Sat next to Dolphin at dinner tonight

[tksirius]

If Akrum gets hurt, then do we have ButToks?

Good one, but it'll be a YoungBut and Pedo St will be licking their chops when they come to town.

 

[westender]

I am looking forward to the 5 TE set...TE Sweep, TE FleaFlicker, TE triple option, TE Super Winged T...

They should have a play where a TE lines up in the full back spot.

And if Cook was in at TE, we could have a lateral to the TE and TE throw.

 

[NCHawker]

I'm ready for the season to start now... I'm tired of waiting.

 

[99topdawg]

Good one, but it'll be a YoungBut and Pedo St will be licking their chops when they come to town.

What if fullback Drake Kulick plays?

 

[BlindDogScooter]

If Akrum gets hurt, then do we have ButToks?

Maybe get them all in the game... YoungButToksWad

 

[BlindDogScooter]

What if fullback Drake Kulick plays?

Yes... Butler and Kulick... I know where you're going with this... lol

 

[judzeehawk]

Maybe get them all in the game... YoungButToksWad

Good thing somebody graduated or it could of been YoungButToksWadBeatHard. Oh my this has to end. TK it's all your fault!

 

[LGEND24]

IvoryAnYoungButToksWad

 

[ArvadaHawk]

When they spell Wadley the D can't just assume there will be a pass and will have to honor Butler which will just open it up a bit more for a pass. The D is going to have to play a bit more honest against Iowa. Now if BF goes away from GD and actually uses the middle 1/3rd of the field, it bodes well.

The previous years, the D only had to concentrate on plugging the run and defending the outside 2/3rd of the field on out passes. Not too hard for a college D coordinator or team.

JB and AW need to be on the field at the same time as often as possible. Let TY be the relief pitcher. How would you defend against JB and AW on the field at the same time? You'd have to play it straight up and un-aggressively and that gives Iowa the advantage. I so hope we do this.

 

[DDThompson]

I'd feel better if Eddie P. said it.

But seriously, it is exciting to think about what Wadley and Butler might accomplish this year.

Agreed. I'm guessing if Dolph said it, then he heard it from football a source.

 

[Ozhawk]

Agreed. I'm guessing if Dolph said it, then he heard it from football a source.

You guess correctly as I alluded in my original post that his information was from practice "reports" and not observations.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

JB and AW need to be on the field at the same time as often as possible. Let TY be the relief pitcher. How would you defend against JB and AW on the field at the same time? You'd have to play it straight up and un-aggressively and that gives Iowa the advantage. I so hope we do this.

As cool as that would be, that's not going to be Iowa's style and you know it. There are a couple reasons why this won't happen. Iowa will have a few plays with both of them (Wadley out in slot) but it's not going to be every play. Iowa will still utilize the fullback. In addition, the real benefit with Butler is you essentially can go or be fresh at RB the majority of the game. Picture a team chasing Wadley down, then bring in Butler who is fresh. A team essentially gets a 80-100% fresh RB the majority of the time. This will really benefit the team in the late 3rd and 4th quarters. You watch how many games Iowa pulls away late because they pound all game with fresher RB's later in the game.

If you played both the majority of plays, you lose that freshness or shock value when the other comes into the game. No reason to completely wear both starting RB's out at the same time with one or the other being a decoy all game.

In addition, it is not as easy as it sounds for a staff and team to just add a bunch of new plays or drastically change the style or what you do. It sounds relatively easy but it isn't. They will have some plays but are not going to have that be the primary offense (both on at the same time). Too much change.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

As cool as that would be, that's not going to be Iowa's style and you know it. There are a couple reasons why this won't happen. Iowa will have a few plays with both of them (Wadley out in slot) but it's not going to be every play. Iowa will still utilize the fullback. In addition, the real benefit with Butler is you essentially can go or be fresh at RB the majority of the game. Picture a team chasing Wadley down, then bring in Butler who is fresh. A team essentially gets a 80-100% fresh RB the majority of the time. This will really benefit the team in the late 3rd and 4th quarters. You watch how many games Iowa pulls away late because they pound all game with fresher RB's later in the game.

If you played both the majority of plays, you lose that freshness or shock value when the other comes into the game. No reason to completely wear both starting RB's out at the same time with one or the other being a decoy all game.

In addition, it is not as easy as it sounds for a staff and team to just add a bunch of new plays or drastically change the style or what you do. It sounds relatively easy but it isn't. They will have some plays but are not going to have that be the primary offense (both on at the same time). Too much change.

I am fairly certain it won't happen, and I will view that as a lost opportunity. When you have over a month to incorporate new players and even a couple of new schemes, yes, that should be enough time. The program needs a higher powered, more potent offense. We have a chance to be creative this season. We have a new OC we were all promised could stand up to kirk's ultra conservatism. I need to see it because it's needed to push the program forward the next decade.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I am fairly certain it won't happen, and I will view that as a lost opportunity. When you have over a month to incorporate new players and even a couple of new schemes, yes, that should be enough time. The program needs a higher powered, more potent offense. We have a chance to be creative this season. We have a new OC we were all promised could stand up to kirk's ultra conservatism. I need to see it because it's needed to push the program forward the next decade.

I don't disagree with you as far as being a little more open to new things or aggressiveness. I do disagree that a month or two is enough time as I don't feel it is if a team is changing philosophy with utilizing two starting RB's at the same time. It's a bigger deal than it sounds as all plays need to be re-evaluated and changed to accomodate the RB. That is why they will just develop a few new plays instead of revamping the entire offensive playbook.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

I don't disagree with you as far as being a little more open to new things or aggressiveness. I do disagree that a month or two is enough time as I don't feel it is if a team is changing philosophy with utilizing two starting RB's at the same time. It's a bigger deal than it sounds as all plays need to be re-evaluated and changed to accomodate the RB. That is why they will just develop a few new plays instead of revamping the entire offensive playbook.

You expand the existing package for the slot wr position and AW learns that position. it can be done in a month.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

You expand the existing package for the slot wr position and AW learns that position. it can be done in a month.

I concurred that a few plays could be added but that is not what you initially stated above.

You stated that Iowa needs to have them both on the field at the same time for the majority of the plays or actually stated as often as possible. Same thing, IMO. That is a whole other dog and cannot be implemented in one month's time.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

I concurred that a few plays could be added but that is not what you initially stated above.

You stated that Iowa needs to have them both on the field at the same time for the majority of the plays or actually stated as often as possible. Same thing, IMO. That is a whole other dog and cannot be implemented in one month's time.

I do think they should. Having them on the field at the same time takes the 8th man out of the box. you know AW can run jets, he can cross the middle downfield from the slot (making an lb and a S have to "maintain" on him. That would allow JB gaping holes. By a majority of the time I mean, also include TY in the mix. But always have the 2 rb's on the field at the same time. JB could play out of the slot with TY at rb.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I do think they should. Having them on the field at the same time takes the 8th man out of the box. you know AW can run jets, he can cross the middle downfield from the slot (making an lb and a S have to "maintain" on him. That would allow JB gaping holes. By a majority of the time I mean, also include TY in the mix. But always have the 2 rb's on the field at the same time. JB could play out of the slot with TY at rb.

Yea, what would go thru the other team's/coaches mind not seeing a FB trot out on Iowa's offensive possession, but to have AW and JB trot out. They'd be like WTF! It would be fun trying to watch initial teams trying to get a grasp and defend that. Perhaps they come up with a package for at least Ohio State that is quite different.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

Yea, what would go thru the other team's/coaches mind not seeing a FB trot out on Iowa's offensive possession, but to have AW and JB trot out. They'd be like WTF! It would be fun trying to watch initial teams trying to get a grasp and defend that. Perhaps they come up with a package for at least Ohio State that is quite different.

you got it. i can dream, can't i?

 

[rschneider]

Am I the only one who'd rather listen to Beth Mowins than Dolphin?