HawkeyeMHA
Well-Known Member
Hate to get ahead of myself, but I bet next year with JVB as a senior we throw it even more.
We all think Iowa was pass crazy in 2004
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
And rightfully so that's our thing right now. I agree go with your strength. Don't bottle up a talented pass game to try and prove you can run.
Next year will be the same as this one, but better. Vandy will be a SR who is all but done with school, Coker will be a JR and have all these carries this year plus some time from last year, we will see atleast 2 more backs develop. We got some big hands in the secondary and we should finally start seeing some TE development. Thats what I said we need some good juco DL and we would be sitting pretty good next year.
If a couple guys can develop on the D line really well, it could be a good year. But if not, next year's D line is looking like it could be worse than this year.
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
It will certainly be interesting. We'll be better at RB, TE, FB, and QB in 2012. In fact, if Reiff sticks around ... a strong argument could be made that the OL would have a good chance of being better in '12 too!
Without question, McNutt's graduation will be felt. However, the good news is that Keenan Davis and Tin-Man have already emerged to a degree where it's fair to be optimistic about the progress of their development. Furthermore, just as Keenan and Tin-Man emerged this year ... it's probably not a stretch to believe that somebody out of the trio of Shumpert, Grant, and Hillyer could emerge in '12 much like how Tin-Man has emerged in '11.
Anyhow, I do expect that Iowa's play-action game will be a good bit more dangerous in '12 than it is now ... and that will continue to allow the Hawks to gain yards in big chunks.
DFaceHawkeye
Well-Known Member
In 2004ass Attempts per game - 32.1Rush Attempts per game - 35.7Pass Yards per game - 240.1Rush Yards per game - 72.6This year
so, with the inequity in yrds per rush versus yrds per catch in 2004 and still the total blind loyalty to continue to run the ball, I would assume the coaches haven't read up on the Nash Equilibrium. If they had, the ratio of passes to rushes would be a little different.
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
Nah ... Nash Equilibrium just doesn't really apply there. Knowing equilibrium strategies doesn't necessarily fare as well in games that can be biased so easily by rare events.
Where you see "blind loyalty" ... you're also seeing a strategy that succeeds on two very important fronts. ONE key front is that opposing Ds were sufficiently nervous about Tate's passing ability that we actually got blitzed surprisingly little in '04. As a result, running the ball not only allowed us to gain some yardage ... but it also forced opposing Ds to still have to think about reading run. That possibility alone helps out Iowa's play-action game ... and the whole principle of play-action is basically to take advantage of the fact that the opposition will actually implement a strategy to bring about a Nash Equilibrium (by accounting for our tendencies). The SECOND key front is that by running the ball ... it allowed Iowa's D to at least get some rest ... and that was critical given how poor the depth was on the DL that year.
I dont know, but did you know according to B10 site, Coker is in 3rd right now? He is behind Wisky and PSU. Given his rather slow start this year and given PSU had the whole qb issue (causing them to pound the rock more) and given Ball and Wisky padding numbers on an easy schedule, I would say he is doing rather well. I hope he pushes it harder, cuz man he is fun to watch. He could end up in 2nd if he turns it up just a bit more.
Section136
Well-Known Member
Albert Young led the league in 2005. Conference games only.
BIG TEN CONFERENCE Official Athletic Site - Football
