Why not run the pistol?

deanvogs said:
Statistically speaking if you have 1 odd result in 5 years of data, that is considered outlier. I would agree with you if the 4 other year were all good and we have 1 bad outlier. Alas we have had 4 bad years, and 1 good year is it.

Greg Davis offensive passing stats:
2012: #102 in the country at 187 YPG
2013: #95 in the country at 197 YPG
2014 #56 in the country at 237 YPG
2015: #89 in the country at 204 YPG
2016: #106 in the country at 180 YPG

Like I said, one data point is the outlier.

8 Years Under KOK, right before GD:
2011: #59 in the country at 235 YPG
2010: #49 in the country at 234 YPG
2009: #55 in the country at 222 YPG
2008: #90 in the country at 180 YPG
I don't have national rankings from here on out, but here are YPG:
2007: 190 YPG
2006: 240 YPG
2005: 257 YPG
2004: 240 YPG

The data outlier in KOK case is the 180 and 190 YPG. The norm was around 230+ and the down years both included Jake "The Snake" throwing the ball..
Click to expand...
I don't have the Exel file any more. It was provided by Jon Miller to HN in 2015. Ask Miller for the total offensive stats per season under KF. The average yards per game. I just committed this information to memory when Miller put it out in 2015.

You want to blame Iowa's consistently low passing rating compared to other D1 schools on Iowa's OC?? Well, that's a strawman argument. Blame KOK for Iowa's consistently low passing rating while he was OC, too?? The blame goes to KF not to the OC. Read my previous post in this thread #17. It chronicles some of the obstacles thrown in the way of 'Iowa offense' and Iowa OCs by KF.
 
Last edited:
HomerChampless said:
I don't have the Exel file any more. It was provided by Jon Miller to HN in 2015. Ask Miller for the total offensive stats per season under KF. The average yards per game. I just committed this information to memory when Miller put it out in 2015.

You want to blame Iowa's consistently low passing rating compared to other D1 schools on Iowa's OC?? Well, that's a strawman argument. Blame KOK for Iowa's consistently low passing rating while he was OC, too?? The blame goes to KF not to the OC. Read my previous post in this thread #17. It chronicles the obstacles thrown in the way of 'Iowa offense' and Iowa OCs by KF.
Click to expand...


I agree the overall offensive problems with Iowa have to do with KF.

I am talking about Iowa's passing schemes. They were much better, and much more productive under KOK. You can look at the two different OC's that KF has had and one consistently averaged 230+ YPG passing the ball. The other can't hardly get to 200 YPG passing the ball.
 
uihawk82 said:
It is basically I formation with the QB sometimes in a short shotgun where the I-back can run the same running plays. hawks could line up with two tight ends, kittle and fant, and then split them out to go 4 wide or run power with the TEs in tight. this would give a lot less of a tell to the defense and KF could be happy about running I formation power football.

Even with that the uptempo offense with 4 wides seems to work with CJ calling plays with hand signals, etc.

I even think they could go uptempo under center just to tire out the defense and not give them time to sub or make their defensive checks.

I am just frustrated like in 2014 with an inconsistent stagnant offense while even teams like jNW and Purdue can get guys open downfield.
Click to expand...
Playing devil's advocate, what does this gain you over take every snap out of the traditional 1 back, 12 personnel package? We still run the same plays, still have the ability to split them out to go 4 wide, can bring them in tight for a downhill running game, and doesn't provide a "tell" to the defense about the play. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, if you want to use double tights and 2 WR's there's only a QB and RB in the backfield which, as long as you line him up directly behind the QB, is still going to provide no keys as to play direction or what is trying to be accomplished.

Ickehawk said:
Yeah, scrapping your offensive scheme in the middle of the year and trying to put in a WHOLE NEW offense in the bye week sounds like a great idea, lol.........You people kill me.........
Click to expand...
Formation, not new offense. Given the similarity to what the scheme is already trying to accomplish, I would look at this pistol as just a different means to the same end. Unless we're going to try to line up in the pistol and run of the Nevada-style option stuff, in which case that's a very expensive install (read: time sensitive). But I don't think that's what the OP is suggesting, unless I'm misunderstanding.
 
Ickehawk said:
You really believe that McCarron (state 100 champ), Smith and Scheel don't have speed??? Lol......Speed is not the problem einstein. I don't get on the coaches much, but our route scheme SUCKS, and our QB can't read sh*t.....It's a combination of things. Yeah, that walk-on from NW that killed us is a burner, lol.......
Click to expand...
They certainly don't have elite speed, but like all (ok, most) D-1A recruited wide receivers, they have enough that, if put in positions to succeed, they can be successful. Therein lies the rub...
 
deanvogs said:
I agree the overall offensive problems with Iowa have to do with KF.

I am talking about Iowa's passing schemes. They were much better, and much more productive under KOK. You can look at the two different OC's that KF has had and one consistently averaged 230+ YPG passing the ball. The other can't hardly get to 200 YPG passing the ball.
Click to expand...
The purpose of Davis' scheme, IMO, is to recruit more athletic receivers and QBs than Iowa is accustomed to under KF. Iowa won't have to retrain athletes from other positions to become their go to pass throwers and catchers. Pass production will take care of itself once Iowa has better athletes at these skill positions. Also, Davis is forcing QBs and receivers to adjust to what the defense is giving them instead of forcing it. That's how the NFL does it (unless you're Chip Kelly). Which is another selling point for Iowa.
 
hawkfan2679 said:
They certainly don't have elite speed, but like all (ok, most) D-1A recruited wide receivers, they have enough that, if put in positions to succeed, they can be successful. Therein lies the rub...
Click to expand...
Watch the replay, again, if you will, of the play where McCarron was denied that pass reception for a TD against Wisky. The play was textbook Davis. CJ recognized a dearth of Wisky coverage in the middle. McCarron recognized the dearth of coverage in the middle and broke to the middle for an apparent touchdown. Too bad the play clock had wound down. Even the TV announcers - of which , at least, one was a former pro QB - lauded the vision of Iowa's QB and receiver on that play. They drew it up (Davis' passing scheme) for the national TV audience to be informed.
 
Last edited:
lol. This is ludicrous to even propose. Propose something more reasonable. Like, run play-action, or blitz more than a couple times a game. -200% chance KF does or tries ANYTHING new.
 
Of course a new offense right now is not realistic. However, something different has got to occur. If Iowa was regularly winning 9 games (or more) a year I'd be fine with what they're doing, but they're not. Since Davis has arrived, they've won 5, 8, 7, 12, (and likely 6 or 7) games. That's unsatisfactory for a program that professes to want to be one of the top programs if the country, if not at least in the Big Ten. Maybe the worm will turn these last 4 games, and we'll all look like jerks for calling out the program before the season is completed. Man, I hope I'm right about that. One thing, I'll be watching, and I'll be cheering (and bitching when necessary).
 
HomerChampless said:
The purpose of Davis' scheme, IMO, is to recruit more athletic receivers and QBs than Iowa is accustomed to under KF. Iowa won't have to retrain athletes from other positions to become their go to pass throwers and catchers. Pass production will take care of itself once Iowa has better athletes at these skill positions. Also, Davis is forcing QBs and receivers to adjust to what the defense is giving them instead of forcing it. That's how the NFL does it (unless you're Chip Kelly). Which is another selling point for Iowa.
Click to expand...

Well he has had 5 years and he has done NONE of what you think he is trying to do. It is a disaster, was always a disaster and posters like me knew it wasn't going to work after year 1 of this stupid hire.
 
I blame the scheme. We may have some fast receivers, but IMO they don't appear nearly as fast because they're having to think while reacting rather than just running a set route. Not saying its world class speed but as others have stated far inferior athletes are getting open while we simply are not. My opinion it started as a GD problem that became a KF problem because he's never had it fixed.
 
I should add that under KF we've never had what I'd call a great passing attack, but under KOK I felt that there were some seasons where it was going to be as good as it could get based on KF's preference to pound away at a defense.
 
Is it just me or is the best part of this thread the fact that we have been reduced to pretending that the fans get to choose the offense?!?

I am truly grateful Gore invented the internet.
 
uihawk82 said:
It is basically I formation with the QB sometimes in a short shotgun where the I-back can run the same running plays. hawks could line up with two tight ends, kittle and fant, and then split them out to go 4 wide or run power with the TEs in tight. this would give a lot less of a tell to the defense and KF could be happy about running I formation power football.

Even with that the uptempo offense with 4 wides seems to work with CJ calling plays with hand signals, etc.

I even think they could go uptempo under center just to tire out the defense and not give them time to sub or make their defensive checks.

I am just frustrated like in 2014 with an inconsistent stagnant offense while even teams like jNW and Purdue can get guys open downfield.
Click to expand...


Because that would be innovative. We don't do innovative at Iowa!
 
HomerChampless said:
Watch the replay, again, if you will, of the play where McCarron was denied that pass reception for a TD against Wisky. The play was textbook Davis. CJ recognized a dearth of Wisky coverage in the middle. McCarron recognized the dearth of coverage in the middle and broke to the middle for an apparent touchdown. Too bad the play clock had wound down. Even the TV announcers - of which , at least, one was a former pro QB - lauded the vision of Iowa's QB and receiver on that play. They drew it up (Davis' passing scheme) for the national TV audience to be informed.
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure what you are asking me or why you quoted my post (maybe in reference to being put in best positions to succeed?), but here's my best response...
* Was McCarron hot on that play? (Don't recall)
* Was Wisconsin in cover 0? (Feel like they were)
* Was that an audible called at the LOS? (Don't recall)
* If so, was the audible at the LOS the reason we had to take the timeout? (Not sure)

I put my responses to my own questions after the questions themselves. I don't think it's a revelation that a good blitz beater would be a quick slant route...from what I remember about that play was the horrible leverage by the guy covering McCarron, which I chalked up to hearing the whistle blowing the play dead. I could be remembering incorrectly though.
 
hawkfan2679 said:
They certainly don't have elite speed, but like all (ok, most) D-1A recruited wide receivers, they have enough that, if put in positions to succeed, they can be successful. Therein lies the rub...
Click to expand...

This can be said about most of our opponents. The huge difference is the opposition routinely picks on and creates mismatches mainly against our linebackers. We do a terrible job at creating mismatches. Most of the athletes Iowa has are not elite but they can do some things if given the opportunity.

I remember a few years with KOK where I thought we had some good schemes but for whatever reason we had a case of the drops for a few seasons. Now we don't even give them a chance and the playcalls are so predictable or the routes just make no sense in relation to the down and distance. In my opinion I would rather accept failure if there were some risks taken and some guts shown rather than the vanilla BS going on. Every play they need to play to win, not set-up the next drive.
 
deanvogs said:
Well he has had 5 years and he has done NONE of what you think he is trying to do. It is a disaster, was always a disaster and posters like me knew it wasn't going to work after year 1 of this stupid hire.
Click to expand...
Oh. You forget 2016 and 2015? Iowa's offense bailed out Iowa's defense in 2016 and 2015, IMO.
 
Last edited:
hawkfan2679 said:
I'm not really sure what you are asking me or why you quoted my post (maybe in reference to being put in best positions to succeed?), but here's my best response...
* Was McCarron hot on that play? (Don't recall)
* Was Wisconsin in cover 0? (Feel like they were)
* Was that an audible called at the LOS? (Don't recall)
* If so, was the audible at the LOS the reason we had to take the timeout? (Not sure)

I put my responses to my own questions after the questions themselves. I don't think it's a revelation that a good blitz beater would be a quick slant route...from what I remember about that play was the horrible leverage by the guy covering McCarron, which I chalked up to hearing the whistle blowing the play dead. I could be remembering incorrectly though.
Click to expand...
I don't know, you seem to want to review vines of plays. It's in your ID.

If Iowa would've called for predetermined pass patterns on that play, there wouldn't have been any guarantee Iowa would've exploited the lack of defense in the middle of the field. For all we could've known, Iowa could've called a pass pattern into the teeth of the Wisky defense.

As far as the possibility of an audible called to change the pass play to exploit the middle of the field, when has Iowa called an audible that does any more than switch to a run from one side of the field to the other?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top