go 13-0 with the same conservative play calling the Hawks have had for the past 2 weeks? I know it's worked their first 8 games, but will it work another 5 games? Can the defense keep carrying this team?
Last edited:
IATrainMaster101
Well-Known Member
Inside the from 1.5 and in there are 3 plays that should be run IMO. QB dive, HB dive and FB dive. North and south, no east and west, no sense in passing. Those were the only calls that frustrated me.
In regards to your question, can Iowa go 13-0 with this play calling. More than likely No. If we do make it to the National Championship game and end up playing a team from the SEC or Texas then I think it's safe to say our defense will probably give up a couple touchdowns. Which means we absolutely have to score three touchdowns at least to be in a game with those top three schools. I know our defense is outstanding and I give them credit galore but we really haven't faced as high powered of an offense they are capable of bringing to the table. Not saying we couldn't shut them down but saying, more than likely, we should plan on them scoring about 17-20 points. We need to open up the field a little bit more if we're going to be able to compete at the national level.
ColoradoHAWKEYE
Well-Known Member
Conservative play calling worries me sometimes, but then they are waaay more in tuned to the game and the opposition than I. What I heard about KoK on that last play call impressed me a bit. It was supposedly a play they not only didn't have in the gameplan playbook, but was not practiced for several weeks. He pulls it out of his head based on McNutts and Stanzi's assessment of the coverage. AND, the team executes it brilliantly under huge pressure. WOW!
Agreed. The rest of the game was called fine as far as I am concerned. We could have thrown the ball more but with an effective rushing attack and Stanzi being off target on multiple throws down field its hard to argue with the conservative calls there, but not having the Wegher or even Robinson run it straight ahead and possibly jump the pile or running a QB sneak is inexcusable in my book. Its not like the MSU D-line had been stuffing the run consistently. Either way, a win is a win, I just hope goal-line stops remain a staple of the Iowa D and not the O.
