Nick Bell, Tony Stewart and Mike Saunders

[Hawknick]

I was thinking about Iowa's running game and some ideas to help improve it. The way the backs were used on the 1990 Rose Bowl team might be a good way to go.

Nick Bell lined up at either the fullback or running back spot. He was on the field at the same time as one of the other running backs often. When he lined up at fb he would still get carries. This would draw the LBs in and open space for the other two. When he played running back there was not so much of the stretch play.

Tony Stewart was used in spots where his speed could be best utilized. He got to the edge, the threat on the inside helped. Even when Lew Montgomery was in the game at FB he would carry the ball. This makes the offense less predictable. Add in Mike Saunders catching passes in the slot it made for a very dynamic attack. They combined for over 2000 yards.

This teams offense could benefit by these concepts. Use Weisman and both rb and as a running fullback. He is too good of a runner to be just a blocker. Get these guys on the field at the same time. Open things up for Bullock's short passes and Canzari on the edge. Use the double power pack where both Daniels and Weisman are a threat on short yardage. Put these guys in positions where they can get the most out of their abilities.

 

[Hawknick]

Simply put teams would have to chose between stacking the inside to stop Weisman and Daniels. Or spreading out to stop Canzari and Bullock. When they focus on one the other will burn them.

 

[WhitUp]

Only problem I don't like with giving Weisman the ball at FB is he's got one less blocker but the defenders covering the RB will still be in the box, rather have the fb in front of him or a 2nd TE. With the RB and QB basically behind the play you're essentially running the ball 9 on 11.

 

[Hawknick]

Fb counter or fake a pitch in that case to draw off a defender or two.

 

[uihawk82]

Great points. First of all Fry and Bill Snyder built that offensive scheme over the years and they are way better at scratching where it itches, to use their term.

And Fry always had a good passing game. Remember Fry was throwing the ball 65-70 times a game when he had to at SMU back in 1963-5 against teams like Michigan. Fry and Snyder would burn teams over the top if you packed the box.

But I definitely agree with you. Let's say you have Jake in shotgun and bullock on one side of him and canzeri on the other side of him. YOu have so many options to fake or give the ball to either one.

Wow you would even have both go out for passes and try to outflank the linebackers with their speed.

It would be fun to watch FOR A CHANGE.

 

[cecilB]

I was thinking about Iowa's running game and some ideas to help improve it. The way the backs were used on the 1990 Rose Bowl team might be a good way to go.

Nick Bell lined up at either the fullback or running back spot. He was on the field at the same time as one of the other running backs often. When he lined up at fb he would still get carries. This would draw the LBs in and open space for the other two. When he played running back there was not so much of the stretch play.

Tony Stewart was used in spots where his speed could be best utilized. He got to the edge, the threat on the inside helped. Even when Lew Montgomery was in the game at FB he would carry the ball. This makes the offense less predictable. Add in Mike Saunders catching passes in the slot it made for a very dynamic attack. They combined for over 2000 yards.

This teams offense could benefit by these concepts. Use Weisman and both rb and as a running fullback. He is too good of a runner to be just a blocker. Get these guys on the field at the same time. Open things up for Bullock's short passes and Canzari on the edge. Use the double power pack where both Daniels and Weisman are a threat on short yardage. Put these guys in positions wherethey can get the most out of their abilities.

Your memory is faulty. Bell and Stewart were on the field together, like never. They kept each other healthy, fresh and effective. And, each were better than our current RBs. Lew and Kujo were the fullbacks.

 

[Hawknick]

They were uselessly on the field at separate times, but occasionally Bell lined up at full back. I mentioned too that even when Lew was in he was a threat to run. This was something the defense had to account for.

 

[cecilB]

They were uselessly on the field at separate times, but occasionally Bell lined up at full back. I mentioned too that even when Lew was in he was a threat to run. This was something the defense had to account for.

OK, whatever you say. If it happened you could count the times it occurred all season on one hand. And, Saunders was a receiver in 1990. He moved to running back in 1991.

There were multiple running options in the backfield that year...fb traps(Lew was effective, Kujo could be counted on for a tough yard or two), RBs (two 1000 yd rushers...both with ability to house it), and several runs per game from the QB in the option game. Play action was available off of everything.

This is an area where I think the Hawks hurt themselves some in the running game and make the play action easier to sniff out...we only run from the running back position. No lead options where the D needs to account for a QB(modern day running back in some offenses) and our RB. No jet sweep where the defense needs to account for the dive or sweep. FBs don't get quick hitters ever.

 

[Hawknick]

We agree in principle that getting more positions carries helps the offense. I also think getting a big rb playing fb part time helps make those carries more of a threat. Even if it was just done a few times. I used Saunders as an example because Bullock switched too. He would be good as another receiver with Weisman as lone setback for the defense to focus on.