What more scoring would have done, one extra TD or FG

[uihawk82]

I have always been of the school of thought that KOK and perhaps KF were too conservative when they had the ball. That there was at least one scoring opportunity wasted per game.

Someone may have done this before but I used the Historical Scores website to compare the Hawk's actual record under KF, under KF scoring 7 more pts per game, under KF with 3 more pts per game. The results are below and I should say scoring 1 more TD per game would have led to 2+ more wins per year (and adding 7 or 3 pts resulted in some ties).

Actual Wins With 1 TD With 1 FG
96 124 103

Since the defense has been a strength of the Hawks under KF I think it reasonable in most games to think we held the opponent to their true score.

My position and what I hope to see is G Davis and KF score more on average and over the next 4 or 5 years we will see some really good records.

Any one dispute this?

 

[Smarthawk]

Well it's only half of the equation. If your defense gives up 3 more or 7 more per game then it just means the games will be higher scoring w/ out changing the outcomes.

 

[uihawk82]

Well it's only half of the equation. If your defense gives up 3 more or 7 more per game then it just means the games will be higher scoring w/ out changing the outcomes.

I put my logic out there that the hawk defense was almost always playing up to their potential so the opponents score would not have changed.

I think the hawks offense has mostly underperformed in the scoring statistic. I am stating that the hawk offense could have and should have scored more in the past.

And I am looking forward I hope to more scoring.

 

[HaydensDad]

The whole reason to be conservative is not to give up field position or turnovers. So if you are going to speculate about what would have happened of kirk was less conservative you should also credit the opposing teams' scores, probably more than you credit Iowa's. Thus, we would have lost more games.

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

By field position do mean taking a knee before the half?

 

[uihawk82]

By field position do mean taking a knee before the half?

Exactly, that is giving up scoring opportunities.
Punting on 4th and 5 on the opponents 35 yard line is giving up opportunities.
Conservative play calling on the opponents side of the 50 yard line.

 

[MoseSchrute]

I've said before that even 3 more points per game would have helped out quite a bit.

 

[BlondeTuco]

I just did my own research, and found that if Iowa simply ran hail-marys on each play from scrimmage, each one would have connected to result in blow-out wins.

In all seriousness, being less conservative doesn't directly equate to points. If you convert on fourth-and-short, you still need to move your offense downfield to get within scoring range. Seeing as the opponents defense stopped you on the last set of downs, there is nothing to say they wouldn't do it again.

While I won't fully defend Ferentz kneeling the ball and taking his timeouts to halftime, there is a methodology to conservative football - like it or not. To use UIHawk's logic, Iowa would have beat Wisconsin in 2010 if they managed to get another field goal; oh wait, they MISSED that field goal and had an extra point blocked. Iowa's defense always plays to its full potential and wouldn't give up points? Clearly Pryor didn't convert the long fourth down that same year, leading to the go-ahead touchdown.

The simple fact is that every fan of every team expects 100% efficiency from all their units, and don't want to give credit to what the other team does. You even flat-out say that the defense will always do its job, so why not buy-in to Ferentz's plan which gives the defense more opportunities to force turnovers and stop the opposing offense with better field position?

 

[1977Hawkeye]

I just did my own research, and found that if Iowa simply ran hail-marys on each play from scrimmage, each one would have connected to result in blow-out wins.

In all seriousness, being less conservative doesn't directly equate to points. If you convert on fourth-and-short, you still need to move your offense downfield to get within scoring range. Seeing as the opponents defense stopped you on the last set of downs, there is nothing to say they wouldn't do it again.

While I won't fully defend Ferentz kneeling the ball and taking his timeouts to halftime, there is a methodology to conservative football - like it or not. To use UIHawk's logic, Iowa would have beat Wisconsin in 2010 if they managed to get another field goal; oh wait, they MISSED that field goal and had an extra point blocked. Iowa's defense always plays to its full potential and wouldn't give up points? Clearly Pryor didn't convert the long fourth down that same year, leading to the go-ahead touchdown.

The simple fact is that every fan of every team expects 100% efficiency from all their units, and don't want to give credit to what the other team does. You even flat-out say that the defense will always do its job, so why not buy-in to Ferentz's plan which gives the defense more opportunities to force turnovers and stop the opposing offense with better field position?

Agreed. IMO there are a lot of different reasons why Iowa has lost so many close games in recent years, and only part of it is on the offense. From showing up lethargic against opponents we're favored to handle easily (particularly on the road), to poor special teams (FG's, PAT's and allowing long kickoff returns.. when was the last time we've blocked a punt, either?), to the defense unable to get stops on 3rd or 4th and long, to the offense being unable to convert 3rd downs consistently, etc.

I'm no football expert, but it seems like all of those little things are leading to losing the close games.

Offensively, I don't know if it's so much about being too conservative as it is making GOOD calls in given situations and not being too predictable - like insisting on handing off when the opponent is stacking the box, or handing off on 2nd and 10 nine times out of ten. I think you can still make fairly conservative play calls on offense and not find yourself in 3rd and 8 situations all the time. I just think there is room for improvement across the board (offense, defense, special teams).