Miller: Next Coach In: Who Replaces Parker?

[Skeets77]

Its almost impossible to predict with KF as he has so many contacts in both college and the NFL. Not saying it will all be his decision either as this could become a decision influenced with some NFL ties, specifically from the Belichick family of coaches. Its a crap shoot Jon.

Oh its time for the yearly NFL coach's hot seat as well for who is replacing who.
NFL Coach Hot Seat

 

[aeischeid]

And yet our pass defense still sucks. Why? You're making his point for him. Even with all that talent at DB, our pass D still sucks.

It's just hard for the DBs to make consistent plays when the D-line isn't stellar....

 

[CHShawk]

Wannstache

 

[HomerChampless]

It's just hard for the DBs to make consistent plays when the D-line isn't stellar....

So, you blame the DLine and linebackers for pass completions?

How about asking the Iowa secondary to prevent pass completions? They could do much more than prevent the run and long pass.

Hey, I understand that wasn't part of Norm's philosophy. IMO, it should be.

 

[aeischeid]

So, you blame the DLine and linebackers for pass completions?

How about asking the Iowa secondary to prevent pass completions? They could do much more than prevent the run and long pass.

Hey, I understand that wasn't part of Norm's philosophy. IMO, it should be.

In what order??? lol

No I don't totally BLAME the line and the backers.
I just said it makes it hard, essentially.
Hey, I understand it wasn't either. I also understand that when the D-line is closer to dominant, the DB's in "Norm's" schemes can make more consistent plays. Corners can breathe easier. Safetes can make plays on the run or on a rushed throw.....etc........

 

[DFaceHawkeye]

I don't know if this name has been thrown out there, Vic Koening. I don't know of any real connection to Iowa, but he has had some pretty tough defenses. He recently told the Illini that he won't be back to coach for them.

 

[cmhawks99]

I think everyone needs to realize who will be making this decision. Mr. Conservative himself, Kirk Ferentz. To expect him to do anything other than take a knee like he always does is crazy.

That's why Iowa didn't beat Ohio State in 2009 when the Hawkeyes had the Buckeyes on the ropes in 2009 at the end of the game and Conservative Kirk chose to take the game to OT where the Hawkeyes lost. He's the same guy who refuses to attempt to score in the final two minutes before half, regardless of game situation. The same guy who put a gameplan in place in Lincoln that made it impossible to win, but also impossible to get blown out. That's safe for him, that's just his nature.

Sadly, Phil Parker will be the next DC at Iowa because it's the safest, not the best, thing to do. Ohio State or Nebraska, two teams that expect to be great, teams that coach, recruit, and hire with that in mind, will grab Stoops. That's just what it is to be an Iowa fan under Kirk Ferentz: 7-5 overall, 4-4 in conference, with an occasional 10 win season. That is what we should expect with Ferentz.

And yet Nebbie lost to NW and got crushed by UM, 2 teams we beat...and tOSU’s fans routinely complained about Tressel ball.

I don’t know what’s sadder, fans being completely blind and oblivious to the outside world and what “reallyâ€￾ happens out there…


Or laying up such easily refuted tripe up on the message boards for all to see…..

Chad

 

[cmhawks99]

Kirk doesn't care what other people think...he is going to do whatever he wants to.

He has a great opportunity to go for a home run here. But sadly, he'll likely bunt.

This hire is going to be very telling.....if he goes the safe route and promotes Parker...you can forget about any attempt to fix the problems this program has...or make any significant changes. It will be the same old dull, stale, predicatable gameplan on both sides of the ball.

Talk about predictable and tired………


I always find myself wondering about people who continually say this…… What is their life like, how do they view themselves and how do others view them.

It is a very common, respected and smart practice to hire from within, if you have a track record as a successful company. The Iowa defense does….

Just because some clownish, angry Iowa football fan who wouldn’t know a good or bad coach if it punched them in the mouth thinks hiring from within is a bad thing….heck that’s what makes me think it’s a no-brainer to do it. If these fans had watched any other games besides Iowa, or listened to any other commentators do games or read any other message boards, they’d know EVERY team in America predictably does the same things that have been successful……

Heck if they had any brains at all, they’d know they are down in Arizona right now talking about how…… for a defensive coach Mikes’ Defense got progressively worse…

They’d know Brett Venables from Oklahoma (a highly respected DC) is being routinely trashed and run out of town by his own moronic fans.

As a rule of thumb I find, if an Internet fan thinks something is bad, it is probably good!!!

Chad

 

[cmhawks99]

After coming back and tying the game up and grabbing all the momentum, getting the ball back with a chance to win the Big Ten on the road with a backup QB, yes, Iowa had Ohio State on the ropes. They needed to go 45 yards, maybe three completions, for a shot to steal that game on the road. Ferentz did NOT make the right decision in that game. If you agreed with his decision then or now, you'd be in the minority.

100 HUNDRED % IN ACCURATE...........

You are the minority. You are the loud, uneducated Internet fan, who thinks he knows something when he doesn’t……he also thinks because he can read 20 or 30 or 40 other guys saying the same thing he is smart and in the “majorityâ€â€¦â€¦if you haven’t seen many, many, many other examples of that same situation work for and AGAINST your belief structure then your opinion truly has no merit and the majority you speak of can’t be taken seriously.

I’ll give you one quick multi-faceted example………….

Baylor was going to run out the clock vs OU. They were playing for OT with an electric QB and dynamic Wr’s from their own 30.

OU, aggressively called a time out hoping to stop them and get the ball back…………OU’s aggression forced Baylor to go aggressive (when they didn’t want to be) and OU lost the game because of it…….

KF has made plenty of aggressive decisions…some worked some didn’t. Conversely those aggressive guys and plays you think you love have gone both ways as well. The sure sign of someone whose opinion you should tale with a grain of salt is anyone who suggests anyone philosophy is the way to go and blindly pretends like anyone else does……


I so enjoy seeing you guys proved wrong, over and over and over again every time I watch ANY football game.

Chad

 

[cmhawks99]

Kirk only fills his assistant positions with "yes men." That would be Phil Parker.

Wow he systematically put together the best 10 year stretch in Iowa football history with “yes menâ€￾…..holy crap, get us more yes men then.

On a side note….some of you cats are absolutely heinous at this game of insults and one-upmanship.

Chad

 

[cmhawks99]

And yet our pass defense still sucks. Why? You're making his point for him. Even with all that talent at DB, our pass D still sucks.

Zero truth to this, but hey, its your lie...feel free.

Chad

 

[hawkfan33]

100 HUNDRED % IN ACCURATE...........
You are the minority. You are the loud, uneducated Internet fan, who thinks he knows something when he doesn’t……he also thinks because he can read 20 or 30 or 40 other guys saying the same thing he is smart and in the “majorityâ€â€¦â€¦if you haven’t seen many, many, many other examples of that same situation work for and AGAINST your belief structure then your opinion truly has no merit and the majority you speak of can’t be taken seriously.

I’ll give you one quick multi-faceted example………….

Baylor was going to run out the clock vs OU. They were playing for OT with an electric QB and dynamic Wr’s from their own 30.

OU, aggressively called a time out hoping to stop them and get the ball back…………OU’s aggression forced Baylor to go aggressive (when they didn’t want to be) and OU lost the game because of it…….

KF has made plenty of aggressive decisions…some worked some didn’t. Conversely those aggressive guys and plays you think you love have gone both ways as well. The sure sign of someone whose opinion you should tale with a grain of salt is anyone who suggests anyone philosophy is the way to go and blindly pretends like anyone else does……


I so enjoy seeing you guys proved wrong, over and over and over again every time I watch ANY football game.

Chad

So you're example to prove that Kirk made the right call by playing for OT against Ohio St is Baylor beating OU because they were aggressive at the end? Just want to get that straight.

 

[cmhawks99]

So you're example to prove that Kirk made the right call by playing for OT against Ohio St is Baylor beating OU because they were aggressive at the end? Just want to get that straight.

I figured it you were going to use such a tiny market segment, this would work for you…..no…?!?!

Chad

 

[cmhawks99]

So you're example to prove that Kirk made the right call by playing for OT against Ohio St is Baylor beating OU because they were aggressive at the end? Just want to get that straight.

I should add……..truly if you haven’t watched enuff football to see how small a segment you are really looking at then me talking you off the ledge, will NOT matter. We did not in any way shape or form lose to tOSU because of this…..but you have several other….ahh…well call them friends who think like this.

I have seen ultra aggressive work and I’ve seen it get absolutely annihilated and the reverse is true as well……I’ve also seen KF and staff be pretty aggressive when I wished they hadn’t been. Again I’ve seen it work and I’ve seen it not….

Unfortunately you have built of this ridiculous façade of belief that can’t be verified and will never go away. It honestly just sounds so dang stupid and quite frankly I see other clowns on other teams message boards saying the same dumb crap…..but what is really funny is when I go to another teams board and see them say, we need a guy who is less emotional and doesn’t give the games away with stupid plays flying by the seat of his pants….that one really makes me laugh…..

Chad


PS…..watched about 20 high school championships game of late and have 20 left. Seen a lot of really ultra crazy aggressive fake punts and onside kicks and what not……ironically enuff, the teams that resort to that kind of stuff, especially early on. Are usually less sound and rarely win…..

Funny how that works…………….there is a place for it, but anyone goof ball who thinks, that’s the kind of long term strategy that is winning g football games is very selectively seeing what they are choosing to remember when they are watching other teams play.

 

[cmhawks99]

I will add, although I am absolutely fine with anyone that KF trusts getting the DC job, I would like to see a way to get Penn St’s DL coach, Larry Johnson on staff……very good recruiter out in that area and highly skilled. That’s not a knock on Kaz as he has been excellent and I’m not sure who has the capability to switch duties, but I did hear that Johnson thought from elsewhere, but I’m sure it’s just a pipe dream….

Chad

 

[PCHawk]

Chad, you must not realize that when fans on teams complain about their aggressive coaches, they are doing it because their coaches are being OVER aggressive. Most people don't want their coaches to be over aggressive or over conservative, they want them to be somewhere in the middle. That can be right in the middle, leaning towards the conservative side, or leaning to towards the aggressive side. Which one of those you want is all personal preference and none are wrong. In your example Stoops was being over aggressive calling timeout in that situation, just like the 1st Michigan State Wisconsin game. I'm not sure why Baylor was not trying to move the ball, I didn't watch the game, but that really surprises me. When Kirk didn't try to score against Ohio State and Iowa State he was in my opinion being OVERLY conservative. That is just my opinion but one thing is for sure he was leaning very heavily towards the conservative side.
Everyone knows that no decision works 100% of the time so giving examples of when something doesn't work is kinda pointless. The chances of beating Ohio State on the road in overtime are way less then the chance of losing the game in regulation trying to pick up a few 1st downs and kicking a field goal as time expires.
You say you watch a lot of games so answer this. When the game is tied with under 2 minutes left who wins in regulation more, the team with the ball or the team without the ball? If there is a situation where a team has 1st and 10 at their own 20 with 2 minutes left and the other team has a better chance to win in regulation, then the team without the ball is so much better then the team with it that they probably don't stand much of a chance in overtime anyway.

 

[Tmoney12]

I will add, although I am absolutely fine with anyone that KF trusts getting the DC job, I would like to see a way to get Penn St�s DL coach, Larry Johnson on staff��very good recruiter out in that area and highly skilled. That�s not a knock on Kaz as he has been excellent and I�m not sure who has the capability to switch duties, but I did hear that Johnson thought from elsewhere, but I�m sure it�s just a pipe dream�. Chad

You mean the guy that could very well take over for JoePa. I dont see that happening

 

[PCHawk]

Also anyone who thinks it's a good idea to sit on the ball in that situation are calculating the odds incorrectly. They are thinking the odds of winning in overtime are better then the odds of WINNING in regulation.
While that is true it doesn't matter. What matters is the odds of winning in regulation vs the odds of losing in regulation. That is all that matters. The thing people do is think that the odds of scoring in regulation are less then the odds of not scoring in regulation. And since there is a good chance that we are going to end up going to overtime anyway, we might as well not risk something going wrong. That is an extremely flawed logic and any coach who uses it is giving up a huge advantage

 

[cmhawks99]

Chad, you must not realize that when fans on teams complain about their aggressive coaches, they are doing it because their coaches are being OVER aggressive. Most people don't want their coaches to be over aggressive or over conservative, they want them to be somewhere in the middle. That can be right in the middle, leaning towards the conservative side, or leaning to towards the aggressive side. Which one of those you want is all personal preference and none are wrong. In your example Stoops was being over aggressive calling timeout in that situation, just like the 1st Michigan State Wisconsin game. I'm not sure why Baylor was not trying to move the ball, I didn't watch the game, but that really surprises me. When Kirk didn't try to score against Ohio State and Iowa State he was in my opinion being OVERLY conservative. That is just my opinion but one thing is for sure he was leaning very heavily towards the conservative side.
Everyone knows that no decision works 100% of the time so giving examples of when something doesn't work is kinda pointless. The chances of beating Ohio State on the road in overtime are way less then the chance of losing the game in regulation trying to pick up a few 1st downs and kicking a field goal as time expires.
You say you watch a lot of games so answer this. When the game is tied with under 2 minutes left who wins in regulation more, the team with the ball or the team without the ball? If there is a situation where a team has 1st and 10 at their own 20 with 2 minutes left and the other team has a better chance to win in regulation, then the team without the ball is so much better then the team with it that they probably don't stand much of a chance in overtime anyway.

Of course the Baylor thing surprises you. It doesn't fit the paradigm of what people think.
　
As far as the examples thing, yeah no kidding. Its why I get so dang tired of reading people trying to use them and then they cry foul when you counter them with you own obvious ones.
　
Finally your final question is a loaded one...I propose with under a minute left at your own 30, you'd be shocked the amount of times coaches do indeed go to over time. In fact I've seen it happen a lot in the Pro's just this year, so please....I know you and I have agreed, before, but seriously I'm a pretty aware of any counter argument I may leave out there, and I will give you credit for grabbing what many dont, but although the "over aggressive" thing appears to work, the truth is people have no clue what is or isn't aggressive unless of course it doesn't work. Most of the critics are the benefactors of 20/20 hind sight.
　
I honestly can not tell you how many times just this year I have seen a team (lots in high school obviously) turn it over on the own side of their field near the half.
　
Truly I don't think you get KF....as many have said, he is a percentage kind of guy....if the percentages as you guys often like to pretend were sooooo obvious he'd make the call. You think he is conservative but in reality he plays the percentages for the most part and every now in then he wings it.....
　
Keep in mind I like your stuff and I'm not against you, but please don't act like I'm one of these other cats who is easily duped or thrown off the scent....kf is not nearly as conservative, nor as different as most of the successful coaches. It really saddens me to see people so tricked by this.
　
Chad

 

[hawkfan33]

Of course the Baylor thing surprises you. It doesn't fit the paradigm of what people think.
　
As far as the examples thing, yeah no kidding. Its why I get so dang tired of reading people trying to use them and then they cry foul when you counter them with you own obvious ones.
　
Finally your final question is a loaded one...I propose with under a minute left at your own 30, you'd be shocked the amount of times coaches do indeed go to over time. In fact I've seen it happen a lot in the Pro's just this year, so please....I know you and I have agreed, before, but seriously I'm a pretty aware of any counter argument I may leave out there, and I will give you credit for grabbing what many dont, but although the "over aggressive" thing appears to work, the truth is people have no clue what is or isn't aggressive unless of course it doesn't work. Most of the critics are the benefactors of 20/20 hind sight.
　
I honestly can not tell you how many times just this year I have seen a team (lots in high school obviously) turn it over on the own side of their field near the half.
　
Truly I don't think you get KF....as many have said, he is a percentage kind of guy....if the percentages as you guys often like to pretend were sooooo obvious he'd make the call. You think he is conservative but in reality he plays the percentages for the most part and every now in then he wings it.....
　
Keep in mind I like your stuff and I'm not against you, but please don't act like I'm one of these other cats who is easily duped or thrown off the scent....kf is not nearly as conservative, nor as different as most of the successful coaches. It really saddens me to see people so tricked by this.
　
Chad

Chad why do you think Kirk is a percentages guy? He seems like the kind of guy who would be against any kind of advance statistics. I would love for you to show me "the percentages" which show that punting from inside your opponents 40 is ever a good idea, yet we did that at least three times this season. Kirk is overly conservative. And no one gives a **** how much high school football you watch, we're talking about college football here.