I think that it is very fair to be skeptical of such a comment ... however, such a statement could be posited based on past precedent.
Of course, one of my own statements predicting what would happen in '17 included presumptions that the Iowa running game would be solid. Of course, as we all well know ... our running game was actually surprisingly underwhelming in '17. Why?
- We would have predicted that the OL play should be solid because we were returning 3 SR starters on the OL (going into '17) and a pretty elite JR starter at C.
- We returned an excellent starting RB in Wadley and we had a talented graduate transfer bolstering our depth in Butler.
- Lastly, Brian was the run-game coordinator through the prior 3 seasons, and our running game seemed really solid before.
So, what happened? Why did our running game seem to capsize, figuratively speaking?
- 2 of the SR starters at OT were lost to the season due to injury. For part of the season, Welsh was playing "out of position" at RT due to personnel juggling on the OL. Lastly, Daniels was dinged through much of the season. On top of all the aforementioned issues ... the new starters at OT were both freshmen. There necessarily HAD to be some growing pains.
- Butler was lost for a hunk of the season due to injury and opposing Ds set their sites on slowing Wadley. Opposing Ds often found success slowing Wadley because the Hawks were still starting a first year starter at QB ... so while the passing game was surprisingly competent through much of the season ... that's not to say that it was a perfect complement to our running game.
- Brian may have been our run-game coordinator before ... but he also was trying to implement a new offensive system. Thus, there was bound to be some transition in terms of execution AND in terms of how the run-game and pass-game concepts complemented each other.
Given the above considerations, I personally believe that the downturn in our running game in '17 is understandable (and predictable given the conditions). Thus, do the aforementioned conditions set a new paradigm for the running game ... or was the downturn a transient?
While injuries are "normal" ... I believe that it is fair to assert that the rash of injuries on the OL was relatively anomalous. Thus, supposing that the '18 OL can remain relatively healthier (more towards the "norm") ... I would anticipate that Iowa's OL play should/could see an improvement.
Given the injury to Butler and our offensive reliance on Wadley ... it some respects it DID make our O a little more predictable. Given that we have 2 "new" RBs who have flashed solid ability ... AND given that the 2 top RBs appear to have contrasting skill sets (Toren is a bull-dozer, Ivory is a nimble slasher) ... Iowa's running game could potentially demonstrate more diversity ... consequently making it somewhat more difficult to defend. As another poster indicated ... the fact that both Toren and Ivory are bigger and stronger than Akrum suggests that we could end up seeing somewhat better first-down production from our running game ... thereby helping to keep the O more "on schedule."
It also stands to reason that the offensive staff has had more time to "come together" as a group and be more on the "same page." This helps both in terms of game-planning and in terms of how they teach the offensive concepts to the players. Furthermore, since the new O has already been delivered to the team ... the players can focus more on refining their craft rather than learning new schemes. This latter point itself suggests that we should be able to expect greater consistency from our O.
Lastly, I expect that any growth that we see on the team as it relates to the passing game should now translate better in terms of helping out the run-game. Consequently, our running game might simply benefit from the fact that opposing Ds will have to scheme things differently to counter our passing game.
