He must have been coached up by our crack QB staff from last year. Either that or this analyst should be fired.
Iowa Spring Football Depth Charts (Deacon QB2; Marco QB3) + KF Press Conference
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
You know deep down in your heart that very little is going to change. Lucy is still going to pull the ball away before Charlie Brown can kick it.
I cannot believe that kid is still on the roster much less QB2. JFC.
I'm starting to feel sorry for BF
I'm starting to feel sorry for BF
Depending on how much confidence you have in Cade’s ability to stay healthy, I think you may want to make other plans for a number of Saturday afternoons this fall.
i’m feeling pretty upbeat based on the quotes in this thread. this is the least amount of bs (about the offense) kirk has shoveled our way after brian became oc. it is a relief to hear him acknowledge the state of the ol.
Have you actually paid attention to Kirk Ferentz Iowa Football??
I will be looking for fall weddings to attend.
does it matter? That kid belongs on no depth chart at all above DIII.
If he is above any QB on the roster, including true FR, the head guy needs his head examined. He should have been Creaned at the end of the season.
Silver lining with Cade being out is Lainez splitting reps (I’d guess almost equally with Deacon) at this point. If Cade was healthy, I bet Lainez would have even less chance to display his abilities for the new OC.
That said, I’m very interested to see when the actually new weights are listed. If Deacon is still 250+, that tells me he hasn’t taken the offseason seriously. At. All. If you have a chance to be a D1 starter, you better be doing everything in your power to be the best player you can be. Period. Frankly there’s zero reason he shouldn’t weigh in at a lean 235. If he did that, I’d at least have some optimism if he was the starter for some games this year. Not because of talent or what we’ve seen to date - obviously - but because it would show he actually gives a damn.
That said, I’m very interested to see when the actually new weights are listed. If Deacon is still 250+, that tells me he hasn’t taken the offseason seriously. At. All. If you have a chance to be a D1 starter, you better be doing everything in your power to be the best player you can be. Period. Frankly there’s zero reason he shouldn’t weigh in at a lean 235. If he did that, I’d at least have some optimism if he was the starter for some games this year. Not because of talent or what we’ve seen to date - obviously - but because it would show he actually gives a damn.
Woof on that second line from Kirk. A lot of ouch there. First, it’s your job as coaches to make them better. Second, is that a concession he thinks they stink?
I don’t have much sadly. Hope I’m wrong but I doubt he plays much this season.
This. Like people think that Piper still weighs 255lbs. Must be someones first day looking at these charts.....
I know it's damn near impossible to replace Linderbaum's production but I have felt with Elsbury the snaps and run game were a little better compared to Jones
Based on Cade’s history I don’t have high confidence. And honestly, while he’s miles ahead of DH, he’s barely an average B1G QB. I really hope come fall Marco is QB2 pushing for QB1 hard.
Agree. Only positive Deacon Hill provided was saving me $4000 and skipping bowl game. I told my wife while sitting at BT Championship game in Indy, if Hill QBS in 4th quarter we are skipping bowl game. No way I could watch another Hill shit show in person. Hill then took being bad to another level.
I think they're just saying Cade is # 1 when healthy. But for Spring, Hill/Marco are splitting reps with Hill probably getting the lion's share with the 1's.
In the age of nil and the portal, how can “ Burger King of the “ Hill possibly be the best we can do at #2?
Unbelievable.
Unbelievable.
Unfing believable. Immobile, inaccurate, turnover machine.
I commented it was funny he’s listed as less than Deacon, I did say it was likely last years weights. Still funny to think that they were even close to the same weight last year.
Would be curious to see what piper and laulk are up to now.
My understand on what KF means by philosophy is a much broader view than 50-50 run/pass.
Having spent some time with the staff now an again, this has more to do with a high level of awareness and decision making, all things considered, to win a game.
It's really the dreaded "C word", which I know Kirk would take back if he ever could, because it has been burned into the mind of most every Iowa football fanatic....
Complimentary.
It's really speaking of having a blueprint for success through offense, defense and special teams and understand how they each impact the other during the course of a game, particularly late. A lot of it is situational, and KF wants to have trust in his coordinators to make the right calls at the right time to mitigate risk of loss.
He has a headset and will use it, but would rather have his guys know what to do within the blueprint - because they all have access to it. It's one of the reasons he's so high on Lester - because as a former HC, Tim gets it.
And yes, there is no question that the offense is going to look and play different.
If he is going full speed in June, he can absolutely be in 100% condition by the first game. No excuse.
Oh yes I can. I stopped going to games after going to 99% of them since the late 1970s. If I can stop going to Kinnick I can find other things to do at home. Will I check the score? Yep. Will I watch Deacon Hill QB the team? Unless he has some MASSIVE turnaround in play, then nope.
I thought the same as you, by the Tennessee game it was such a feeling of mild rage he was still playing and pure childish laughter when he would mess up again. And that’s not to bash the kid, in fact l, I feel bad for him. Felt bad for Petras when they kept sending him out there. Hopefully it’s not him, and if it is I think I’ll have a max 2 games before I make the leap of not physically watching games and just checking score and stats after games.
Good points. Mine was a much more narrow view as I was caught up in the question about Lester as the OC, but I think your universal view is accurate. Kirk certainly has a track record, and nothing in the past 25 years is going to discourage him from following it this year. Mitigating against the risk of loss is a huge part of it.
I suppose that is why in a close game on 3rd and 10 from Iowa's 40 he'll run the ball; if they get the first down great. If they don't they'll punt it and try to stone the opponent inside their 10, ergo, punting is winning. I bet he has reams of data that supports it. Regardless, fans don't care for loss mitigation football, particularly when it is not as effective against teams with better talent.
Last edited:
Potential change coming down.................
Ross Dellenger
Senior College Football Reporter
Wed, Mar 27, 2024, 7:01 AM CDT·6 min read
In many aspects, college athletics is steadily expanding.
The College Football Playoff, for example, is moving from four to 12 teams. The four major conferences will grow next academic year by a combined 13 teams. League television contracts continue rising, coaching salaries soar and the schedule itself is growing longer.
Next up: coaching staffs.
The NCAA Football Oversight Committee introduced a legislative proposal this month that would expand the abilities of a football support staff, permitting all staff members to provide players skill and tactical coaching instruction — both during practice and games. The proposal, introduced for a second straight year after failing to get approval last spring, eliminates the policy limiting coaching instruction to only the NCAA’s maximum of 11 “countable” coaches: the 10 assistants and head coach.
The proposal strictly maintains the number of off-campus recruiters to 11, but gives flexibility to head coaches to potentially designate any 10 staff members as “countable” coaches who are eligible to recruit off-campus.
The proposal is now in a six-week socialization stage as members of the oversight committee receive feedback from their respective conferences. The committee is scheduled to meet in mid-May to assess feedback and potentially adopt the legislation. Any adoption from the committee is subject to the approval of the DI Council, the primary NCAA governing board that consists of 40 members from all 32 conferences.
If the proposal is adopted, it will take effect either in time for summer training or the start of fall camp, said Craig Bohl, the executive director of the American Football Coaches Association. The AFCA endorses the proposal “100%,” said Bohl, who sits on the oversight committee.
“This is probably the most common sense approach that we could make,” he told Yahoo Sports. “For years, we’ve had analysts and quality control coaches who have had a desire to coach. So much has changed with the landscape with players now being compensated. To be concerned that you’re going to have an assistant quarterbacks coach out there coaching is counter productive. It’s been a compliance nightmare.”
For years now, coaches have encouraged administrative leaders to expand coaching abilities to their full staffs beyond the 11 countable coaches. Most FBS programs have upwards of two dozen support staff members with various titles such as analyst, recruiting coordinator, quality control coach and directors of player personnel, player development and player relations.
According to NCAA rules, those staff members — many of them former position assistants and head coaches — are not permitted to provide coaching instruction to players within the building, at practice or during games. It’s a somewhat unenforceable rule that many schools already violate to a degree.
“It really takes all the gray area out of what each role can do and not do,” said West Virginia coach Neal Brown, a member of the AFCA Board of Trustees. “There is a little gray area in some leagues, and some compliance departments look at it differently than others. I think it’s really good for the profession. Our job as coaches is to grow and develop those on your staff.”
However, lifting the limitations opens the door for the further expansion of staffs that have swelled over the years.
The Division I Council rejected a similar proposal last spring in a surprising move that angered many in the coaching profession. The Council, encompassed mostly of administrators as well as representatives from FCS and non-football playing leagues, did not adopt the proposal predominantly out of the policy change triggering a proliferation of coaching staffs.
Coaches push back on such a notion. Auburn coach Hugh Freeze, one of the loudest supporters of the change, believes that most teams at the major conference level will employ a second assistant at each position group and a separate coach for special teams.
The policy change would likely produce more coaches designated with NFL-like titles, such as assistant offensive line coach or assistant quarterbacks coach.
“You can have too many. I don’t want 40 coaches,” Freeze told Yahoo Sports. “We need more people than ever to try to hold our teams together. We need the bodies to help capture our kids and culture and manage the 85 (man roster). At some point, we’re limiting their growth.”
There are several potential unintended consequences aside from swelling staffs.
The change could be viewed as yet another way that more well-resourced programs will separate themselves, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to stockpile coaches. Many expect the move will trigger more coaching movement from the Group of Five to Power Four.
There is also a question of the proposal’s impacts on the graduate assistant position. Each team is allotted two graduate assistants who are able to provide coaching to players. Opening up coaching abilities to all staff members eliminates that unique benefit of GAs.
Charged with vetting this issue by the oversight committee, Bohl believes there will still exist a sustainable and healthy pathway for graduate assistants under the academic model if the proposal is adopted.
The proposal comes a few weeks after the NCAA Rules Committee recommended the implementation this season of a player-to-helmet communications system. Coaches will have the ability to communicate with one player on each side of the ball through a helmet mic that cuts off with 15 seconds remaining in the playclock. They will also have the ability to watch previous plays on digital tablets from the sideline — a reason that the coaching proposal expands to in-game instruction, Bohl said.
The committee examined several versions of the proposal, including one in which only the 10 countable coaches and head coach could provide skill instruction on gameday. The current version of the proposal could change as committee members receive feedback.
“With the tablets on the sideline, it seems counterproductive, as coaches, not to allow coaching duties during the game,” Bohl said.
In the recruiting space, 11 staff members would be designated for off-campus recruiting. Those 11 people would be required to adhere to NCAA protocols and current recruiting limitations. While that could extend beyond position assistants, Bohl believes that most position assistants would want to recruit as a way to begin building relationships with their future players.
“Some people say you could hire a bunch of quality control guys to coach and you’d have these other guys recruiting. That’s an NFL model,” Bohl said. “What I see, when you’re out recruiting, you are still projecting. The relationships… the guy who recruits these guys is going to want to coach them.”
The recruiting portion of the proposal allows for flexibility similar to the NFL, Brown said. Those coaches who were in non-coaching roles would be permitted to teach.
“It gives experienced staff members who don’t like the grind of recruiting an opportunity to get them back on the field coaching rather than being in an advisory role,” he said.
https://sports.yahoo.com/sources-co...ing-role-of-all-staff-members-120144263.html#
Sources: College football oversight committee pushing to expand coaching role of all staff members
Ross Dellenger
Senior College Football Reporter
Wed, Mar 27, 2024, 7:01 AM CDT·6 min read
In many aspects, college athletics is steadily expanding.
The College Football Playoff, for example, is moving from four to 12 teams. The four major conferences will grow next academic year by a combined 13 teams. League television contracts continue rising, coaching salaries soar and the schedule itself is growing longer.
Next up: coaching staffs.
The NCAA Football Oversight Committee introduced a legislative proposal this month that would expand the abilities of a football support staff, permitting all staff members to provide players skill and tactical coaching instruction — both during practice and games. The proposal, introduced for a second straight year after failing to get approval last spring, eliminates the policy limiting coaching instruction to only the NCAA’s maximum of 11 “countable” coaches: the 10 assistants and head coach.
The proposal strictly maintains the number of off-campus recruiters to 11, but gives flexibility to head coaches to potentially designate any 10 staff members as “countable” coaches who are eligible to recruit off-campus.
The proposal is now in a six-week socialization stage as members of the oversight committee receive feedback from their respective conferences. The committee is scheduled to meet in mid-May to assess feedback and potentially adopt the legislation. Any adoption from the committee is subject to the approval of the DI Council, the primary NCAA governing board that consists of 40 members from all 32 conferences.
If the proposal is adopted, it will take effect either in time for summer training or the start of fall camp, said Craig Bohl, the executive director of the American Football Coaches Association. The AFCA endorses the proposal “100%,” said Bohl, who sits on the oversight committee.
“This is probably the most common sense approach that we could make,” he told Yahoo Sports. “For years, we’ve had analysts and quality control coaches who have had a desire to coach. So much has changed with the landscape with players now being compensated. To be concerned that you’re going to have an assistant quarterbacks coach out there coaching is counter productive. It’s been a compliance nightmare.”
For years now, coaches have encouraged administrative leaders to expand coaching abilities to their full staffs beyond the 11 countable coaches. Most FBS programs have upwards of two dozen support staff members with various titles such as analyst, recruiting coordinator, quality control coach and directors of player personnel, player development and player relations.
According to NCAA rules, those staff members — many of them former position assistants and head coaches — are not permitted to provide coaching instruction to players within the building, at practice or during games. It’s a somewhat unenforceable rule that many schools already violate to a degree.
“It really takes all the gray area out of what each role can do and not do,” said West Virginia coach Neal Brown, a member of the AFCA Board of Trustees. “There is a little gray area in some leagues, and some compliance departments look at it differently than others. I think it’s really good for the profession. Our job as coaches is to grow and develop those on your staff.”
However, lifting the limitations opens the door for the further expansion of staffs that have swelled over the years.
The Division I Council rejected a similar proposal last spring in a surprising move that angered many in the coaching profession. The Council, encompassed mostly of administrators as well as representatives from FCS and non-football playing leagues, did not adopt the proposal predominantly out of the policy change triggering a proliferation of coaching staffs.
Coaches push back on such a notion. Auburn coach Hugh Freeze, one of the loudest supporters of the change, believes that most teams at the major conference level will employ a second assistant at each position group and a separate coach for special teams.
The policy change would likely produce more coaches designated with NFL-like titles, such as assistant offensive line coach or assistant quarterbacks coach.
“You can have too many. I don’t want 40 coaches,” Freeze told Yahoo Sports. “We need more people than ever to try to hold our teams together. We need the bodies to help capture our kids and culture and manage the 85 (man roster). At some point, we’re limiting their growth.”
There are several potential unintended consequences aside from swelling staffs.
The change could be viewed as yet another way that more well-resourced programs will separate themselves, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to stockpile coaches. Many expect the move will trigger more coaching movement from the Group of Five to Power Four.
There is also a question of the proposal’s impacts on the graduate assistant position. Each team is allotted two graduate assistants who are able to provide coaching to players. Opening up coaching abilities to all staff members eliminates that unique benefit of GAs.
Charged with vetting this issue by the oversight committee, Bohl believes there will still exist a sustainable and healthy pathway for graduate assistants under the academic model if the proposal is adopted.
The proposal comes a few weeks after the NCAA Rules Committee recommended the implementation this season of a player-to-helmet communications system. Coaches will have the ability to communicate with one player on each side of the ball through a helmet mic that cuts off with 15 seconds remaining in the playclock. They will also have the ability to watch previous plays on digital tablets from the sideline — a reason that the coaching proposal expands to in-game instruction, Bohl said.
The committee examined several versions of the proposal, including one in which only the 10 countable coaches and head coach could provide skill instruction on gameday. The current version of the proposal could change as committee members receive feedback.
“With the tablets on the sideline, it seems counterproductive, as coaches, not to allow coaching duties during the game,” Bohl said.
In the recruiting space, 11 staff members would be designated for off-campus recruiting. Those 11 people would be required to adhere to NCAA protocols and current recruiting limitations. While that could extend beyond position assistants, Bohl believes that most position assistants would want to recruit as a way to begin building relationships with their future players.
“Some people say you could hire a bunch of quality control guys to coach and you’d have these other guys recruiting. That’s an NFL model,” Bohl said. “What I see, when you’re out recruiting, you are still projecting. The relationships… the guy who recruits these guys is going to want to coach them.”
The recruiting portion of the proposal allows for flexibility similar to the NFL, Brown said. Those coaches who were in non-coaching roles would be permitted to teach.
“It gives experienced staff members who don’t like the grind of recruiting an opportunity to get them back on the field coaching rather than being in an advisory role,” he said.
https://sports.yahoo.com/sources-co...ing-role-of-all-staff-members-120144263.html#
Did his mom write that? Any evalutor who made those comments is a freakin' idiot. We saw the real Deacon Hill for most of last season, and it was a horror show. Hill has no business on the depth chart at all. He should have been shown the door. Every snap he takes this spring is a waste of time. Hill may be the worst Iowa starting QB I've ever seen, and I go back a ways. He can't do ANYTHING. Hell, he can't even run a sneak correctly. He may be a wonderful human being, but he's a disaster as a QB. Having him around really puts a damper on the whole new OC deal. Yuk.
This is carved in stone:
Our Offense will continue to be inept/unwatchable this Fall.
Our Offense will continue to be inept/unwatchable this Fall.
Richman as a starting OT sends chills down my spine. 🤨
You hope for improvement every off season but getting Richman to perform as an effective Big Ten OT is like being tasked with the job of training a mule to qualify for the Kentucky Derby. No matter how much you train, no matter how many PEDs are administered, it’s still a mule.
Similar threads
