Before the last 2 games, we were converting at a clip way above average. Lately it's been worse to bring us back closer to average.
This game is tailor-made for "Old Kirk"
- Thread starter SpiderRico
- Start date
Before the last 2 games, we were converting at a clip way above average. Lately it's been worse to bring us back closer to average.
It is the yips when you miss 3 kicks in 3 games from around the 5 yard line. Now if I said he sucks and can't be relied on, that would be throwing him under the bus. Stating the fact that he has the yips to agrue that a field goal is no sure thing isn't throwing him under the bus. But I guess if you only see black and white, your response makes sense.
Agreed. I've been indifferent on a couple decisions but have loved the rest.
chicagoherky
Member
Let's just play with those numbers:
The expected points from kicking a field goal from short yardage could be expressed at probability of making it times the point value or 0.875 * 3
Thus the expected point value for a short field goal would be 2.625
Now we can also look at the expected points from going for the touch down on fourth and short, here we see that Iowa has gone for it 8 times and converted 5 of those, this is not enough for us to develop a confident estimate but we will do the math for completeness 0.625 * 6
Thus the expected point value of going for the touchdown would be 3.75 points if the percentages hold, another way to look might be the national average:
The national average for 4th down conversions is 51.47%, the expectation then becomes .5147 * 6
Thus resulting in an expectation of 3.09 points by going for it on 4th and short.
So we have a net gain of .57 points by going for it on 4th and short vs. kicking the field goal.
This of course does not take into account the stage of the game (if there are only a few seconds left and field goal would win it for example), but I think the math would hold early in the game like we have seen thus far.
For this weeks game, the last thing the coaches should do is have a pass/run option for CJB.
Again, only talking about this weeks game, but CJB should hand the ball off, throw a few screens and throw quick slants in the middle. Cause you know NW is going to blitz the Hawks silly and CJB doesn't need to take any hits this game.
You said the kicker had the "yips". I don't call that a favorable term and I don't see how Koehn has the "yips". I think most on here would argue the exact opposite. So he missed a PAT. I think we were due to miss one. He has been money.
homes
Well-Known Member
Don't see it happening. Maybe conservative on defense - no big plays, but that's the way Iowa always plays defense. On offense, I think it would be a major mistake to crawl into a shell and just try to survive. They still have weapons. The TEs are effective, Canzeri out of the backfield, Smith has made some plays that NW will have to now respect, which should open up some space for Vandeberg. If NW can't stop Iowa's running game, then of course we'll see a steady diet of that, with play action mixed in, but that's not Old Kirk, that's Hayden Fry football.
Koehn doesn't have the yips - you don't bang in two clutch FGs deep in the fourth quarter if you're fighting the yips.
Koehn doesn't have the yips - you don't bang in two clutch FGs deep in the fourth quarter if you're fighting the yips.
ThunderHawk
Well-Known Member
We've seen the Old Kirk the past two weeks. And it almost bit us on the hind end (twice) Old Kirk is sitting on a touchdown lead, or less, trying to run out the clock, grind it out. Hard to argue with success, but neither the Wisconsin game, or the Illinois game should have been nail biters, we left points on the field and played not to lose....just like the old days.
ThunderHawk
Well-Known Member
I totally disagree.
Kurt ran the ball in those games because his offensive line was masquerading as a triage unit and The Ceej was getting lambasted every other time he went back to pass. Kurt didn't leave points on the field. Dropped passes and missed field goals left points on the field. He passed on third down on the possession when we were up 3; J Smith dropped a perfect pass. You had to kick it there. On the ensuing drive after the fumble, the only goal was to kill clock and make it a 2 possession game. Kurt had faith in Koehn to pull it off. Total NFL move.
The team is 6-0 without optimal execution. The players have left a lot of points on the field, as the coach is almost always getting them into a play that will work if properly executed. Regardless it demonstrates faith in the players and faith that they can score again.
homes
Well-Known Member
Iowa left points on the board against Illinois because Smith and Beathard didn't connect in the end zone (thrown slightly behind Smith), Beathard just missed Vandeberg on a fade to the NW corner, and Smith dropped a pass that would have led to a first down (and maybe a touchdown). That wasn't Kirk being conservative, it was just missed opportunities that left up to 15 points off the board. As far as sitting on a lead, Illinois couldn't stop Canzeri in the 4th quarter - that's smart football, not being unnecessarily conservative. If he was being unnecessarily conservative, he would have run the ball on 3rd and 5 instead of trying to hit Smith on the post move (it was open, Smith dropped it).
As far as Wisconsin, again, missed opportunities in the first half, although I would agree that the play calling got conservative in the second half.
ThunderHawk - we're on the same page on this one.
I see and agree with your point....kind of. I am not disagreeing with the results. But 13 first down plays in the second half...all running, almost all up the middle. He was risk adverse, that is Old Kirk.
ThunderHawk
Well-Known Member
You have a point there, although I've also heard guys like Podolak and Chuck Long say that sometimes that's a function of recognizing a defensive tendency that could lead to huge gains (such as Canzeri's 75 yard run.)
One thing Kurt hates, and this is something that we're all just going to have to accept, is not getting positive yards on first down. It's his NFL mentality: Get to third and short; if you have second and short, take a shot. It frustrates me too at times but we're gonna be stuck with that Old Kirk for as long as he's here.
I also don't think on Saturday he had much faith in the pass blocking, and rightly so.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Yep. Backed up with a freshman QB, bad passing game & questionable punter, if true. I like it.
A
alexzelada
Guest
Percentage-wise he is second in the conference. BTW, isn't it fun we're having debates about our excellent kicker being excellent (remember the rugby punt?), rather than the debates we USED to have. You know, the ones where we ask each other, "How did we lose to Iowa State?"
SteveGarvey
Well-Known Member
Just like boy-wonder Jordan Spieth can mis-hit a golf shot now and again, a great kicker like Koehn can miss a PAT. It happens.
A
alexzelada
Guest
The thing I luv about Koehn, is when we need him to come thru, he is money. That 57yarder should erase his bar bill in Iowa forever. Without the win we are just another team with one loss. With that win our press grows each week.
Last edited by a moderator:
We've seen the Old Kirk the past two weeks. And it almost bit us on the hind end (twice) Old Kirk is sitting on a touchdown lead, or less, trying to run out the clock, grind it out. Hard to argue with success, but neither the Wisconsin game, or the Illinois game should have been nail biters, we left points on the field and played not to lose....just like the old days.
I, too, completely disagree. How is going for another TD on 4th being "just like the old days?" How is throwing the ball on 3rd and 5 not "new Kirk?" In the past, we would have continued to run the ball on 3rd and 5 (not going for the dagger). Now, we do it more than ever and it's the just the same old Kirk? You do realize we are trying to throw the ball deeper and less horizontal, right? You do realize that the 4th quarter drive where the ball went to JC 11 straight times smacks of bullies of the big ten and a will breaker, yes? It's not conservative to be willing to take chances and to let CJ make plays. I guess I am not watching the same games. Maybe I have too much kool-aid in my glass.
I, too, completely disagree. How is going for another TD on 4th being "just like the old days?" How is throwing the ball on 3rd and 5 not "new Kirk?" In the past, we would have continued to run the ball on 3rd and 5 (not going for the dagger). Now, we do it more than ever and it's the just the same old Kirk? You do realize we are trying to throw the ball deeper and less horizontal, right? You do realize that the 4th quarter drive where the ball went to JC 11 straight times smacks of bullies of the big ten and a will breaker, yes? It's not conservative to be willing to take chances and to let CJ make plays. I guess I am not watching the same games. Maybe I have too much kool-aid in my glass.
