WTF BTN and FS1 Analysts!!?

[MelroseHawkins]

Ok, the narrative is starting to get quite old. I realize in the past that Iowa was not a flashy team, but continually hearing analysts say "That's Iowa being Iowa.....", "We'll cover the next game which will be completely different from Iowa.......", "Iowa is not flashy......", "Iowa does not change....". blah blah blah. Iowa struggled in the past because of the WR position.

IMO, Iowa played a damn good solid game last Saturday, especially for a first game. What are these morons watching? Iowa played damn good football and I found them exciting. Why don't they talk about how efficient Iowa was, especially in a first game?

Stanley was 21 for 30 for 252 yrds, 3 TD and no interceptions. He completed 70% of his passes. Of his 21 completions, 10 went to different receivers. WR's were making plays consistently. Throwing to 10 different receivers is not exciting!?

Iowa had 213 rushing yards for a nice balance in offense. Totaled 465 yds. That is not exciting?

Iowa controlled the Time of Possession 35.57 to 24.03 minutes. Seriously, what are these people watching? That's damn good football and great execution of a game plan for a first game.

I dunno, it's just the narrative from the announcers/analysts is getting old.

 

[trj]

I get what the OP is getting at; however, if you are an outsider looking in the Iowa offense does look archaic.

 

[Hawk1960]

That must have been the "Big Show" you were watching and your right ... see my OP on the Stanley narrative that no longer applies. Rick Pizzo on BTN is the worst and has always been snarky about Iowa. He's not the sharpest pencil in the box. They have their 3rd string guys on that show. Howard Griffith is the only one on the network I really pay attention to because he knows his stuff.

With the talent and depth we now have at WR, RB, OL and QBs the future is very bright but it takes some people a little longer to realize this because they live in an echo chamber.

 

[Fryowa]

They’re not wrong, though. It can be good football but it’s still completely vanilla.

 

[kameltoez102]

The style of play and formula that KF uses is not exciting. They want to control the ball by running, limit mistakes, take the ball away, play fundamentally sound defense and limit the number of possessions the other team has. We may not always like it from a fan perspective but from how many wins he has under his belt it has worked the majority of the time.

There is a reason they call it a pro-style offense because the same can be said about most games played on Sundays they are pretty boring to watch and are not that flashy. The big difference for the pro game is the emphasis on creating mis-matches if at all possible. So much more strategy is present in Pro football because the talent level, for the most part, is very similar from team to team and any little edge can help. It is also their job and the attention to detail is much higher.

The college game has changed so much the last several years where the Pro-style offense is not the normal anymore and not the sexy thing to do at the current point. Maybe it will be again at some point, who knows. I guess from my stand-point I would rather watch the style of play Iowa does rather than for example the Oklahoma/Houston game, or the ND/L:Louisville game from last night. I like the ball control offense and the emphasis on defense and tackling. I also think that Iowa carries with them a label, that while may not always be true, is going to be tough to shake.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I get what the OP is getting at; however, if you are an outsider looking in the Iowa offense does look archaic.

Why, because they didn't launch it 40 yrds? The coaches and Stanley spread the ball around which may end up being the best strategy for a team like Iowa so the defense can't key on just a few players. Iowa last Saturday didn't look any different than many good football teams. If f'ing Alabama did it (which they are quite similar actually), they'd be salivating on how good Alabama got everybody involved and spread the ball around. But, Iowa is just this plodding boring team. Screw it.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

That must have been the "Big Show" you were watching and your right ... see my OP on the Stanley narrative that no longer applies. Rick Pizzo on BTN is the worst and has always been snarky about Iowa. He's not the sharpest pencil in the box. They have their 3rd string guys on that show. Howard Griffith is the only one on the network I really pay attention to because he knows his stuff.

With the talent and depth we now have at WR, RB, OL and QBs the future is very bright but it takes some people a little longer to realize this because they live in an echo chamber.

OMG, yea, don't get me started about that Nicole Aurbacher.

 

[trj]

Why, because they didn't launch it 40 yrds? The coaches and Stanley spread the ball around which may end up being the best strategy for a team like Iowa so the defense can't key on just a few players. Iowa last Saturday didn't look any different than many good football teams. If f'ing Alabama did it (which they are quite similar actually), they'd be salivating on how good Alabama got everybody involved and spread the ball around. But, Iowa is just this plodding boring team. Screw it.

Like I stated before I get your point. It is a perception vs. a reality thing. Other than Wisconsin what other P5 school is in 12 personnel more than Iowa? . I am not saying the perception is right, but I get why it is there.

 

[4thngoal]

It wasn't boring.
As I have been saying, if a couple of those near picks were picked and a couple of passes were caught, the internet would be blowing up that we are going to have an excellent shot at winning the conference. Not just the west.
We are not talking things out of our control, we are talking balls hitting people, or that jump ball being a little further in bounds. It was that close in 4 plays.
Those 4 plays being a little sharper and nobody is going to say boring. You go from boring to WOW.
What is more exciting?????
It wasn't 4 plays on just O or just D, it was 2 plays on each side.
Which is very very close to playing an almost flawless game.
"Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence."

 

[mopkins]

I get what the OP is getting at; however, if you are an outsider looking in the Iowa offense does look archaic.

They’re not wrong, though. It can be good football but it’s still completely vanilla.

I'm actually fine with it. Running a pro style offense probably gets some recruits that Iowa might not typically get...especially at QB, OL and TE. Although the flip side is it also probably costs Iowa some WR recruits.

 

[mopkins]

Ok, the narrative is starting to get quite old. I realize in the past that Iowa was not a flashy team, but continually hearing analysts say "That's Iowa being Iowa.....", "We'll cover the next game which will be completely different from Iowa.......", "Iowa is not flashy......", "Iowa does not change....". blah blah blah. Iowa struggled in the past because of the WR position.

IMO, Iowa played a damn good solid game last Saturday, especially for a first game. What are these morons watching? Iowa played damn good football and I found them exciting. Why don't they talk about how efficient Iowa was, especially in a first game?

Stanley was 21 for 30 for 252 yrds, 3 TD and no interceptions. He completed 70% of his passes. Of his 21 completions, 10 went to different receivers. WR's were making plays consistently. Throwing to 10 different receivers is not exciting!?

Iowa had 213 rushing yards for a nice balance in offense. Totaled 465 yds. That is not exciting?

Iowa controlled the Time of Possession 35.57 to 24.03 minutes. Seriously, what are these people watching? That's damn good football and great execution of a game plan for a first game.

I dunno, it's just the narrative from the announcers/analysts is getting old.

Iowa isn't "exciting" in that they don't run the sexy fast paced BS that other teams run. They don't sling the ball all over the field and have many 65 yard TD bombs.

However, Iowa does wear defenses out and typically gives their own defense as much rest as possible. Its smart football whether these analysts like it or not.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

They’re not wrong, though. It can be good football but it’s still completely vanilla.

I disagree with last Saturday though. They had WR's that were effective and spread the ball around to 10 different receivers. In years past, they were down an entire unit for the most part.

I think analysts just assume Iowa will be the same Iowa. They may be in their game plan or approach but the game won't be as boring, IMO.

 

[Jonrn]

It wasn’t boring, I love iowa football. However rewatch the Oregon/auburn game from Saturday night. It’s a different ball game

Iowa offense and sometimes the whole program is like having an ugly child. You love it and see beauty in it. However, everyone else is seeing something else.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

The style of play and formula that KF uses is not exciting. They want to control the ball by running, limit mistakes, take the ball away, play fundamentally sound defense and limit the number of possessions the other team has. We may not always like it from a fan perspective but from how many wins he has under his belt it has worked the majority of the time.

There is a reason they call it a pro-style offense because the same can be said about most games played on Sundays they are pretty boring to watch and are not that flashy. The big difference for the pro game is the emphasis on creating mis-matches if at all possible. So much more strategy is present in Pro football because the talent level, for the most part, is very similar from team to team and any little edge can help. It is also their job and the attention to detail is much higher.

The college game has changed so much the last several years where the Pro-style offense is not the normal anymore and not the sexy thing to do at the current point. Maybe it will be again at some point, who knows. I guess from my stand-point I would rather watch the style of play Iowa does rather than for example the Oklahoma/Houston game, or the ND/L:Louisville game from last night. I like the ball control offense and the emphasis on defense and tackling. I also think that Iowa carries with them a label, that while may not always be true, is going to be tough to shake.

Solid post. I agree with that.

 

[NikeHawk21]

Unfortunately, once the narrative is built it’s hard to change it.

In my opinion Iowa’s offense was far from “archaic” on Saturday.

-ISM motions across the formation for a big gainer in the flats.

-ISM takes a jet sweep handoff for big gain.

-Iowa shows a read option look and Stanley pulls the ball for a big gain.

-Shotgun sets with two RBs flanking the QB.

-The route combination on Ragaini big gainer was high level. I think ISM running one defender off and Nico running a great route.

-Four goaline fades, one of the more exciting plays in football.

-On the FG drive Iowa ran an NFL rub play to try and get Beyer in the flats. Kid made a heck of a play and tackle.

Iowa’s offense showed a few wrinkles and that was just game 1. This is not exactly the Iowa offense of old, which I would agree was archaic at times.

 

[trj]

I'm actually fine with it. Running a pro style offense probably gets some recruits that Iowa might not typically get...especially at QB, OL and TE. Although the flip side is it also probably costs Iowa some WR recruits.

I am fine with it as well. I am strictly talking about perception on how it may look to someone who doesn’t follow the program closely.

 

[oldhawk12]

Ok, the narrative is starting to get quite old. I realize in the past that Iowa was not a flashy team, but continually hearing analysts say "That's Iowa being Iowa.....", "We'll cover the next game which will be completely different from Iowa.......", "Iowa is not flashy......", "Iowa does not change....". blah blah blah. Iowa struggled in the past because of the WR position.

IMO, Iowa played a damn good solid game last Saturday, especially for a first game. What are these morons watching? Iowa played damn good football and I found them exciting. Why don't they talk about how efficient Iowa was, especially in a first game?

Stanley was 21 for 30 for 252 yrds, 3 TD and no interceptions. He completed 70% of his passes. Of his 21 completions, 10 went to different receivers. WR's were making plays consistently. Throwing to 10 different receivers is not exciting!?

Iowa had 213 rushing yards for a nice balance in offense. Totaled 465 yds. That is not exciting?

Iowa controlled the Time of Possession 35.57 to 24.03 minutes. Seriously, what are these people watching? That's damn good football and great execution of a game plan for a first game.

I dunno, it's just the narrative from the announcers/analysts is getting old.

When you continue to play nobody and refuse to even leave the state in the month of September, and have the son of the coach running the offense (a former center no less), this is how the world views you. You can choose to keep making excuses, yell louder or mumble something about never being able to find anyone any better or you can demand change or at least demand an intersectional away game like most programs that have top 15 budgets and facilities. You can’t have the aw shucks but then turn around and bitch when the National media pokes holes in our balloon when we beat a middling mac team in the 4th quarter at home.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Unfortunately, once the narrative is built it’s hard to change it.

In my opinion Iowa’s offense was far from “archaic” on Saturday.

-ISM motions across the formation for a big gainer in the flats.

-ISM takes a jet sweep handoff for big gain.

-Iowa shows a read option look and Stanley pulls the ball for a big gain.

-Shotgun sets with two RBs flanking the QB.

-The route combination on Ragaini big gainer was high level. I think ISM running one defender off and Nico running a great route.

-Four goaline fades, one of the more exciting plays in football.

-On the FG drive Iowa ran an NFL rub play to try and get Beyer in the flats. Kid made a heck of a play and tackle.

Iowa’s offense showed a few wrinkles and that was just game 1. This is not exactly the Iowa offense of old, which I would agree was archaic at times.

Iowa got Ross involved with a few touches including a pass.
Iowa ran a wheelroute to Sargent.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

When you continue to play nobody and refuse to even leave the state in the month of September, and have the son of the coach running the offense (a former center no less), this is how the world views you. You can choose to keep making excuses, yell louder or mumble something about never being able to find anyone any better or you can demand change or at least demand an intersectional away game like most programs that have top 15 budgets and facilities. You can’t have the aw shucks but then turn around and bitch when the National media pokes holes in our balloon when we beat a middling mac team in the 4th quarter at home.

Nothing in my post said I was wanting to get rid of Brian Ferentz. Actually he opposite and I actually think he is breathing life into the offense and making nice changes.

 

[oldhawk12]

Iowa isn't "exciting" in that they don't run the sexy fast paced BS that other teams run. They don't sling the ball all over the field and have many 65 yard TD bombs.

However, Iowa does wear defenses out and typically gives their own defense as much rest as possible. Its smart football whether these analysts like it or not.

It’s also pretend football because against the upper echelon, of college football, it doesn’t compete and that’s the real reason kirk/gary don’t play those games in September. The other reasons are hogwash