Videos & Transcripts: Phil Parker, Brian Ferentz Pressers
- Thread starter RobHowe
- Start date
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Well, if there was ever any doubt.....it's right there in black and white. The primary job of the offense is to not put the defense or special teams in bad positions. Secondarily, it's to score points. I think we've all known that to some extent, but it's interesting to hear it put out there in plain English.
That's not to say I agree or disagree with it. I certainly understand the challenges we have in recruiting really good skill position talent that can enable us to score a lot of points....but it ends up being a circular argument to a certain extent....are you not able to get the good skill guys because of the offense you play, or do you play the offense you play because no matter what, you're not going to get those great skill guys on a regular basis?
Brian certainly isn't shy about saying what he feels.....
That's not to say I agree or disagree with it. I certainly understand the challenges we have in recruiting really good skill position talent that can enable us to score a lot of points....but it ends up being a circular argument to a certain extent....are you not able to get the good skill guys because of the offense you play, or do you play the offense you play because no matter what, you're not going to get those great skill guys on a regular basis?
Brian certainly isn't shy about saying what he feels.....
HawkleberryFinn
Well-Known Member
I wonder what Hayden Fry would say to this. Brian's on record slamming Hayden's stand-up tight end. I don't know that Hayden would like the slick-haired Ferentz.
"So one thing we try to be very cognizant of offensively is we need to protect our defense and keep them out of bad positions. That means we need to protect the football, we need to change field position and we need to score as many points as we can with the opportunities we have."
Sounds like Football 101 to me.
His quote about the Bowl game was a bit more controversial:
"It was very important for us in the Bowl game to keep our defense fresh and to keep them off the field as much as possible. So even though there were some things that were probably not the most effective things in the game, it was irrelevant because we needed to make sure that we kept the clock moving and we possessed the ball as much as possible. Gave us our best chance to win."
I don't think anyone would disagree with the 1st quote. The 2nd would create a lot of argument, but as you said, it is not clear that he is wrong, though hard to prove he is right.
GesterHawk
Well-Known Member
So one thing we try to be very cognizant of offensively is we need to protect our defense and keep them out of bad positions. That means we need to protect the football, we need to change field position and we need to score as many points as we can with the opportunities we have.
I think your comments have misrepresented what was actually said.
He is saying scoring as many points as possible is a way to protect the defense. Crazy thought, I know...
He is saying that the offense can't turn the ball over. Wild idea right there.
He is saying that they can't lay an egg when they are deep in their own side of the field. Damn, he has no idea what he is talking about.
There are plenty legitimate things the criticize Brian about, what he said in that presser is not one of them.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Did you even read my post at all. Nowhere in there did I criticize him. I even made it a point to say I don't know that I necessarily agree OR disagree with that assessment.....but I did think it was notable that it was actually said out loud because in the past, it'd just be basic coach-speak....
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I wasn't surprised or taken aback by the content of what was said....I was surprised that it was actually said....Ft Kinnick and all.
RobHowe
Administrator
I wasn't surprised or taken aback by the content of what was said....I was surprised that it was actually said....Ft Kinnick and all.
I think he articulated it very well. But it's been said for the last two decades. I've lost count of how many stories I've written on complementary football. I wrote a lot about it in 2015.
I'm not sure that Iowa coaches have actually valued offense and defense equally, or in a 'complimentary' way over the years, as implied. I can think of 2 specific instances that when the defense collapsed in a dramatic way, it caused the Head Coach to completely rethink the defensive scheme. The 1st was the 4th quarter defensive collapse vs Nebraska at home a handful of years ago, which Ferentz' described as a devastating experience which caused him to review the entire program from top to bottom. The 2nd was last year's game when the defense allowed Wisconsin to march down the field for a last minute winning TD vs Iowa's 4-3 defense, which led to installation -- midseason even -- of the 4-2-5 defense. (Granted, this scheme had been talked about internally prior, but in a coach's own words, it was that one drive and outcome which led to a major change in scheme.)
On the other hand, over the past 20 years I can't think of a single offensive collapse or experience which caused the coaches to completely rethink Iowa's offensive scheme. And goodness knows, there have been some horrendous offensive games, including some of the worst in Iowa history. Greg Davis brought in a different scheme, but it wasn't significantly different.
What this says to me is defense comes first at Iowa. If it's not working, changes will be made immediately because we can't win without a good defense. Meanwhile, Iowa's offense has been unimpressive for many years, in many ways, yet there has been no effort to upgrade or significantly change the offense. That's a very unbalanced situation. Nothing really complimentary about it.
On the other hand, over the past 20 years I can't think of a single offensive collapse or experience which caused the coaches to completely rethink Iowa's offensive scheme. And goodness knows, there have been some horrendous offensive games, including some of the worst in Iowa history. Greg Davis brought in a different scheme, but it wasn't significantly different.
What this says to me is defense comes first at Iowa. If it's not working, changes will be made immediately because we can't win without a good defense. Meanwhile, Iowa's offense has been unimpressive for many years, in many ways, yet there has been no effort to upgrade or significantly change the offense. That's a very unbalanced situation. Nothing really complimentary about it.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I agree that you guys in the media have written and talked about it. Heck, Morehouse describes Iowa's offense as existing solely to protect the defense in the OnIowa pod....but I don't know that we've actually had an Iowa coach come out and essentially say that.....
Fryowa
Administrator
That’s because Brian is all psychobabble.
It’s a tactic unintelligent people use to pass themselves off as intelligent.
Use a bunch of long, rambling sentences full of ridiculous metaphors and big words to state something that’s completely obvious and basic.
Brian’s second quote you posted was actually “We want to stay on the field as long as possible.” That’s it. Which is 3rd grade level football knowledge, but he made a rambling paragraph out of it and essentially repeated himself four times. Because he’s a blockhead who wants to sound smart and articulate.
He gave no specifics, no insight, showed no knowledge at an advanced level, just total bullshit that’s obvious to little kids who don’t even watch the sport.
If you want the opposite of Ferentz-speak psychobabble, listen to Phil Parker. That guys knows football inside and out, and when he speaks he shows he knows it. Their pressers could not be more polar opposites.
Brian is a big man child who wouldn’t have gotten past preliminary interviews for OC at any other school than Iowa.
I'd feel a lot better about Brian's comments if:
1. Iowa's offense didn't consistently put its defense in bad spots;
2. Iowa's offense was consistently good at running the football;
3. Iowa's offense scored as many points as it could with the opportunities the defense gave them.
I'm not sure how anyone feels good about the offense if items 1-3 are truly the goals.
Beyond that, I'd be curious to see how many times over the years the offense had a chance to seal victory in a 1 score game by getting 1 or 2 first downs and either didn't get them, or even try to get them. Also curious to know how many times they ended up losing in those situations.
1. Iowa's offense didn't consistently put its defense in bad spots;
2. Iowa's offense was consistently good at running the football;
3. Iowa's offense scored as many points as it could with the opportunities the defense gave them.
I'm not sure how anyone feels good about the offense if items 1-3 are truly the goals.
Beyond that, I'd be curious to see how many times over the years the offense had a chance to seal victory in a 1 score game by getting 1 or 2 first downs and either didn't get them, or even try to get them. Also curious to know how many times they ended up losing in those situations.
