What message is KF sending his team

[busabus114]

Kirk...is that you? I didn't think you knew what the interwebs was??? In all seriousness, are you some sort of idiot??? This team has scored, looked more in sync and has been way more dangerous in the no huddle this year and it was more than the last quarter of the Pitt game, I mean the old pro style worked out so well for them the first three quarters, right? It amazes me that they getting up the field on that first drive with the no huddle, they get to psu's 40 and go right back to the pro style and the drive stalls out. I don't know about anyone else, but I want a coach who will put his foot on the opponents throat and hold it there the whole game and KF ain't ever gonna do it and it is a sad state of affairs for these kids

I didnt say they shouldnt use it - all I said was that it wasnt proven which is true. I think its dumb that people just assume we wouldve scored 30 using the no huddle yesterday. We have much bigger problems than not using the no huddle

 

[tm3308]

Would any of you trust this offense on the road against a good defense?

I know he would play it the same way no matter what but yesterday was one of the few situations where it actually made sense to sit on it

I disagree. On the first possession, the no-huddle was (again) effective, and then we suddenly went away from it after we crossed midfield. And we didn't see it again until later in the second half.

There was no evidence at the time to suggest that the no-huddle wasn't going to work with nearly two minutes and two timeouts. The regular offense? Sure, there were plenty of signs at the time that it wasn't going to be particularly effective. But the no-huddle looked good again before we suddenly just went away from it.

It's become clear in the past few years that a lot of the offense's woes are not KOK's fault. He's made it pretty clear (IMO) that he would like to be more aggressive. And given the offense's success in 2002, 2004 (when we had no running game), 2005, and even the first 2/3 of last season, he's really in his element as an OC when he's allowed to be aggressive. He's more creative, and effective, when he's allowed to do his thing. Obviously, he's going to make calls that we don't always agree with (I don't agree with them all), but he's a much better OC when he's given the reins to be aggressive.

 

[JohnstonHawkeye]

I agree with everything you said tm, the bottom line here is this...KOK is not allowed to be aggressive and Norm refuses to be aggressive! How any armies win wars when they do not take the fight to their enemies? Zero, that's how many and it is very FRUSTRATING!

 

[tm3308]

I didnt say they shouldnt use it - all I said was that it wasnt proven which is true. I think its dumb that people just assume we wouldve scored 30 using the no huddle yesterday. We have much bigger problems than not using the no huddle

Our biggest problem is that several of the issues that are more important than whether or not we run the no-huddle aren't fixable. The d-line isn't suddenly going to get bigger and eat up blockers and get an effective pass rush. That's just not going to happen this year. The defense is what it is this year.

 

[Sirhouseman]

again...13 points. gave up a lot of yards, but 13 points is good enough.

 

[tm3308]

again...13 points. gave up a lot of yards, but 13 points is good enough.

Against an offense that scored 16 against Indiana, 14 against Temple, and 11 against Alabama. Penn State's offense sucks. I'm not going to blame the defense, because they're simply overmatched physically. But let's not pretend that they played some kind of terrific game yesterday, either. They held a crappy offense to their (vs. BCS opponent) scoring average.

 

[Southernhawk]

I didnt say they shouldnt use it - all I said was that it wasnt proven which is true. I think its dumb that people just assume we wouldve scored 30 using the no huddle yesterday. We have much bigger problems than not using the no huddle

Not everyone assumes that we would have scored 30 using the no huddle. PSU's defense is good. But I think it's safe to assume that using the no huddle we would have been put in a better position to score more than 3. It's also safe to assume then, that our defense wouldn't have been on the field nearly 2x as long as our offense and as a result getting gassed and gashed in the 2nd half.

 

[Sirhouseman]

again...13 points. gave up a lot of yards, but 13 points is good enough.

Against an offense that scored 16 against Indiana, 14 against Temple, and 11 against Alabama. Penn State's offense sucks. I'm not going to blame the defense, because they're simply overmatched physically. But let's not pretend that they played some kind of terrific game yesterday, either. They held a crappy offense to their (vs. BCS opponent) scoring average.

Oh you were completely expecting and banking on a shut out in Happy Valley. Got it. Wow.

 

[hawkeyescott]

This is far from proven...it worked for a quarter against Pitt

Other than that quarter when this year did Iowa run it on consecutive possessions and didn't score?

 

[rdwars]

You do? Don't you have to trust your team at some points in a game? It would be one thing if Penn State's offense looked good, but they didn't. So why not try to actually try to move the ball down the field? The point of the game is to score more points than the other team.

 

[kuhntz]

The worst part about KF sitting on the ball yesterday...there were only 3 possessions per team in the 1st half and we were down a scoring possession with them getting the ball first to start the second half.

Throwing away an opportunity to score when you are playing a game you might only get 3 or 4 possessions in the second half....seriously Kirk....wake up.

 

[SDK46]

It's the Iowa way.

Oh, BTW....we finally lost by more than 7. Pathetic.

 

[PatrickAdamovicz]

again...13 points. gave up a lot of yards, but 13 points is good enough.

Simply put....time of possession. Much like last year, Iowa is allowing double digit scoring drives, whether they are field goals or touchdowns doesn't really tell the whole story. The other team is occupying the ball for far to long, which doesn't give our offense enough plays during the course of the game. It was the exact same theme last year.

 

[HawkPhreek]

1:47 and 2 Timeouts to go and KF opts to run out the clock. I really think that is a very poor message to be sending to your players especially at this level. I also don't think this helps the recruiting efforts.

How many coaches at this level are really playing for the half to end down 3 with that much time and those timeouts? My take is a very small minority!

Not to mention Iowa was losing at the time. Even Paterno didn't call a time out till Iowa did it twice Iowa almost had to punt the ball back to them. It's an embarrassing effort with clock management with this staff.

 

[herkyattack]

Simply put....time of possession. Much like last year, Iowa is allowing double digit scoring drives, whether they are field goals or touchdowns doesn't really tell the whole story. The other team is occupying the ball for far to long, which doesn't give our offense enough plays during the course of the game. It was the exact same theme last year.

This. Iowa ran only 65 plays on Saturday, and 23 of those were in the 1st quarter.

 

[HawkPrdatr40]

Not to mention Iowa was losing at the time. Even Paterno didn't call a time out till Iowa did it twice Iowa almost had to punt the ball back to them. It's an embarrassing effort with clock management with this staff.

Exactly. Joe Pa forced Iowa's hand. Just think about that for a second. How big a slap would that have been. Say Vandebburg doesn't scramble and get the first down. We punt ball back to Penn State and they go and score. That is how pathetic this is getting. I guaranteee you that scenario will play out against Iowa sooner rather than later.