Rb problems are not just bad luck

[Easton]

You know, one could also get the impression from this thread and the resultant posts that there are lots of KF lovers who couldn't care less about Iowa football. I hope the style of offense used against ISU gets more wins for Iowa later on in the schedule.... or Iowa's defense gets better... <P> I'm just tired of 'arguing' with Ferentz lovers, I want to 'argue' with Iowa lovers...

Why do you want to argue? A discussion is always more productive than an argument. It is evident that you are here to argue. Something wrong at home? Do you think that anyone believes you or the rest that spew crap? It is obvious that football is not your thing, maybe jon can make a soccer board for you.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I think its making sure to get Wiesman in the groove. Also, getting him in timing with the zone blocks. Seriously, they don't get true game speed in practice, so I suspect KF is trying to get everyone in sync, unfortunately, Iowa plays so many close games that it takes all preseason games to get this accomplished.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

This is why so rarely we see any back-up QB's get any game experience at Iowa.

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

Either way you look at it Kirk is going to keep crappy teams in the game. Why risk Weisman in doing so?

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

Either way you look at it Kirk is going to keep crappy teams in the game. Why risk Weisman in doing so?

Trying to win the game. KF has faults...no question. But your post above makes no sense...if the game is close..for whatever reason...you play the players that are performing well. There are moments and things you can criticize KF and his staff...but Cmon man...

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

Trying to win the game. KF has faults...no question. But your post above makes no sense...if the game is close..for whatever reason...you play the players that are performing well. There are moments and things you can criticize KF and his staff...but Cmon man...

Does kirk not let crappy teams stay in games?

Did it suprise you that ISU came back at the end?

 

[DexterMorgan]

Does kirk not let crappy teams stay in games?

Did it suprise you that ISU came back at the end?

Do either of these have anything to do with The number of carries Weisman had?

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

Does kirk not let crappy teams stay in games?

Did it suprise you that ISU came back at the end?

He has. But I also think he's changed a LOT of things we've been asking for. I think he's been over conservative at times and out coached in games. IMO...I don't think either has happened this year yet. I know its a running joke on here, but sometimes it really does come down to execution...and even more so when a team has little room for error.

A little...yeah. if was a coaching mistake it was on the defense coord. The onside, IMO, was set up fine...Hamilton, a sure handed pass catching tight end, was in the position to make the play...it hit both his hands..and he missed it...it happens.

But you asked why risk Weisman in a close game and I answered.

You want KF gone, asap, and it might happen. If it does, I understand it. I still believe things can get improved...under KF. If I'm wrong...it won't be the first or last time.

Your kind of in a win/win scenario...if Iowa gets better and competitive, your favorite team will be good...if they don't, KF goes and you get what you desperately want. I get it.

It's all good.

 

[DP5555]

You know, one could also get the impression from this thread and the resultant posts that there are lots of KF lovers who couldn't care less about Iowa football. I hope the style of offense used against ISU gets more wins for Iowa later on in the schedule.... or Iowa's defense gets better... <P> I'm just tired of 'arguing' with Ferentz lovers, I want to 'argue' with Iowa lovers...

We're all Iowa lovers genius! That's why some of the things you guys are saying are so freaking ridiculous. You're just trying to find things to blame on Kirk Ferentz. Whether you see it that way or not is irrelevant.

The fact of the matter is if Kirk were rotating RB's at the end of a close game and one of the backups either struggled or turned the ball over in key situations then we all know exactly what you guys would be saying. Your argument would then be the exact opposite... in a close game why would Kirk not be giving the ball to his most effective offensive player (Weisman)!? You'll spin the situation simply to find something to criticize Kirk Ferentz for. It's your M.O. It's the only thing you bring to the table. You've proven you either have little football knowledge, or the football knowledge that you do have is overshadowed by your dislike of Kirk Ferentz. It's pretty sad when your desire to be proven right about your feelings on Kirk Ferentz clouds your judgement to the point you aren't even able to understand some basic elementary level football strategies.

Don't categorize us as Kirk lovers. We're Iowa fans. Kirk is the head coach. You're getting called out because your logic is irrational. Not because you're hating on Kirk and we feel the need to defend him.

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

He has. But I also think he's changed a LOT of things we've been asking for. I think he's been over conservative at times and out coached in games. IMO...I don't think either has happened this year yet. I know its a running joke on here, but sometimes it really does come down to execution...and even more so when a team has little room for error.

A little...yeah. if was a coaching mistake it was on the defense coord. The onside, IMO, was set up fine...Hamilton, a sure handed pass catching tight end, was in the position to make the play...it hit both his hands..and he missed it...it happens.

But you asked why risk Weisman in a close game and I answered.

You want KF gone, asap, and it might happen. If it does, I understand it. I still believe things can get improved...under KF. If I'm wrong...it won't be the first or last time.

Your kind of in a win/win scenario...if Iowa gets better and competitive, your favorite team will be good...if they don't, KF goes and you get what you desperately want. I get it.

It's all good.

I dont think this topic is a reason why Kirk should be gone. I just think with the rb problems at Iowa kirk should manage the rbs a little more like a bullpen.

I also said that its hard to take Weisman out when hes get 4 yards every play. However I think the game would have played out similar had they used the other rbs more. By the end ISUs defense was being pushed even though they had no doubt what play was being ran.

This thread was more of things Iowa could have done to lesson the number of carries Weisman had.

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

I dont think this topic is a reason why Kirk should be gone. I just think with the rb problems at Iowa kirk should manage the rbs a little more like a bullpen.

I also said that its hard to take Weisman out when hes get 4 yards every play. However I think the game would have played out similar had they used the other rbs more. By the end ISUs defense was being pushed even though they had no doubt what play was being ran.

This thread was more of things Iowa could have done to lesson the number of carries Weisman had.

That's fair enough.

 

[HomerChampless]

If Iowa has another bad season, there definitely is a need to talk about another coach, and fast. Too bad some of you can't read the tea leaves now....

 

[Billso]

When did Iowa have the chance to run play-action in the fourth quarter? Iowa's first possession of the fourth quarter took nearly 8 minutes off the clock and resulted in Iowa scoring to go ahead 27-7 with a bit over 7 minutes left. What exactly should Iowa have done differently on that drive? That was beautiful, start the quarter with a 13-point lead, run half the quarter off while scoring a TD.

After that, ISU scored a TD with a bit over 4 minutes left to cut it to 27-14. ISU recovered the onside kick, then Lowery made the great interception on the Iowa 15-yard line. A bit over 4 minutes left at this point. ISU had 3 timeouts. Weisman tried one run (loss of 2). Then Rudock ran a bootleg with run/pass option. ISU read it well so he just ate the ball for loss of 1. 3rd and 12 on the 13 Iowa runs Weisman for 6. I agreed with how Iowa handled this drive as it made ISU use all 3 of their timeouts and Iowa didn't turn it over.

After ISU got the ball back and scored again, Iowa recovered the onside kick. Because ISU had no more timeouts, all Iowa had to do was run 3 plays and milk the clock down to under 10 seconds for the punt. Iowa had 3rd and 1 and gave it to Weisman but he didn't make it.

I agree that play-action would have been ideal had Iowa simply recovered the onside kick with 4 minutes left and Iowa ahead 27-14. Then you have the ball at midfield and you can do whatever you want. As it was, Iowa ended up at its own 15 with 4 minutes left and the goal became making ISU use its timeouts and not turning it over deep in our own end. One can argue that Iowa should have been more aggressive in that situation, but what happens if you throw it twice and its incomplete? Now ISU doesn't have to burn its timeouts and we aren't able to milk the clock. KF has faults as a game manager and time/score situations, but how they handled things up 27-14 and possession at our own 15, ISU with 3 timeouts was spot on. I want the coach to make choices that maximize the team's chances of winning, and forcing ISU to burn their timeouts was the right move.

Great post. It must have sucked up all available intelligence, because this thread was mostly a waste of time after page 2.

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

Great post. It must have sucked up all available intelligence, because this thread was mostly a waste of time after page 2.

Anytime there are 10 running plays in a row. That would be a good time for play action. After the first question I stopped reading that book.

 

[tubahawk]

I was also thinking we should have shimonek (sp??) Take a few snaps since this the worst d we will see.

I'd rather bring in our back-up RB's and break them in against one of the worst d's we will see as opposed to beating down Weisman and having to break them in against the upcoming stronger defenses.

In other words if you're not preparing (trusting) the back-ups to spell Weisman against the crappy teams they certainly won't be ready if/when Weisman gets dinged-up. And at that point it's going to be an even steeper learning curve.

 

[Billso]

Does kirk not let crappy teams stay in games?

He did on Saturday by being aggressive on defensive and getting burned on a blitz. Exactly as many geniuses here have demanded.

Had he run more play action as you suggest, ISU would have had more time for a comeback. And had he done it late in Q4, ISU could have preserved timeouts (or got a fatal INT). I've been plenty critical of Curk and GDGD when warranted, but thought the offensive play selection in Ames was excellent.

 

[DP5555]

I'd rather bring in our back-up RB's and break them in against one of the worst d's we will see as opposed to beating down Weisman and having to break them in against the upcoming stronger defenses.

In other words if you're not preparing (trusting) the back-ups to spell Weisman against the crappy teams they certainly won't be ready if/when Weisman gets dinged-up. And at that point it's going to be an even steeper learning curve.

The bottom line is a RB can get hurt on his first carry or his last. If we've learned anything through the years as Hawkeye fans it's that there is no rhyme or reason for it. It can be an injury from contact or an injury suffered simply making a cut in practice. Weisman didn't participate in contact for almost all of the offseason because they didn't want to risk an injury. He's mopped up most of the carries thus far in the season because the Hawks haven't been able to blow out opponents. Now it's totally fair game to criticize the coaches for the reasons they have been unable to separate themselves on the scoreboard, but in my opinion it is a tad bit absurd to criticize them for playing their best RB in what is still considered a close game. Now if he had suffered a mild injury or something than that's one thing, but thus far he's been able to stay healthy.

Weisman is on pace for about 350 carries. I believe I saw someone else comment in another thread that Leveon Bell had 380 carries last year for Mich. State. Both guys are big downhill runners. The more carries a RB gets the higher the chance becomes that he's going to get hurt. I get that. The problem is that it's a double edged sword. If you take out your best guy in a close game in order to save him some carries then it could mean the difference between winning and losing. Weisman is not only Iowa's best RB. Right now he's Iowa's best offensive player. I understand you're playing with fire by relying on him so much, but at this point I'd much rather see Iowa do what they need to do to convert W's. Because if you don't play him in key situations and you end up losing a game then you stop and wonder what could have been.

I guarantee you Weisman wants every single carry he can get. The kid said he loves being sore. Now the coaches have to be smart about it, and distribute carries accordingly. However, this team is trying to turn a entire program back around. They are trying to make the Iowa fanbase proud to be Hawkeye fans once again. Screw playing it safe. If we have a backup emerge who proves he can produce similar numbers as Weisman then that's a different story. Until then I say put the team on the Hebrew Hammers back and see how far he can take them.

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

He did on Saturday by being aggressive on defensive and getting burned on a blitz. Exactly as many geniuses here have demanded.

Had he run more play action as you suggest, ISU would have had more time for a comeback. And had he done it late in Q4, ISU could have preserved timeouts (or got a fatal INT). I've been plenty critical of Curk and GDGD when warranted, but thought the offensive play selection in Ames was excellent.

I never said there was anything wrong with the play calling. There is a problem running Weisman that much. So either use other rbs or use the passing game.

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

The bottom line is a RB can get hurt on his first carry or his last. If we've learned anything through the years as Hawkeye fans it's that there is no rhyme or reason for it. It can be an injury from contact or an injury suffered simply making a cut in practice. Weisman didn't participate in contact for almost all of the offseason because they didn't want to risk an injury. He's mopped up most of the carries thus far in the season because the Hawks haven't been able to blow out opponents. Now it's totally fair game to criticize the coaches for the reasons they have been unable to separate themselves on the scoreboard, but in my opinion it is a tad bit absurd to criticize them for playing their best RB in what is still considered a close game. Now if he had suffered a mild injury or something than that's one thing, but thus far he's been able to stay healthy.

Weisman is on pace for about 350 carries. I believe I saw someone else comment in another thread that Leveon Bell had 380 carries last year for Mich. State. Both guys are big downhill runners. The more carries a RB gets the higher the chance becomes that he's going to get hurt. I get that. The problem is that it's a double edged sword. If you take out your best guy in a close game in order to save him some carries then it could mean the difference between winning and losing. Weisman is not only Iowa's best RB. Right now he's Iowa's best offensive player. I understand you're playing with fire by relying on him so much, but at this point I'd much rather see Iowa do what they need to do to convert W's. Because if you don't play him in key situations and you end up losing a game then you stop and wonder what could have been.

I guarantee you Weisman wants every single carry he can get. The kid said he loves being sore. Now the coaches have to be smart about it, and distribute carries accordingly. However, this team is trying to turn a entire program back around. They are trying to make the Iowa fanbase proud to be Hawkeye fans once again. Screw playing it safe. If we have a backup emerge who proves he can produce similar numbers as Weisman then that's a different story. Until then I say put the team on the Hebrew Hammers back and see how far he can take them.

We have learned that rbs at Iowa get hurt and that they mst start from over every time bc the backups havent seen minutes.

 

[tubahawk]

Now if he had suffered a mild injury or something than that's one thing, but thus far he's been able to stay healthy.

He's stayed healthy so far this year. His track record from last year shows he is at risk for injury, especailly with his upright running style. All the warning signs are there; high number of carries, upright running style, previous history of injury.

Weisman is on pace for about 350 carries. I believe I saw someone else comment in another thread that Leveon Bell had 380 carries last year for Mich. State. Both guys are big downhill runners. The more carries a RB gets the higher the chance becomes that he's going to get hurt. I get that. The problem is that it's a double edged sword. If you take out your best guy in a close game in order to save him some carries then it could mean the difference between winning and losing. Weisman is not only Iowa's best RB. Right now he's Iowa's best offensive player. I understand you're playing with fire by relying on him so much, but at this point I'd much rather see Iowa do what they need to do to convert W's. Because if you don't play him in key situations and you end up losing a game then you stop and wonder what could have been.

Do you think we'd have a better opportunity to beat ISU & Directional Michigan & Purdue while keeping Weisman at 25 carries or run him into the ground and try to beat Purdue without him because he's hurt?

To me it seems like minimal short term gain while risking the rest of your season.