Time to Switch Out Brandon Smith?

IowaLawWasRight

IowaLawWasRight

Well-Known Member
The bye week is the time coaches get a chance to reevaluate things, watch tape, and make the changes they would not ordinary get to make during the season. This is normally the time when you'll see a guy who has been playing well in practice get a chance to get more playing time.

Brandon Smith went into this season touted as Iowa #1 receiver out of the 10 WRs we have on scholarship. He has the size and the look of a Big 10 receiver and unlimited potential.

Well...starting for the Hawks in all 4 games (and by default, taking playing time away from those on the bench), he has hauled in a grand total of 5 passes and zero touches. While that's not terrible, those are the numbers most starting WRs in the Big 10 put up in 1 game, not 4.

If Brandon is not the answer this year, maybe it's time to see what the other guys can do. Tyrone Tracy and Nico Ragani have played just 5-10 snaps all year and both have already been nearly as productive as Smith. Would they have more than 5 catches if they were starters? My guess is that it's possible. Max Cooper already has 4 catches and he virtually never plays either. Some of it is just a matter of having a knack for getting open...regardless of your God given athleticism.

No matter what excuses are made for our WRs, the numbers don't lie. We need our WRs to be more productive out there.
 
Last edited:
I'm all for letting guys develop, but why not give some other guys reps. Let's see what they can do. Screw the "tenure" thing. (aka: union card) Let's see who can perform on the field.
 
Um no... None of those others must be doing as well in practice either or they would have been playing them more..

To me it's also about play calling. How many plays have they had where he was the primary receiver on the route and then how many of the times was he targeted and thrown at? Now he's dropped a few and when you've only had but a handful thrown at you that feels worse then it may be. I don't think he's been targeted in the endzone yet. I'm still waiting to see them to throw him more of those jump ball/back shoulder type of 50/50 balls that I think he'd thrive at. He's so much bigger than most of the DBs he's up against he should be able to box them out for em. But if you don't call those types of plays....

Maybe if he'd been targeted twice as much he'd have not dropped as many. Or more unless his volume were to go up we'll not know that. I'm not throwing in the towel on a true soph who's got the physical ability he has through 4 games just yet. I like you am really hoping for some more production from not only he but the rest of the group. That said our game plan and the defense we are playing against often dictates a lot of it. Our TEs took up a hook chunk of the targets against Wisky and I'm not going to complain about that much as those two guys are pretty much our best players...
 
How many targets does Brandon Smith even have this year? Its kind of maddening saying Iowa's WR's are terrible when we never throw to them...unless we never throw to them because they're terrible. Chicken vs Egg?

remember when Marvin McNutt had 82 catches in 2011? That same year Keenan Davis had 50 catches and KMM had 30 catches. Have we even targeted 1 receiver 82 times since then? I would assume not.

"Strange" that Greg Davis showed up at Iowa the very next year. Davis did a lot of damage to Iowa, but maybe the least recognized is that he slaughtered our WR position.
 
Ree4 said:
How is Brandon Smith "tenure"? This is his 2nd year here..
Click to expand...

It's all relative...he's more "tenured" than Ragaini and Tracy. Smith has also been named starter...which KFz rarely walks back unless a guy really struggles badly (like Amani Jones).

Either way...let's just throw em the damn ball (to paraphrase Keyshawn Johnson)
 
mopkins said:
How many targets does Brandon Smith even have this year? Its kind of maddening saying Iowa's WR's are terrible when we never throw to them...unless we never throw to them because they're terrible. Chicken vs Egg?

remember when Marvin McNutt had 82 catches in 2011? That same year Keenan Davis had 50 catches and KMM had 30 catches. Have we even targeted 1 receiver 82 times since then? I would assume not.

"Strange" that Greg Davis showed up at Iowa the very next year. Davis did a lot of damage to Iowa, but maybe the least recognized is that he slaughtered our WR position.
Click to expand...
Oh the good ole days of KOK.... I've always been on the fence with how he did. He wasn't as bad as a ton of folks thought or as good. I think that era was when Reisner was our TE. He was a good/ok TE but we weren't targeting him nearly as much as we are Fant/Hockenson now... Regardless of if this roster had a McNutt, Davis, KMM on it Fant would be the featured receiver I would hope so it's an interesting dynamic of how would they distribute the targets/touches if that was the case
 
Receivers generally have a problem getting open or creating space at Iowa. I'm beginning to think its the routes in the playbook. They really need to evaluate their playbook after the season. I'm so sick of this being an issue.
 
hawkdrummer1 said:
It's all relative...he's more "tenured" than Ragaini and Tracy. Smith has also been named starter...which KFz rarely walks back unless a guy really struggles badly (like Amani Jones).
Click to expand...

or Toren Young (named starter in spring, now on the #2 OR line with Sargent), or Cole Banwart (started to begin the season, currently 2nd), or Cedrick Lattimore (starter last year, currently 2nd), or Rugumba (started last year, benched for freshman Hankins), or Gervase (starter to begin last year, replaced by Hooker), or Miles Taylor (2 year starter at S, eventually replaced by Gervase). But aside from those examples just from the last 2 years, it hardly ever happens.
 
Smith was probably the #5 receiving target coming into this season behind Fant, Easley, Hock, and ISM in some order. Sure he was on the one line on the depth chart but that doesn’t mean a whole lot.

He had a bad opening game as did our entire passing attack, Fant included. Game winning catch against ISU.

Smith will be fine and continue to improve with reps and confidence.
 
NikeHawk21 said:
Smith was probably the #5 receiving target coming into this season behind Fant, Easley, Hock, and ISM in some order. Sure he was on the one line on the depth chart but that doesn’t mean a whole lot.

He had a bad opening game as did our entire passing attack, Fant included. Game winning catch against ISU.

Smith will be fine and continue to improve with reps and confidence.
Click to expand...
Yeah he's gaining. They need to not only use mop up time to develop depth, but if you are up by 14 and pretty much have been dominant, throw one to them in the end zone. The confidence or learning lesson is invaluable, if they score or not.
 
NikeHawk21 said:
Smith was probably the #5 receiving target coming into this season behind Fant, Easley, Hock, and ISM in some order. Sure he was on the one line on the depth chart but that doesn’t mean a whole lot.

He had a bad opening game as did our entire passing attack, Fant included. Game winning catch against ISU.

Smith will be fine and continue to improve with reps and confidence.
Click to expand...

You're mixing other positions in which isn't what people mean. They mean he was classified as the #1WR position, not who would catch the most balls in a season.
 
4thngoal said:
Yeah he's gaining. They need to not only use mop up time to develop depth, but if you are up by 14 and pretty much have been dominant, throw one to them in the end zone. The confidence or learning lesson is invaluable, if they score or not.
Click to expand...

Actually, even going deep and not hitting the receiver is important, just for the fact the D has to play a bit honest and maybe not hug the box so much.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Actually, even going deep and not hitting the receiver is important, just for the fact the D has to play a bit honest and maybe not hug the box so much.
Click to expand...

This. No better example than this week's game. Minnesota will load the box as they know they need to stop our run. Must make them pay.
 
If Iowa is playing well, we are going to throw the ball max 25-30 times. You have to think about our TEs much differently than how most teams evaluate them. We have two NFL TEs right now and they have 30 catches between them...including 4 of the 5 TDs. Whereas most teams don't use one TE well, Iowa uses two very well and gets them open. Iowa's plan is to stay ahead on the chains, and use the short passing game to wear teams down. The WRs are a part of that, but the TEs and backs are the primaries as the catches show.

I will tell you...Brandon Smith made maybe the single most important catch of the young season against Iowa State. I also think he has looked much much better in running routes and catching the ball. As we start to open things up a bit...which is typical when you get in the B10. I think he will have 35 by season's end...or more. I think he's developing...and hopefully gaining some confidence.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Receivers generally have a problem getting open or creating space at Iowa. I'm beginning to think its the routes in the playbook. They really need to evaluate their playbook after the season. I'm so sick of this being an issue.
Click to expand...

Check out a lot of Oklahoma's routes plus it helps to have there QB who can move around and buy time but when I watched OU and ISU the OU receivers would take off on streak/fly routes and if they beat the Dback they kept going.

If they didnt have the Dback beat they would plant a foot, break down and run a comeback pattern and be so frigging wide open it was like stealing candy from the Clown babies.

I think the comeback pattern is totally underused because the receiver can be moving mostly right back at the QB so there is no side to side aiming the pass or the receiver can move toward the sideline and be open.

jNW uses the comeback pattern to open up guys along the sidelines for safe open passes.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Receivers generally have a problem getting open or creating space at Iowa. I'm beginning to think its the routes in the playbook. They really need to evaluate their playbook after the season. I'm so sick of this being an issue.
Click to expand...

This.

I don’t believe that the early KF years we were grabbing 5* talent at the WR years and yet we got much more success from that position there. That tells me it the scheme.

One thing I hate that our playbook utilizes is the “come back” route or the box route. Our receiver completely stops out of their break and squares up to the QB. Then once the pass is completed, their momentum is completely stopped. The receiver has to turn around and restart their momentum (most of the time the defensive back has caught up and makes the tackle). Our YAC has to be low.
 
uihawk82 said:
Check out a lot of Oklahoma's routes plus it helps to have there QB who can move around and buy time but when I watched OU and ISU the OU receivers would take off on streak/fly routes and if they beat the Dback they kept going.

If they didnt have the Dback beat they would plant a foot, break down and run a comeback pattern and be so frigging wide open it was like stealing candy from the Clown babies.

I think the comeback pattern is totally underused because the receiver can be moving mostly right back at the QB so there is no side to side aiming the pass or the receiver can move toward the sideline and be open.

jNW uses the comeback pattern to open up guys along the sidelines for safe open passes.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything you said but you have to remember, OU is recruiting 4*-5* receivers left and right. Their talent level is WAY above what we have on the roster. They make those comeback routes look so much better than our guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top