What is the model to follow?
- Thread starter CP87
- Start date
BILLBUCKNER
Well-Known Member
They chose the right coaches for sure. It does not hurt that they are sitting in Texas with all that talent to choose from. What is puzzling is why on earth is TEXAS not the ALABAMA of college football. Coaching.
SmokeTownHawk
Well-Known Member
But at this point in time what savvy aggressive OC would Iowa be able to get and would KF allow him to be aggressive and not reign him in?
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
This is where the "knowledge" part comes in.
Oregon has a HUGE donor. One might say "private" donor, although both the school and the donor, from all appearances, don't worry too much about keeping it "private". In fact, empirical evidence, in the form of press releases, ESPN features and local news links, shows that "publicity" seems to be the very nature of the relationship between Nike and Oregon. And with all that "above-board" stuff, the natural assumption for the sheeple is that it all MUST be kosher, right? Like, if ABC News says it, it HAS to be true.
Here's the cute little secret: Nike is just as competitive as the folks in the Oregon Athletic Department. And there are TONS of ways to make the "relationship" look upstanding, rule-abiding and full of integrity.
So take a step back and take a good look. People say Iowa doesn't have beaches to sell (Agreed). Oregon doesn't have beaches to sell (Agreed).
So what does an Oregon, a Baylor, a TCU, even an Alabama post-down period, all have to sell? Wonderful and brilliant head coaches and staff members? Go with that for a bit. Then look at the histories. Nick Saban was pretty much "slightly above average" at Michigan State. He excelled at L$U. He was very much below average at Miami/NFL. He is near-unbeatable at Alabama. What does the two "success" stops and the two non-success stops have in common?
Ditto Oregon. How good was Oregon before Nike entered the picture? While other schools may have big donors (Oklahoma State, for example), what do schools with big donors who don't enjoy the same level of success have in common (for the most part)?
I-N-T-E-G-R-I-T-Y
COULD we enjoy the same level of success as Ohio $tate? Probably not. Do you think Urban Meyer has "integrity"? Do you think folks out of that coaching tree have it? (Tressel, Urban-ite, et. al.)?
I get that a lot of folks on this board don't have it. I'm glad that our staff, for the most part, does.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
Here are a few of my ideas for a new start:
* Change the type of offense we use. We need to change to a form of the spread or pistol. You can still run power from the spread and it doesn't mean you have to throw on every down. With the proliferation of 7 on 7 football to being year round, in many places, the skill position kids are coming into college more ready to play, right away, than ever before. This goes for the back 7 defensive players, as well. This would put Iowa in line with being able to recruit higher caliber recruits.
* Start recruiting the higher caliber kids. There are several reasons that I believe lead us to continue to sign 2 and 3 star kids:
1. Our head coach is his own best negative recruiter. When a head coach continually calls his program "not sexy" and "developmental" this translates to recruits. The high caliber kids aren't impressed by that.
2. The waiting 3 years to "develop" skill position kids (and other positions) is ridiculous. Urban Meyer has been winning with freshman qb's for years. It is absolutely possible to do. Look at F$U. Walk into a high caliber skill players house, sit down in their living room and promise them game time and commit to how much game time. We must upgrade our recruiting, across the board, but particularly at the skill positions.
3. Our coach wants the 2 and 3 star recruit so that he can develop them. With approach as your backbone to your recruiting, you get what we have.
* Stop treating the non conference as scrimmages. By design, we routinely play close non conference games. Unfortunately, we also regularly lose at least 1 non conference game. Playing close ball control games by design limits the quantity of offensive plays in each game. The result of this is our coaching staff doesn't put in deep reserves to get them playing time. Blowout wins in the non conference should be the mantra so that you can play your freshmen and RS freshmen to get them on film. Use the non conference season as a "developmental" tool and not just the off season workouts.
* Become innovative.
* Utilize the killer instinct mentality. Iowa needs to try and light up the score board at every opportunity. This also helps recruiting. Recruits want to go where it is fun to play. Scoring a lot of points = fun to play. This goes for the defensive side of the ball, also. Iowa needs to be aggressive. Not just out of control no thought to it aggressive, but well thought out strategic and meaningful aggression. The aggressor dictates the game, most times.
I don't want to get further down into the minutia, but these items would be a good start.
* Change the type of offense we use. We need to change to a form of the spread or pistol. You can still run power from the spread and it doesn't mean you have to throw on every down. With the proliferation of 7 on 7 football to being year round, in many places, the skill position kids are coming into college more ready to play, right away, than ever before. This goes for the back 7 defensive players, as well. This would put Iowa in line with being able to recruit higher caliber recruits.
* Start recruiting the higher caliber kids. There are several reasons that I believe lead us to continue to sign 2 and 3 star kids:
1. Our head coach is his own best negative recruiter. When a head coach continually calls his program "not sexy" and "developmental" this translates to recruits. The high caliber kids aren't impressed by that.
2. The waiting 3 years to "develop" skill position kids (and other positions) is ridiculous. Urban Meyer has been winning with freshman qb's for years. It is absolutely possible to do. Look at F$U. Walk into a high caliber skill players house, sit down in their living room and promise them game time and commit to how much game time. We must upgrade our recruiting, across the board, but particularly at the skill positions.
3. Our coach wants the 2 and 3 star recruit so that he can develop them. With approach as your backbone to your recruiting, you get what we have.
* Stop treating the non conference as scrimmages. By design, we routinely play close non conference games. Unfortunately, we also regularly lose at least 1 non conference game. Playing close ball control games by design limits the quantity of offensive plays in each game. The result of this is our coaching staff doesn't put in deep reserves to get them playing time. Blowout wins in the non conference should be the mantra so that you can play your freshmen and RS freshmen to get them on film. Use the non conference season as a "developmental" tool and not just the off season workouts.
* Become innovative.
* Utilize the killer instinct mentality. Iowa needs to try and light up the score board at every opportunity. This also helps recruiting. Recruits want to go where it is fun to play. Scoring a lot of points = fun to play. This goes for the defensive side of the ball, also. Iowa needs to be aggressive. Not just out of control no thought to it aggressive, but well thought out strategic and meaningful aggression. The aggressor dictates the game, most times.
I don't want to get further down into the minutia, but these items would be a good start.
In your opinion, can this happen with staff changes, or does it have to involve a complete overhaul?
As for offensive scheme, I am a huge fan of Oregon's system and think it could work at Iowa. Run heavy (about 65%), uses athletic linemen, does not require a QB with an elite arm, just needs to be a quick decision maker and reasonably athletic. When they do throw, they throw deep at a higher percentage, and more successfully, then just about anyone else. I also think Oregon does a nice job of spreading the offensive responsibility. Many of the spread systems put so much on the QB that I feel it detracts from the team approach and exposes that QB to a borderline criminal level of abuse. Iowa would need more speed at the RB position, but I think that is something that can be obtained as well. Oregon's RBs have not been elite recruits for the most part, and they have not had huge pro success. They have been players who can take advantage of the open field created by the overall speed and design of the offense.
I am probably in a large minority here, but I also love watching Georgia Tech or the service academies. I think that style lowers your ceiling, but I enjoy watching it.
Elwood
Well-Known Member
Iowa football can reach the next level without changing much. Start going after the best kickers in the country. How many games have been lost by 1-6 points in the last 10 years? These losses alone would have made a huge difference in this conversation. A lights out kicker is huge to any program. A cluch punter turns field position in every game played. Bring in a great punter and kicker every year, and Iowa is playing for Big 10 titles on a regular basis. All great teams, have great kicking games, period.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
Yes and No. An absolutist embracing of either is foolish. Most of life happens in that gray area in between polls. Much as pop culture and the mass media love to force people into a false dichotomy (you're either THIS...or you're THIS...you're either FOR or you're AGAINST)... intelligent solutions usually fall somewhere in between. And I think most people do too.
Much of what Ferentz does is solid. But his weaknesses are so glaring that almost anybody (including the 60 yr old lady in my section) can see them and understand what should change. If you keep the best of KFz and he's willing to accept his weaknesses and delegate those to a great OC, for example... then you have a pretty damn good program. This year alone, it would have us at 9 wins...minimum.
Well thank god Im not one of those folks- I looked up the definition of Luddite a couple of years ago when kurt used the term in an interview- it means somebody that doesn't like twitter
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
CP87, to me, kfootball has proven that he doesn't want to change. If kfootball was willing to change like I've described, then great I think he could do these things. Mike Bellotti was the HC that oversaw the development of Oregon by bringing in Chip Kelly as the OC. It can be done. But since I believe kfootball won't embrace this type of full scale change, a new regime is needed.
TychoBrahe
Well-Known Member
We need to stop looking for pro-style QB's, period. We need guys who can be, when needed, equal threats to run or pass. It's not as if we'd be giving up a philosophy that is producing all-B10 QB's--Rudock wasn't one, Vandt wasn't, Stanzi kind of was maybe, but JC wasn't. Tate was more in that run or pass mode--except we never let him run, and he proved to be a great passer.
Really, the only true pro-style QB we've had who was successful was Stanzi.
By having a non-run-threat QB. we automatically limit ourselves. Add to that the mystery of Weisman staying at HB when we didn't need to keep him there, and you have an offense with VERY limited options.
We've set ourselves up to fail. Clearly, we need a new OC, new offensive philosophy, and a head coach willing to change those things. And there's the rub: I do not think KF is that coach. He cannot change, partly because he's stubborn and a control-freak, but also because he doesn't see the NEED to change. He's in denial.
Really, the only true pro-style QB we've had who was successful was Stanzi.
By having a non-run-threat QB. we automatically limit ourselves. Add to that the mystery of Weisman staying at HB when we didn't need to keep him there, and you have an offense with VERY limited options.
We've set ourselves up to fail. Clearly, we need a new OC, new offensive philosophy, and a head coach willing to change those things. And there's the rub: I do not think KF is that coach. He cannot change, partly because he's stubborn and a control-freak, but also because he doesn't see the NEED to change. He's in denial.
guffus
Well-Known Member
Iowa should hire someone like Tom Herman, The OC at OSU for $2M as the head coach. And offer $1.5M to Pat Narduzzi to be DC. And hire kevin wilson when he gets fired at Indy, to be OC for $750k.
Total amount $4.3M for HC and 2 coordinators.
Thats a cant lose combo. Today in CF there is too big of gap between HC and his assistants in pay. The HC should be paid less and Coordinators paid more.
Total amount $4.3M for HC and 2 coordinators.
Thats a cant lose combo. Today in CF there is too big of gap between HC and his assistants in pay. The HC should be paid less and Coordinators paid more.
A
alexzelada
Guest
I would've stated it thusly: There are optimists and pessimists.
guffus
Well-Known Member
Uh, not the same thing.
BILLBUCKNER
Well-Known Member
Make sense except the HC gets to choose who is on his staff. What you are proposing sounds like a coaching committee that won't work. Those big egos would clash. The HC lives by the sword and dies by the sword. He is ulitmately responsible. I am not opposed to paying the coordinators more to help the HC attract top talent.
I don't know why we don't utilize more JCs. We have one of the top JC programs in the country in our backyard. Steer non qualifiers there and prep them to come to Iowa.
Current model can work given more talent and more importantly the ability to land it:
* Why do we end up competing with MAC schools (or equivalent) so often?
* Why do most of our weekend visits end up with no commits? Why can't we close like most others do?
* Why did we wait so long to put together a more robust recruiting structure with supporting personnel?
* After 16 years with the same leader why do we not have some (any?) pipelines to high schools outside of Iowa?
* Why does it seem our recruiting focus geographically seems like it lacks a clear plan? One moment were not going to spend much if any time in FL, for example, and then the next year we decide we will? Our strategy most often seems to be to go into the backyards of those programs that are suffering as well as focusing within a certain mile radius (Ferentz quote) of IC. With MN, WI, MO programs all on the rise that strategy becomes suspect, no?
* Why no JC players with few exceptions?
I believe it all starts with head man's thinking of where recruiting fits into the importance of having a successful program. I don't expect Top 10 recruiting rankings but we should be doing better and haven't in my opinion. The recruiting game is much less about "discovering" good recruits (tech changed that long ago) it's now about outselling your competitors.
* Why do we end up competing with MAC schools (or equivalent) so often?
* Why do most of our weekend visits end up with no commits? Why can't we close like most others do?
* Why did we wait so long to put together a more robust recruiting structure with supporting personnel?
* After 16 years with the same leader why do we not have some (any?) pipelines to high schools outside of Iowa?
* Why does it seem our recruiting focus geographically seems like it lacks a clear plan? One moment were not going to spend much if any time in FL, for example, and then the next year we decide we will? Our strategy most often seems to be to go into the backyards of those programs that are suffering as well as focusing within a certain mile radius (Ferentz quote) of IC. With MN, WI, MO programs all on the rise that strategy becomes suspect, no?
* Why no JC players with few exceptions?
I believe it all starts with head man's thinking of where recruiting fits into the importance of having a successful program. I don't expect Top 10 recruiting rankings but we should be doing better and haven't in my opinion. The recruiting game is much less about "discovering" good recruits (tech changed that long ago) it's now about outselling your competitors.
M
mysteron
Guest
It can't work. And you listed the reasons why.
.........not under the current regime or staff makeup but that's part of the intent of the posting along with noting that few models work consistently well when ample overall talent is missing.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
My short answer is to follow Oklahoma's model. Tending to lean towards Alabama's model, now, as well. The defense must be dominant and the offense must try to keep up with the high powered spread offenses. Iowa has neither
Last edited:
