WUWs highlight surprising facts regarding current O-line

[hawkinn3]

We produce offensive linemen who are better pass blockers than run blockers anymore. Our lines are pretty consistently undersized.

We (myself included) still have this myth in our head of the cornfed Iowa farmboys mowing down defenders.

 

[trj]

@Luftgekuehlt67 posted last week about Iowa being a developmental program and being frustrated on how things will never align all in the same year. I am paraphrasing what he posted, but I think it fits perfectly in regards to the offensive line.

Under a Ferentz regime Iowa will always have at least one stud on the offensive line. Trying to develop the 2nd, 3rd,or 4th guy where it all aligns at the same time is the issue.

 

[HuckFinn]

I went to the UW Eau Claire vs UW Oshkosh game on Saturday and the Packers vs Washington game on Sunday. All four teams ran almost entirely zone blocking schemes. Media in WI believes the improvements in the Packer run game is due to the zone scheme. And, much is made of the reduced scramble runs by Rogers due to the run game improvements. Probably has added some years to his career. Apparently that was the goal with the new head coach.

 

[Ree4]

Given that most years Iowa has 2-4 new "young" players and a couple of guys injured...so the O Line is being asked to execute blocking schemes that they just can't do well consistently. SO I'm wondering is KF's philosophy hamstringing the lines effectiveness? Insisting on schemes that can't be executed consistently.

I think this is a very real possibility as it's harder to execute in unison, but it prepares the young men to be more successful in the NFL should they choose to do that IMO.

 

[HAWKINNM]

Given that most years Iowa has 2-4 new "young" players and a couple of guys injured...so the O Line is being asked to execute blocking schemes that they just can't do well consistently. SO I'm wondering is KF's philosophy hamstringing the lines effectiveness? Insisting on schemes that can't be executed consistently.

"Insisting on schemes that can't be executed consistently". WOW ... Please keep sharing that !!... oh wait ...never mind we see it every game.....I love my HAWKS but really? something has to get better with this run/ Play action pass game. we don't have to be RPO... but if I can see the flaws and I'm sure 95% of you guys can see it..........

 

[IowaTeddy]

I agree with a lot of what's being said, regarding the true "talent" / ability of our O Line in recent years. And I think there's a lot of truth that there's a lack of alignment between the perception that we develop GREAT o-linemen (based on our "style" and under Kirk) and the actual results of our O Line play.

But as a side note, I think it's horrendous that we refuse to consider playing a mobile quarterback. My guess is that deep down, our coaches think that "mobile QB" = turnovers... and they're inherently looking for game managers... who won't turn the ball over. But in this era for Iowa, in which we are DEEPLY struggling to run the ball, I don't understand why we won't consider a mobile quarterback. It could open up the offense so much. And in theory, it's not like we'd be sacrificing "accuracy" versus a guy like Petras or Stanley. Our guys have had massively strong arms, which is great, but they're not super accurate by any means.

 

[Gibsonian]

Agreed on size. I debated that with a buddy this year. Our OL is young and smallish. He pointed out that our size is similar to the 2015 team that went to the conference championship. True, but that was not a great running team either. For its time, the 2002 OL was good sized.

I have wondered whether losing Doyle has impacted our S&C the last couple years. Both sides of the line lack any impressive size. Are we just not recruiting big bodies the last few years or are we not bulking them up as readily in years past?

KF is probably the third best OL program in the conference behind OSU and Wisky, and probably on par with Michigan and PSU. Not bad, but the reputation is overblown some.

Sure but recruit wise, all of those teams start with higher ranked recruits than Iowa does. Developmental wise, we are as good or better than those teams imo.

 

[teachercoach]

I agree with a lot of what's being said, regarding the true "talent" / ability of our O Line in recent years. And I think there's a lot of truth that there's a lack of alignment between the perception that we develop GREAT o-linemen (based on our "style" and under Kirk) and the actual results of our O Line play.

But as a side note, I think it's horrendous that we refuse to consider playing a mobile quarterback. My guess is that deep down, our coaches think that "mobile QB" = turnovers... and they're inherently looking for game managers... who won't turn the ball over. But in this era for Iowa, in which we are DEEPLY struggling to run the ball, I don't understand why we won't consider a mobile quarterback. It could open up the offense so much. And in theory, it's not like we'd be sacrificing "accuracy" versus a guy like Petras or Stanley. Our guys have had massively strong arms, which is great, but they're not super accurate by any means.

The argument against "mobile/running QB" is you better be all in and have at least 3 of them that are more than functional. Playing D1 college football, those guys get hurt and have a hard time making it thru all 12 games and performing at a high consistent level. Numerous examples around the Big10 the last 5 years where that's the issue in a teams' season.

The 'drop-back NFL style QB' may get beat up a little, but usually can be dependent on the entire season. Allows you to put more on the plate for that QB and hopefully that's an advantage

 

[IowaTeddy]

The argument against "mobile/running QB" is you better be all in and have at least 3 of them that are more than functional. Playing D1 college football, those guys get hurt and have a hard time making it thru all 12 games and performing at a high consistent level. Numerous examples around the Big10 the last 5 years where that's the issue in a teams' season.

The 'drop-back NFL style QB' may get beat up a little, but usually can be dependent on the entire season. Allows you to put more on the plate for that QB and hopefully that's an advantage

I agree. I think the key there is that it would be difficult for Iowa to simply plug in a mobile quarterback and let it loose. We would need the whole quarterback group (or at least some depth) to support this structure.

But I don't fully agree with the idea of being able to depend on a guy for the full season. Our offense has been in a really really bad, deep dark place for the last month. Do we want to depend on that quality of play from our QB and offense? Or would we rather mix it up?

And by the way, watching Padilla move around a bit and use his feet (against Northwestern) is exactly what I'm talking about when I say "mobile quarterback". I have no visions of Lamar Jackson in an Iowa uniform.