so it is the OL or the HB rotation?
- Thread starter mrolympia
- Start date
RushTogether
Well-Known Member
I think it's the HB rotation.
That **** has to stop.
That **** has to stop.
D
DDThompson
Guest
#10 didn't. That's why Vandenberg was in the game -- Joey Galloway couldn't figure that out???
Parker will be fine. The LBs breaking down on coverage all game last week is not any different than Parker's fumbles. They saw the field this week. Ferentz sat him to clear his head. Parker has the speed Iowa needs.
Parker will be fine. The LBs breaking down on coverage all game last week is not any different than Parker's fumbles. They saw the field this week. Ferentz sat him to clear his head. Parker has the speed Iowa needs.
MoseSchrute
Well-Known Member
You've seen the last of that jet sweep play.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
I agree. If you're going to rotate em, fine. Choose two to rotate early... Then lean on the other pair later in the game. But playing four backs....well, do you see any other teams do it? There's your answer.
The elephant in the room is the run blocking. It's the reason these weak teams give us trouble every year. Wisconsin probably would have had 300 yards rushing against that team, any year. North Dakota State probably could have done the same. The question is how do we manage to have at least two future NFL players on the OL and can't establish the run against a MAC or FCS team.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
It's the OL....particularly the right side. Walsh and Donall not getting it done by a long way....
Both. I think they need to spread the field and use Canzeri as the main back with bullock as a third down back and then Daniels and Weisman as short yardage and time grinders. Backs need a feel for the hole and they aren't getting it. Line needs more space as they aren't getting the push. Outside of scherff and Blythe they are struggling.
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
I despise the 4 headed RB monster. Sack up and pick 2 at most. If the other 2 are so talented they need to get on the field, then find ways to get them on the field without sacrificing the running game. That's what coaches do.
Also, can anyone tell me why Jonathan Parker was the 2nd back in the game today. As if having 4 wasn't enough, you put a 5th guy in there? This has nothing to do with the later fumbles on the jet sweep and the kickoff...but I was truly baffled by that move.
Also, can anyone tell me why Jonathan Parker was the 2nd back in the game today. As if having 4 wasn't enough, you put a 5th guy in there? This has nothing to do with the later fumbles on the jet sweep and the kickoff...but I was truly baffled by that move.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Apparently he's just killing it in practice....
EMik21
Well-Known Member
From an outsiders perspective (being I am not allowed at practice) it looks like our pass-blocking is just fine, but the run-blocking is horrible (which you all can see). Did we spend too much time in the spring and in camp on the passing game that the run game suffered? Just a thought, but there seems to be no flow.
I would run the ball every play in practice this week and screw the passing game as these guys need reps and if they can't figure it out vs UNI and Ball State, then the Offensive line needs to figure it out vs our Defensive line. I also think that the rb thing needs to be cut in half. Need 2 guys getting 15+ carries, period.
I would run the ball every play in practice this week and screw the passing game as these guys need reps and if they can't figure it out vs UNI and Ball State, then the Offensive line needs to figure it out vs our Defensive line. I also think that the rb thing needs to be cut in half. Need 2 guys getting 15+ carries, period.
TheIowaHawkGuy
Well-Known Member
The RB rotation has got to stop. It's as annoying as Fran's "depth" on the basketball team. No one can get comfortable an into the flow of the game. But Kirk has never had this many running backs to work with before and is completely clueless on how to use the rotation. Never thought having too many RBs would be a bad thing.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
There's an old saying that says "depth is great until you use it"....meaning it's more of an advantage on paper than in reality....typically your "depth" is on the bench because they aren't good enough to start.... just ride the best horse or two until they break down...
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
Iowa doesn't have 4 super-talented RB's. They have one who is pretty quick with good vision but is small (Canzeri) one who is fast but little vision or cutback ability (Bullock) one who runs hard but lacks speed (Weisman) and one who shows the most complete potential but will need more carries to find out (Daniels). Bullock and Canzeri played most of the snaps in the second half. That's probably the right way to go.
The reason Parker was in the game was he has ability, speed Iowa lacks.
JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
I think it's both. Enough of the four backs.
Run blocking has been fine - the holes are there and the line gets a 3 yd push most plays. The backs aren't seeing the lanes, for two reasons as far as I can tell.1. They hit the line too quickly. Outside of three runs vs. UNI they hit the hole just as it opened. A half step later and they'd have more room to keep their legs moving at the initial point of contact. Happened to Weisman a couple.of times today. That's a rhythm thing and it will fix itself with more carries. I do wonder if the rotation is causing that issue at game speed.2. They follow the lead blocker a half second too long on the zone blocking runs - they overrun the block instead of tucking up inside as the block clears to the outside. I'm certain they are taught to do this as they are following an All-American that routinely pushes 4 yards upfield, but sometimes you musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling, and get creative. They see that in film, and I did see that improve on a couple third quarter runs. Vision is kind of like speed though, in that it is hard to teach, and all the Hawkeye backs look to make contact before avoiding it. Making contact is best done while carrying your momentum, and changing direction kills momentum. Might not change. The solution could be to run fewer zone schemes and more quick dives between the tackles. That fits better with the current stable of backs' styles of running. That will change over the course of the season, I expect.One positive that I noted today was that the Hawks abandoned their strategy when it stopped working. Run was not there, so they passed with zeal. It was nice to see an in-game adjustment like that this early in the season.
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
We have a perfect stew of issues at the moment.
The very biggest factor is our interior offensive lineman are under sized and not physical enough at the point of attack to move bodies off the LOS to create adequate running lanes. Someone pull up the link to the CR Gazette article in August about all of this 'low man' wins stuff. Can we now put that to bed as totally false when you lack the size and physicality? That article is being proven ridiculous 2 weeks in a row. We have had a lot of problems on the interior in many seasons and that is why we do not have some of the best o-lines in the B1G even though we get that praise often.
The other aspect is our QB although accurate and good on throws within 10-15 yards of the LOS cannot throw a deep route to save his life. This is allows teams to pack in even tighter against the run. Quite simply we need what CJ brings to force defenses to honor us vertically.
I do agree that we should get down to 2-3 backs. Personally Bullock outside of blocking does not do much for me. I like Canzeri & Weismann/Daniels.
The very biggest factor is our interior offensive lineman are under sized and not physical enough at the point of attack to move bodies off the LOS to create adequate running lanes. Someone pull up the link to the CR Gazette article in August about all of this 'low man' wins stuff. Can we now put that to bed as totally false when you lack the size and physicality? That article is being proven ridiculous 2 weeks in a row. We have had a lot of problems on the interior in many seasons and that is why we do not have some of the best o-lines in the B1G even though we get that praise often.
The other aspect is our QB although accurate and good on throws within 10-15 yards of the LOS cannot throw a deep route to save his life. This is allows teams to pack in even tighter against the run. Quite simply we need what CJ brings to force defenses to honor us vertically.
I do agree that we should get down to 2-3 backs. Personally Bullock outside of blocking does not do much for me. I like Canzeri & Weismann/Daniels.
