The Offense

AreWeThereYet

Well-Known Member
Offensive yards-per-point is considered a bit of a voodoo statistic because it correlates well with winning on an individual game basis, but tends to be very random and even out over an entire season.

The lower the offensive yards-per-point the better. Iowa ranks #1 (lowest) yards-per-point in the nation at 10.1

So not only is Iowa getting the ball with really good field position they are taking full advantage of it when they do. So is this just luck or is something else going on.
 

AreWeThereYet

Well-Known Member
Iowa is #6 in defensive yards-per-point at 21.1 (higher is better). This means opponents are putting up yards and getting little for it.

Forcing turnovers will do that, long punts, and making the other team settle for field goals.

Iowa is #3 at yard-per-point margin at 11. Last year Iowa was #2 on the year. 2019 they were #4, 2018 #12, 2017 #5, 2016 #8, 2015 #16. That seems to be a bit of a thing for Iowa.
 
Last edited:

hawkfan2679

Well-Known Member
Just to be clear I'm not advocating that the offense is good, I see first hand all the points you are making. My point is that the offense isn't as bad as some make it out to be and the data the "experts" are looking at is flawed.

Keep in mind Iowa hasn't had that game where they've been able to rack up a ton of points and yards. Even that Maryland game, where they scored 51 points, was mostly due to the defense getting 6 turnovers. I look at Purdue's numbers and even as crappy as their offense is rated the numbers are inflated because they were able to rack up almost 600 yards in offense against a very bad UConn team. I felt the offense should have been able to do more against KSU and CSU, for a variety of reasons they didn't.

I will say I'm optimistic that this offense can improve and it all starts with the OL play. If the OL can keep making improvements then all this data we are talking about will keep getting better. It better as this defense and ST's can't keep bailing them out every game.
I get it. I completely agree with everything you are saying above. I just happened to take a quick look at what you linked and compared with some high level stats to surmise that the story can be derived by looking at enough of the data available.
 

hawkfan2679

Well-Known Member
Offensive yards-per-point is considered a bit of a voodoo statistic because it correlates well with winning on an individual game basis, but tends to be very random and even out over an entire season.

The lower the offensive yards-per-point the better. Iowa ranks #1 (lowest) yards-per-point in the nation at 10.1

So not only is Iowa getting the ball with really good field position they are taking full advantage of it when they do. So is this just luck or is something else going on.
Probably a combination of defensive scoring (23 points so far this year on 0 plays) and the beginning field position. If you go 70 yards for a 7 point touchdown, it's the same as going 30 yards for a 3 point FG. With starting with the ball on our own 38 on average, 30 yards puts us into a position to make a long FG. Plus we've got a TON of +yardage possessions this year because we are turning teams over at a crazy high rate. So I think we've got a fair amount of +yardage point possessions this year, then likely quite a few drives that start in our own territory that don't gain as much so they don't delude the ratio. This is complete conjecture, as I have no idea, but that's my best guess...

Our games so far this year:

Indiana - 303 yards, 34 points, 8.91 yards/pt
Iowa State - 173 yards, 27 point, 6.41 yards/pt (!!!)
Kent State - 418 yards, 30 points, 13.93 yards/pt
Colorado State - 278 yards, 24 points, 11.58 yards/pt
Maryland - 428 yards, 51 points, 8.39 yards/pt
Penn State - 305 yards, 23 points, 13.26 yards/pt
 

AreWeThereYet

Well-Known Member
Probably a combination of defensive scoring (23 points so far this year on 0 plays) and the beginning field position. If you go 70 yards for a 7 point touchdown, it's the same as going 30 yards for a 3 point FG. With starting with the ball on our own 38 on average, 30 yards puts us into a position to make a long FG. Plus we've got a TON of +yardage possessions this year because we are turning teams over at a crazy high rate. So I think we've got a fair amount of +yardage point possessions this year, then likely quite a few drives that start in our own territory that don't gain as much so they don't delude the ratio. This is complete conjecture, as I have no idea, but that's my best guess...

Our games so far this year:

Indiana - 303 yards, 34 points, 8.91 yards/pt
Iowa State - 173 yards, 27 point, 6.41 yards/pt (!!!)
Kent State - 418 yards, 30 points, 13.93 yards/pt
Colorado State - 278 yards, 24 points, 11.58 yards/pt
Maryland - 428 yards, 51 points, 8.39 yards/pt
Penn State - 305 yards, 23 points, 13.26 yards/pt

Yes, they used he defensive point in this. (They didn't specify, I checked.) Subtracting out the 23 defensive points gives 11.5 yards/pt which is #12. Still pretty good.

They've had to face some good punters this year too. They haven't got trapped by it much. Either they got a play or punted out of it. The few times they did give the opponent good field position, they usually got scored on.
 

GesterHawk

Well-Known Member
Kirk has always been a first of all limit the number of possessions and win the time of possession coach. Old school football, great defense, dont turn the ball over, and a great kicking game and coverage.

You made a bunch of good observations and I wonder if the big chunk plays come somewhat from Brian being around the Patriots organization where they run the ball, dink the passes to the slot receivers, then hit big passes of 20+ yards when they have the right matchup and possibly one of the greatest QBS of all time
I think it is a combination of his time with the Pats and all the work he and the offense do to set up the dagger plays (plays that feel like a dagger to the heart of the other plays.)

Take the PSU game winner. All season that bootleg has had all the receivers flooding to the right. This is how the play was run early in the PSU game.
The play action was established throughout the second half. You can watch a see Spencer starting to boot out after the handoff. He normally doesn't sell it that hard.

So when it comes to run the play for the touchdown:
1. LBs bite pretty dang hard on the play action. This removes any underneath coverage that would be there to run with Nico.
2. All the other routes are the same flood routes. This causes the safeties to cheat up to the right and have their eyes on the multilevel out routes. So when Nico runs that quick fake the the right and release left, the safeties don't see him and the one player he jukes expects him to be pick up by the safety. This lets Nico get across the field unmolested and uncovered.
 

hawkfan2679

Well-Known Member
Take the PSU game winner. All season that bootleg has had all the receivers flooding to the right. This is how the play was run early in the PSU game.
The play action was established throughout the second half. You can watch a see Spencer starting to boot out after the handoff. He normally doesn't sell it that hard.
Iowa runs it a ton, for sure, but EVERYBODY runs that bootleg (so that PSU guy has likely seen that route concept before) and there is almost always:

1) A flat route to the QB's boot side (interesting...we didn't even have this as we chose to protect with LaPorta on this play, probably to protect against boot side pressure)
2) A crossing route coming from the back side
3) A deep route (or deep comeback) originating from the boot side

EVERYBODY runs it and it almost always looks the same...until it didn't. PSU guy, in his mind, thought he'd seen this live and on tape a hundred times before and thought he'd get under the route or at least beat Ragaini to the spot. His intuition proved wrong and when both athletes got up to full speed, Ragaini was nearly the entire width of the hash separated.

Great tendency breaker too, because when you roll right, most/all QB coaches and OC's are going to tell that QB don't throw back over the middle. So we broke tendency with the route concept, then we broke tendency with generally accepted QB play. Love it.
 

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
Probably a combination of defensive scoring (23 points so far this year on 0 plays) and the beginning field position. If you go 70 yards for a 7 point touchdown, it's the same as going 30 yards for a 3 point FG. With starting with the ball on our own 38 on average, 30 yards puts us into a position to make a long FG. Plus we've got a TON of +yardage possessions this year because we are turning teams over at a crazy high rate. So I think we've got a fair amount of +yardage point possessions this year, then likely quite a few drives that start in our own territory that don't gain as much so they don't delude the ratio. This is complete conjecture, as I have no idea, but that's my best guess...

Our games so far this year:

Indiana - 303 yards, 34 points, 8.91 yards/pt
Iowa State - 173 yards, 27 point, 6.41 yards/pt (!!!)
Kent State - 418 yards, 30 points, 13.93 yards/pt
Colorado State - 278 yards, 24 points, 11.58 yards/pt
Maryland - 428 yards, 51 points, 8.39 yards/pt
Penn State - 305 yards, 23 points, 13.26 yards/pt

That Iowa State game is the classic example of where the defense made it where the offense didn't need to go very far to score.

That Colorado State game.....ewwww. That was a game the offense should have rolled all over them.
 

BrianFerentzForPresident

Well-Known Member
People who still lean on yards/game to evaluate a football offense also look at pts/game to evaluate a basketball offense...I have no time for those folks. We have so much more available that accounts for so many more factors, do better.
The same folks should take a look at a bunch of those New England Patriots seasons and try to figure out how they made it to the AFC championship every year.
 

BrianFerentzForPresident

Well-Known Member
I think there is validity to this theory. The stats seem to support it, and so does common sense. Petras has a better reputation outside of the fan base than inside. Write-ups after Penn State were basically: he is efficient and maybe developing into something slightly better than just a game manager. He is definitely performing in the Top half of conference QBs.
Best touch of any Iowa QB not named Beathard or Stanzi in at least 15 years, and he doesn't throw picks. And it's not as if he's markedly worse than those two, at least outside of the first quarter, and I'll take a slow first quarter to throwing two or three picks any day.
 

kicker22

Well-Known Member
1. We put up 12 more points against the second ranked defense in the B10 (at the time) than they were allowing per game at the time. Only 3 were a result of a TO short field (this stat is both a plus and minus for the offense).

2. We have had around 8 to 12 -2 yard V-formation plays this season. This will dent a yard per play average.

3. Iowa has run about 10 to 20 less offensive plays than a lot to most of the other teams... in the nation. This is a big hit on their offensive yards totals.

4. Iowa is in the top 10 in the nation with plays over 20 yards (from the broadcast last weekend.) They are a chunk of yards team for the first time in forever. This is just interesting to me.

5. 6-0. We are scoring more than each team we have faced. Boom. (Mike drop).
Just my two cents and I'm in the corner that that stats don't mean everything, however...

1. You touch on TO short field against PSU, but what about when we pin opponents deep with special teams but fail to generate points on the ensuing possession when we just flipped the field. I'm not saying this happens a lot (nor do I have the numbers) but it seems to happen more than I'd like to see.

2. Absolutely nothing from me lol. I'll take the victory formation any day of the week unless its done intentionally to give the ball back to another team with time on the clock (ie. PSU) when a first down will win the game. I understand the logic, but I wasn't a fan, as it still scared the hell out of me regardless of how well the defense was playing.

3. Again not having an info in front of me, but would this have something to do with how we value our punting game? There are times where I think we can all agree that we play it to safe at times on 3rd down and opt to pin opponents back rather than keep the drive alive.

4. I completely agree with this, but its also concerning to me. I see it as a glass half full argument, where one could argue that we'd be in world of hurt in terms of putting up points without the big plays.

5. Winning is the end picture regardless of how what the numbers tell us offensively or defensively and at the end of the day is all that matters.

I'm not saying our offense is poor or that the numbers generated aren't influenced by our field defense and special teams, but regardless of what the numbers tell us there are times when the majority of us are going to be frustrated. That's not a shot at the offense as I still think we've yet to see their best football, but at the same time there's times when they simply don't pass the eye test. I'm a stat guy and think our offense is doing what they need to to win games as the stats show, but there's times where it still feels like were missing something.
 

dahlhawk

Well-Known Member
I think there is validity to this theory. The stats seem to support it, and so does common sense. Petras has a better reputation outside of the fan base than inside. Write-ups after Penn State were basically: he is efficient and maybe developing into something slightly better than just a game manager. He is definitely performing in the Top half of conference QBs.

Iowa drove 75 yards to get back into the game in the 2nd quarter. I literally texted a buddy right before that drive and said we were incapable of driving 75 yards against this D. He IS getting better.

Petras and the offense just need to keep chopping wood and be more efficient. BF needs to call better games too. If they have a short field, they need to score 7. If they have a long field, they need to at least get to mid-field for a weaponized punt or a field goal.

NO negative plays and NO turnovers. Move the sticks and good things can happen.
I actually though that Petras played a good game, Brian had a bad game. Some of the called plays, clock management issues were on him. Those consecutive run plays late in the game when we needed to score were tough to watch. The designed run by Petras was awful. No way was that going to work. Especially on a gimpy leg, by the way has that been ruled out as non-serious, hopefully? Petras actually showed some poise and that int. was his fault but not that bad a throw. The PSU receivers twice saved their QB from pics on high throws. I said before this game both QB's would struggle, well one of them did. Petras had decent protection considering how good the PSU pass rush has been this year. I guess if that run off center all day was to set up that game winning throw I guess it was worth it, maybe? I guess I would like at this point in the season to see a more polished run game. Some of it is on Goodson who is starting to dance and isn't hitting the holes like he did last year. Way to many times he is stopping and looking, that's never a good thing for a back to do.
 

uihawk82

Well-Known Member
I think it is a combination of his time with the Pats and all the work he and the offense do to set up the dagger plays (plays that feel like a dagger to the heart of the other plays.)

Take the PSU game winner. All season that bootleg has had all the receivers flooding to the right. This is how the play was run early in the PSU game.
The play action was established throughout the second half. You can watch a see Spencer starting to boot out after the handoff. He normally doesn't sell it that hard.

So when it comes to run the play for the touchdown:
1. LBs bite pretty dang hard on the play action. This removes any underneath coverage that would be there to run with Nico.
2. All the other routes are the same flood routes. This causes the safeties to cheat up to the right and have their eyes on the multilevel out routes. So when Nico runs that quick fake the the right and release left, the safeties don't see him and the one player he jukes expects him to be pick up by the safety. This lets Nico get across the field unmolested and uncovered.

Petras said on a postgame interview I saw on Des Moines Register HawkCentral that 1) they do not want to run that play when it looks like a blitz is coming 2) the play can be called at the LOS 3) it was first down after a PSU punt and most teams do not blitz on first down 4) Petras said PSU was blitzing in some fashion, even just a 5th guy in a run blitz about 80% of the time as he recalled it 5) but that play at the LOS pre-snap Petras said he didnt see a blitz formation so he audibled to that play he seemed to say, or maybe that play was called by Brian but if they showed blitz Petras could axe that play to another.

Anyway, the way he said it everything lined up and it worked to perfection.

Yeah go hawks
 

HawkeyeDenis

Well-Known Member
what a lot of these experts forget is that at the time Iowa played these teams their defense's were considered pretty good. Indiana, Iowa State, were both expected to have stellar defenses. They gave Iowa fits. Kent State and Colorado State were games expected to be tune ups. As it turned out they brought their best game to Kinnick. They played hard and Iowa came out a bit flat after two tough games. Maryland just fell apart after Demus went out. Their defense was also expected to be improved. Iowa, aided by their defense shredded Maryland.

Penn State has one of the best defense's in the country. That's not even a question mark. Iowa went down 17-3 and rallied back to a 23-20 win. Iowa scored 20 points on a top defense in 3 quarters. That's a fact.
 

kicker22

Well-Known Member
Petras said on a postgame interview I saw on Des Moines Register HawkCentral that 1) they do not want to run that play when it looks like a blitz is coming 2) the play can be called at the LOS 3) it was first down after a PSU punt and most teams do not blitz on first down 4) Petras said PSU was blitzing in some fashion, even just a 5th guy in a run blitz about 80% of the time as he recalled it 5) but that play at the LOS pre-snap Petras said he didnt see a blitz formation so he audibled to that play he seemed to say, or maybe that play was called by Brian but if they showed blitz Petras could axe that play to another.

Anyway, the way he said it everything lined up and it worked to perfection.

Yeah go hawks

I heard that interview as well and the thing that stuck out to me is he's young, but the maturity and IQ is there. My opinion is quickly changing listening to both him and the way his teammates talk about the confidence they have in him. I'm really thinking he is going to be looked at as more than just a game manager when he's done.
 

GesterHawk

Well-Known Member
Just my two cents and I'm in the corner that that stats don't mean everything, however...

1. You touch on TO short field against PSU, but what about when we pin opponents deep with special teams but fail to generate points on the ensuing possession when we just flipped the field. I'm not saying this happens a lot (nor do I have the numbers) but it seems to happen more than I'd like to see.

2. Absolutely nothing from me lol. I'll take the victory formation any day of the week unless its done intentionally to give the ball back to another team with time on the clock (ie. PSU) when a first down will win the game. I understand the logic, but I wasn't a fan, as it still scared the hell out of me regardless of how well the defense was playing.

3. Again not having an info in front of me, but would this have something to do with how we value our punting game? There are times where I think we can all agree that we play it to safe at times on 3rd down and opt to pin opponents back rather than keep the drive alive.

4. I completely agree with this, but its also concerning to me. I see it as a glass half full argument, where one could argue that we'd be in world of hurt in terms of putting up points without the big plays.

5. Winning is the end picture regardless of how what the numbers tell us offensively or defensively and at the end of the day is all that matters.

I'm not saying our offense is poor or that the numbers generated aren't influenced by our field defense and special teams, but regardless of what the numbers tell us there are times when the majority of us are going to be frustrated. That's not a shot at the offense as I still think we've yet to see their best football, but at the same time there's times when they simply don't pass the eye test. I'm a stat guy and think our offense is doing what they need to to win games as the stats show, but there's times where it still feels like were missing something.
The only this offense can't do and is missing is the ability to grind away the clock. Hopefully it doesn't bite them in the butt.
 

GesterHawk

Well-Known Member
Petras said on a postgame interview I saw on Des Moines Register HawkCentral that 1) they do not want to run that play when it looks like a blitz is coming 2) the play can be called at the LOS 3) it was first down after a PSU punt and most teams do not blitz on first down 4) Petras said PSU was blitzing in some fashion, even just a 5th guy in a run blitz about 80% of the time as he recalled it 5) but that play at the LOS pre-snap Petras said he didnt see a blitz formation so he audibled to that play he seemed to say, or maybe that play was called by Brian but if they showed blitz Petras could axe that play to another.

Anyway, the way he said it everything lined up and it worked to perfection.

Yeah go hawks
I'll have to find that interview, sounds like a good one.

I am sure it came in from BF as it was the first play after the punt, and it had Nico's misdirection.
 
Top