lets talk offensive scheme

[RocknRollface]

Quit talking in cliches. My mention of trickeration is mockery of your persistent cliche-ridden arguments about what Iowa needs to do offensively to win.

The fact here is simple, Foval, Iowa's overall game plan and play book are proven commodities. We've had great success with them, so changing the paint job isn't the solution.

What has been recently reiterated by previous replies to this one is what is being largely ignored. The players execution plays a large role in this that gets ignored. Some of that is on players, some is on coaches, I am not here to hang anyone out dry. But the simple fact remains that when our players are able to execute we can play with the best.

We're Iowa. And part of being Iowa is accepting who we are, who we recruit and what our limitations are. I am not saying we need, or should, expect 7 and 8 wins seasons. Iowa isn't an easy recruiting job. There is a large gap that has to be bridged by the coaching staff, and if people want to knit-pick KOK and KF on offense, then do so, but you had better damn well give credit for arguably the best player development in the NCAA.

So, getting back on point, get your blinders off and realize that the challenges we face aren't going to be resolved by scheme. It's not that simple and if you want to talk about knowing football then know who we are and what we have to work with before you get into your pretentious little paradise of X's and O's and schematic changes we need to make based of your time on PlayStation.

Your argument is actually the definition of cliche-ridden, and doesn't address the reality of the situation.

Iowa had talent all over the field on offense this year against defenses that were not that good.

It basically came down to awful QB play on the road.

You can blame that on the QB, obviously, and the receivers for dropping balls, but there is more to it than that.

For one, jvb is clearly more effective in a shotgun faster paced offense where he can get into a rythm throwing the ball.

They should have done a 180 after the Pitt game and identified the potential they had. They should have stuck with that scheme against the weak part of the schedule and continued to develop it.

Instead they took the easy way out and immediately reverted back to pounding Coker against the weak teams but against good Ds that didn't work and they had nothing in the end.

You say Iowas O is a proven commodity, I say its proven to be a poor commodity that relies far to heavily on the defense.

The numbers clearly back that up.

 

[hogeye]

Your argument is actually the definition of cliche-ridden, and doesn't address the reality of the situation.

Iowa had talent all over the field on offense this year against defenses that were not that good.

It basically came down to awful QB play on the road.

You can blame that on the QB, obviously, and the receivers for dropping balls, but there is more to it than that.

You're exactly right. Which is what I've been saying is the more critical aspect all along. Not scheme, not play calling, but we have had marginal to above average QB play for years. Our offense success is more linked to QB play than anything. We've lacked a combination of talent and development at the position over the years.

For one, jvb is clearly more effective in a shotgun faster paced offense where he can get into a rythm throwing the ball.

They should have done a 180 after the Pitt game and identified the potential they had. They should have stuck with that scheme against the weak part of the schedule and continued to develop it.

Instead they took the easy way out and immediately reverted back to pounding Coker against the weak teams but against good Ds that didn't work and they had nothing in the end.

I hate to break it this way, but JVB isn't a great QB, so they were protecting him by covering with Coker. JVB is developed decently enough, but he wasn't the guy that was consistently going be able to move the offense with his arm, shotgun or not.

I agree that he did better in the shotgun at time, but to not acknowledge that he also struggled in the formation when we needed him to make plays with his arm is being disingenuous.

Kirk is going to protect the ball.

You say Iowas O is a proven commodity, I say its proven to be a poor commodity that relies far to heavily on the defense.

The numbers clearly back that up.

You're right, the numbers back that up. And when execution of that offense is peaking, we win. The numbers back that up.

Changing the scheme doesn't address the underlying issues. I know you guys live in this fantasy world where you'd like to put 40+ up every game, but regardless of the system you're running you have to execute to win games.

You're problem seems largely centric on the fact that you don't like what you see, not that what you see can't work and work effectively.

Are there things we could have been doing within the offense under KOK to put ourselves in a better position, I believe so. We might disagree with those aspects, but I don't agree with large scale, or wholesale, offensive scheme changes as being an answer to this problems.