HaydenHawk56
Well-Known Member
Kyle McCann was pretty bad to.
Nothing ever changes narrative
- Thread starter iloveyoularrystation
- Start date
hawkeyes87
Well-Known Member
Right.
'04 they literally had no choice, though.
But definitely that OSU game was an example- come out aggressively throwing over the middle to the TE's. Great example of them focusing on a strength vs weakness match-up. And it worked out pretty well.
But we just don't see much of that.
HaydenHawk56
Well-Known Member
I actually think Deace made a good point on the HawkeyeNation Podcast. Iowa should have been the one doing this.....make Patterson beat you with his arm. He did one time in the game and he gave up one as well. Instead, we put the game on Stanley to make plays to win and that obviously failed. We probably should have played the field position game and put Michigan into more situations where they would have to open it up (leaving themselves open for mistakes). If we could have rushed more...even if we did not end up with points.....we could have punted and pinned Michigan back there more. Yard by Yard, we could have had a shorter field to work with. Instead, we kept going backwards (with costly sacks) after we got something going.
Still really sucks because we had good field position with what we were doing...if we even had an average offense show up that day. Seemed Iowa started a lot of their drives around their 40 and crossed into Michigan territory 6 times. Though, you would think a 3 year QB starter, his line, and coaches would be able to muster up more than 3 points and put the team on their shoulders. But, it was the Iowa defense that could handle that challenge and perhaps they needed a longer field for the Michigan team to play on to impose more of their will and get some more turnovers.
Hand it to Michigan, they played their cards better than we did. It is a shame.
Last edited:
ChosenChildren
Well-Known Member
There are 5 games remaining that will define this season:
Penn State (ranked)
@ NW (always a tough game)
Minnesota (could be 8-0 when we play them if they beat Nebraska this weekend); worst case 7-1?
@ Wisconsin (ranked)
@ Nebraska
Win 3 of the above, and beat IL and Purdue (two very average teams at home), and that's a 9-3 season. Anyone would have taken that at the beginning of the year.
Anything less than 9-3 this year will be a huge disappointment, particularly with the talent on this team and a senior QB.
Iowa State will be ranked at the end of the year, so that was a big win. Michigan was a disappointing loss (so we are 1-1 in those two big games).
At least that is my opinion.
Penn State (ranked)
@ NW (always a tough game)
Minnesota (could be 8-0 when we play them if they beat Nebraska this weekend); worst case 7-1?
@ Wisconsin (ranked)
@ Nebraska
Win 3 of the above, and beat IL and Purdue (two very average teams at home), and that's a 9-3 season. Anyone would have taken that at the beginning of the year.
Anything less than 9-3 this year will be a huge disappointment, particularly with the talent on this team and a senior QB.
Iowa State will be ranked at the end of the year, so that was a big win. Michigan was a disappointing loss (so we are 1-1 in those two big games).
At least that is my opinion.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
U
How much more black and white can that be. Do Kirk's points not count as much because he didn't score them as flashy as Hayden's? We scored enough to beat Mississippi State. I remember a Fry coached team getting boat raced 37-3 in a bowl game, scoring six points in another, and failing to score in yet another.
You are overreacting to one game. If you're going to jump on the offense for not scoring enough, then you better look at the history of this program.
The "bottom line" is that Kirk's teams have have averaged more points per game Hayden's. Those are results that count. And that's through year 21. I mean decades.
How much more black and white can that be. Do Kirk's points not count as much because he didn't score them as flashy as Hayden's? We scored enough to beat Mississippi State. I remember a Fry coached team getting boat raced 37-3 in a bowl game, scoring six points in another, and failing to score in yet another.
You are overreacting to one game. If you're going to jump on the offense for not scoring enough, then you better look at the history of this program.
hawkeyes87
Well-Known Member
Come on man, why do you keep repeating that?
I think you probably understand football was different 20+ years ago, scoring is up across the board these days, defense is optional.
How did Hayden's offenses compare to the rest of the B10? Nationally? We know KF's have almost always been average or worse.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
losing defining moment games. beating PSU, UM or OSU during an 8 win season isn't a defining game. winning road dog games on the way to West title and B1G game, are. complete lack of consistent aggressiveness on offense. inability to make in-game adjustments to a formation or strategy.
I'm starting to think that Iowa's seasons really come down to 4 games that define their success every year.
Iowa St
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Nebraska
We can pretty much chalk up a loss to Wisconsin every year. The other programs Iowa seems to have an advantage over currently but all also seem to be closing the gap to some degree. But (knock on wood) Iowa clearly is winning the games on the field against these programs regularly.
The rest involves 2 non-con tomato cans, and 6 other B1G games in varying degrees of difficulty. Iowa will lose some, win some, usually wins one they shouldn't & losses one they shouldn't and it all ends up with 7/8 wins in the regular season.
But those 4 games tend to bring out the most emotion in fans and as long as KF keeps winning more agains those 4 than he losses, fans will be pretty happy.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
The record shows that the tenth ranked scoring team in 2018 averaged 40.3 ppg.
In 2000 it was 37.3 ppg (two teams)
Your argument gets stronger when you dig further into scoring depth. In 2000 39 teams averaged at least 30 ppg.
In 2018 it was 59 teams (Iowa was one of them)
So I can concede era comparison. I think kickers are more accurate today and that helps with scoring as well.
Recency bias will always be an issue. I'm sure people were calling for saban's scalp because he couldn't beat Clemson. Hell, people were probably calling for swinney's after the recent north Carolina scare. What about the national championships they won?
Last edited:
I usually feel a lot of emotion when Northwestern outwits Iowa consistently.
I'm used to Iowa's offensive coaches getting outwitted. So I'm pretty emotionless there.
What bothers me is that they physically have put it to Iowa for the last decade. Too watch a program that prides itself on being physical getting beat up by NW is pretty alarming. Particularly in Kinnick.
Concur...And we are a "feeder" for NFL linemen. That seems in-congruent and puzzling.
DBAHawkFan
Well-Known Member
Comparing offenses between Hayden and KF is apples to oranges.
KF offense scheme would work wonders back in the 80s and early 90s. Hayden and his staff were one of a kind, and dare i say legendary when you look at the coaching tree.
Kirk seemed to have this same attitude when he got here. He had a vision, and he executed it perfectly and we reaped the benefits from the end of 2001 - 2004. Those teams were freaking monsters. Every game I couldn't take my eyes away from the game because of what could happen.
Offense had so many weapons and big plays
Defense absolutely broke opposing QBs
Special Teams were freaking special. Didn't it seem like we blocked a punt or FG every game?
Look at the staff KF put together. It may not go down in history like Fry's, but it was a damn good coaching staff with nearly everyone but Norm going on to better things.
Something happened around 2009-10 where Kirk became extremely conservative on offense. 2008 we had Greene running wild, and at the end of the year we seemed to be a well oiled machine. South Carolina stood no chance against that defense, and our offense came out firing.
But 2009 we started to see Kirk-ball. Limit possessions, don't take any risks. Once we lost everyone from the 2005 recruiting class, plus the addition of GDGD, our offense completely fell apart.
Even with more coaching changes it still feels like Kirk expects his defense to pitch a shutout as the only means to a victory. He basically said as much in yesterday's presser. He talked about how the defense only gave up one big play, and that was pretty much the ball game.
That is true, but the expectation to hold today's offenses to no big plays is crazy. So many missed opportunities over the years because our offense couldn't help out the defense. It magnifies every single play, every single possession that the pressure has to be enormous on these kids.
That is what hasn't changed over the last decade. Iowa loses big games 90% of the time because the offense doesn't show up, and a one or two mental errors, coaching blunders, or a turnover does us in.
KF offense scheme would work wonders back in the 80s and early 90s. Hayden and his staff were one of a kind, and dare i say legendary when you look at the coaching tree.
Kirk seemed to have this same attitude when he got here. He had a vision, and he executed it perfectly and we reaped the benefits from the end of 2001 - 2004. Those teams were freaking monsters. Every game I couldn't take my eyes away from the game because of what could happen.
Offense had so many weapons and big plays
Defense absolutely broke opposing QBs
Special Teams were freaking special. Didn't it seem like we blocked a punt or FG every game?
Look at the staff KF put together. It may not go down in history like Fry's, but it was a damn good coaching staff with nearly everyone but Norm going on to better things.
Something happened around 2009-10 where Kirk became extremely conservative on offense. 2008 we had Greene running wild, and at the end of the year we seemed to be a well oiled machine. South Carolina stood no chance against that defense, and our offense came out firing.
But 2009 we started to see Kirk-ball. Limit possessions, don't take any risks. Once we lost everyone from the 2005 recruiting class, plus the addition of GDGD, our offense completely fell apart.
Even with more coaching changes it still feels like Kirk expects his defense to pitch a shutout as the only means to a victory. He basically said as much in yesterday's presser. He talked about how the defense only gave up one big play, and that was pretty much the ball game.
That is true, but the expectation to hold today's offenses to no big plays is crazy. So many missed opportunities over the years because our offense couldn't help out the defense. It magnifies every single play, every single possession that the pressure has to be enormous on these kids.
That is what hasn't changed over the last decade. Iowa loses big games 90% of the time because the offense doesn't show up, and a one or two mental errors, coaching blunders, or a turnover does us in.
EstronHawkKing
Well-Known Member
Except for 2015, Iowa football since 2010 seems like the same broken record. We beat ISU, Illinois, Minnesota and lose to Wisky, MSU, PSU, N'western and even Purdue now. Kirk always seems to pull one big win out of his butt and everyone including Barta acts like Kirk is the greatest ever. Kirk is a good guy and has done some wonderful things for Iowa, but he's been here way to long now. We need something fresh and new. I'm tired of this broken record. I wish we would get a dual threat QB like Banks, so tired of these big, slow lumbering QB's that Kirk just seems to love. Kirk is an old man now and a very old school thinker, he is like a stubborn mule that will never change his ways.
Last edited:
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
There's probably something to be said for the extra game Ferentz has had the advantage of playing in the Fry v Ferentz comparison. Adding an additional MAC school (or even FCS sometimes) usually gives a nice little boost of a couple points to the scoring average for the year.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
Drew Tate and CJ were also dual threats, though not at Banks level, and Tate was a magician at keeping plays alive and throwing on the run.
If longevity is becoming the issue, and it appears as if it is, there is going to be no convincing to the contrary of those who feel that way. Look around, how many of people you know still with the same position that they were twenty of thirty years ago. Not many, cause many of those that stay get booted out, regardless of experience or ability, in favor of "fresher ideas" or a "new voice"
I think that's where we are getting here with Kirk. I'll bet there are people on these boards right now who would trade wins for a more exciting brand of football. Like that played in the big 12 for example.
I would love to see the Syracuse basketball threads. Boeheim has been at Syracuse longer than the football tenured of Kirk and Hayden COMBINED! And that's just as a head coach; he played there and was an assistant there when Bobby Knight coached at Army!
Think they don't cry for a change once in a while? Even though he has gone Sweet Sixteen or better six times since 2009?
Ben Rumson
Well-Known Member
Ho hum! Yeap nothing ever changes!
Latest posts
-
-
-
Iowa reportedly in contact with Arkansas transfer F Maryam Dauda- Latest: thedukeofearl