A big what if ....

[ghostOfHomer777]

Last year the Hawks averaged something like 28.2 points per game ... and that was despite them facing an exceedingly strong group of defenses. To make the number even stranger ... we pulled it off despite breaking in both a new O and new QB.

If you truly break down the Iowa O ... there is really no reason to not assume that they won't be a much improved outfit. To make things even more interesting ... the coaching staff is learning to work better together too. And the craziest thing of all ... the schedule seems to be set up so that the Hawks will not be facing quite so many top-tier Ds.

Besides, as we saw against Ohio State ... even against excellent Ds ... if we can manage to mitigate the pressure on Stanley ... the balance of our O is capable of creating a lot of problems for opposing Ds. Of course, as the Wisconsin and Purdue games demonstrated ... if we fail to handle the pressure on Stanley ... it's possible for our O to stagnate too.

So here's the "what if" ... what if the O is as good as billed? ... what is the implication of them playing against a less-stellar group of Ds? How many points per game will they pull off?

There has been mention of Fant saying something like 45 points per game ... and that's obviously a crazy number. However, what might be a reasonable number? If the aforementioned scenario plays out ... maybe we're looking at 34 points per game?

 

[Pepperman]

They’d probably go 11-1 is my guess.

But I’m not believing it yet.

OL has a lot to prove to me. So do WRs.

 

[MeyerLansky]

Last year the Hawks averaged something like 28.2 points per game ... and that was despite them facing an exceedingly strong group of defenses. To make the number even stranger ... we pulled it off despite breaking in both a new O and new QB.

If you truly break down the Iowa O ... there is really no reason to not assume that they won't be a much improved outfit. To make things even more interesting ... the coaching staff is learning to work better together too. And the craziest thing of all ... the schedule seems to be set up so that the Hawks will not be facing quite so many top-tier Ds.

Besides, as we saw against Ohio State ... even against excellent Ds ... if we can manage to mitigate the pressure on Stanley ... the balance of our O is capable of creating a lot of problems for opposing Ds. Of course, as the Wisconsin and Purdue games demonstrated ... if we fail to handle the pressure on Stanley ... it's possible for our O to stagnate too.

So here's the "what if" ... what if the O is as good as billed? ... what is the implication of them playing against a less-stellar group of Ds? How many points per game will they pull off?

There has been mention of Fant saying something like 45 points per game ... and that's obviously a crazy number. However, what might be a reasonable number? If the aforementioned scenario plays out ... maybe we're looking at 34 points per game?

Honest question ghost, don’t you think the offensive output against osu was because osu was cocky and really didn’t pressure the hawks? Or was it a sign of what they could really do? Maybe both, but I’m really hoping the latter.

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

I’m hopeful the offense improves but we’ve got a lot of lightly used parts that are unproven at this point. Solid line play would definitely help.

 

[Harbinger273]

Honest question ghost, don’t you think the offensive output against osu was because osu was cocky and really didn’t pressure the hawks? Or was it a sign of what they could really do? Maybe both, but I’m really hoping the latter.

Let down game for OSU after a huge comeback against PSU the week before. Arrogant team that day got complacent and didn't have a good approach to the game. I think that our offense could do nearly as well in some other games, but it would take more effort and focus. I believe Iowa was up for that game too being that it was against OSU and we were in alternate jerseys.

 

[nu2u]

There has been mention of Fant saying something like 45 points per game ... and that's obviously a crazy number. However, what might be a reasonable number? If the aforementioned scenario plays out ... maybe we're looking at 34 points per game?

The Beantronic Ultra forecasts an average of 33.75 points per game and it is 99.9% accurate so I would say 34 is a fairly accurate guess.

...as calculated by the Beantronic Ultra, which has a 99.9% accuracy rating. The final results will be released on August 30th. Please note that the use any information contained below for the purposes of gambling or wagering of any kind is strictly prohibited.

Northern Illinois 13 Iowa 38

Iowa State 17 Iowa 34

Northern Iowa 6 Iowa 41

Wisconsin 16 Iowa 17

Iowa 38 Minnesota 10

Iowa 28 Indiana 17

Maryland 9 Iowa 44

Iowa 24 Penn State 21

Iowa 23 Purdue 20

Northwestern 21 Iowa 31

Iowa 35 Illinois 3

Nebraska 17 Iowa 52

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

Honest question ghost, don’t you think the offensive output against osu was because osu was cocky and really didn’t pressure the hawks? Or was it a sign of what they could really do? Maybe both, but I’m really hoping the latter.

The extreme extent of the score was mostly reflective of the turnovers. However, the fact that Iowa was still moving the ball on them ... that was reflective of the Hawks executing good ball. Ohio State didn't bring extra heat because they expected the supreme talent of their DL to get the pressure for them. That didn't work out particularly well for them. The Iowa coaches clearly put in extra time prepping an excellent game-plan against Schiano's D ... and they guessed right more time than not. However, the best laid plans don't mean crap if the guys don't execute it ... and, shockingly enough, our young O executed really well.

The bigger surprise in the game was Kevin Wilson's choice to continue pressing the long ball. It's true that the fact that they exploited their speed to get behind the secondary was part of the reason why they were managing to stay in the game ... but they really should have attempted to lean more on Dobbins. The fact that they abandoned their run so early was arguably one of the most critical errors they made in the Iowa game.

What I truly believe is that IF the Iowa O can execute with consistency ... and that includes some competency demonstrated by our WRs ... and having us continue to utilize our TEs to create mismatches (or to dictate things to opposing Ds) ... I think that the Hawks will even be able to have success against teams that try to pressure Stanley too. There is the classic line ... you live by the sword, you die by the sword. If Iowa can make teams pay for bringing pressure ... then they'll either change tactics OR the Hawks break away in the game.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

They’d probably go 11-1 is my guess.

But I’m not believing it yet.

OL has a lot to prove to me. So do WRs.

I have no idea about the record ... the D needs to prove that they can prevent big plays better before I start getting carried away about our record.

However, the 28.2 points per game were tallied under circumstances that we far less than ideals for the Hawks. James Daniels played dinged for much of the season, for stretches Welsh was made to play at his suboptimal position (RT), and we had to break in all-new OTs!

On top of the above, you have to remember that in the spring camp of '17, Kelton Copeland only had 2 healthy scholarship WRs on the whole roster! Those guys also happened to be Falconer and Young ... the former is no longer of the team ... and the latter hasn't yet broke back within the top 5! While our WR situation is still far from ideal ... it's still FAR BETTER than it was before!

If the above weren't enough ... Butler was a guy who we were counting upon ... and he got injured. Furthermore, our top 2 TEs were shockingly young ... and still learning the position. What damage can they wreak as they both continue to improve in every facet of the game?

I surely agree that the OL and WRs have plenty to prove ... however, even with modest improvement ... that still likely puts the Hawks at over 30 points per game.

 

[funnyfletcher]

Counting the defensive touchdowns, the offense averaged 26.4 points per game last year.

 

[Hawkeyeinsoutherncalifornia]

Do you recall how many games Butler missed? It was a quite a bit but don’t recall how many games

I have no idea about the record ... the D needs to prove that they can prevent big plays better before I start getting carried away about our record.

However, the 28.2 points per game were tallied under circumstances that we far less than ideals for the Hawks. James Daniels played dinged for much of the season, for stretches Welsh was made to play at his suboptimal position (RT), and we had to break in all-new OTs!

On top of the above, you have to remember that in the spring camp of '17, Kelton Copeland only had 2 healthy scholarship WRs on the whole roster! Those guys also happened to be Falconer and Young ... the former is no longer of the team ... and the latter hasn't yet broke back within the top 5! While our WR situation is still far from ideal ... it's still FAR BETTER than it was before!

If the above weren't enough ... Butler was a guy who we were counting upon ... and he got injured. Furthermore, our top 2 TEs were shockingly young ... and still learning the position. What damage can they wreak as they both continue to improve in every facet of the game?

I surely agree that the OL and WRs have plenty to prove ... however, even with modest improvement ... that still likely puts the Hawks at over 30 points per game.

 

[Harbinger273]

Do you recall how many games Butler missed? It was a quite a bit but don’t recall how many games

3 maybe 4 games missed.

 

[grayhair81]

Four teams last year managed 45 or more points per game. So that would indeed be amazing.
Fant sounds a little bit like Jacob Park's brother before last season. Here's hoping it turns out better for the Iowa offense than it did for Borat.

 

[grayhair81]

The passing game and WRs in particular are going to have to demonstrate the ability to CONSISTENTLY make plays of 10+ yards to keep the battle at the LOS a fair fight. The O line is going to have to show the ability to identify and deal with any kind of twist or delayed blitz in the A gap.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

Counting the defensive touchdowns, the offense averaged 26.4 points per game last year.

Yeah, there is always the contributions that the D makes. While that is sometimes reflected by pick-sixes, fumbles for TDs, and safeties ... the D also leaves its mark in terms of field position and turnovers. Given that pretty much every safety we have is more than a little bit of a ball-Hawk ... and given that our DL is supposed to be a strength ... I'm thinking that we'll still be getting a good number of picks. The difference is that probably more of the picks will be by the safeties rather than the corners ... of course, I'm happy if the corners prove me wrong! Furthermore, Amani Jones is an explosive, strong dude ... I'll be surprised if he doesn't end up forcing a few fumbles through the year. Lastly, the last I checked, Anthony Nelson and A.J. Epenesa are both strip-sacks waiting to happen!

Anyhow, I'm still pretty bullish on the base-line potential of the D ... so even if they end up giving up some more yards or points ... I still think that they'll get enough take-aways and big plays to keep their contributions to the O reasonably level. Besides, for the aforementioned reasons, the D can figure in more to the success of an O than we often given them credit. Thus, it's a bit of a nontrivial task to disentangle their contributions.

Anyhow, my "prediction" of 34 points per game ... that would include defensive contributions too. I'm still thinking that it's an attainable number too ...

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

The passing game and WRs in particular are going to have to demonstrate the ability to CONSISTENTLY make plays of 10+ yards to keep the battle at the LOS a fair fight. The O line is going to have to show the ability to identify and deal with any kind of twist or delayed blitz in the A gap.

RE: the WRs - Totally true ... but that it also reliant on how well the WRs and the QB work together. It sounds like big gains have been made as it relates to the connection between the QB and WRs.

RE: the OL - Of course, you know that you're right on that count too. Again though, if we consider the context of last season ... having all new OTs and dealing with all the juggling on the OL ... I don't think that it's a stretch to suppose that we'll see some real gains made by the OL through the coming season.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

Do you recall how many games Butler missed? It was a quite a bit but don’t recall how many games

Around 4 and a half games. Also, he was limited a little afterwards due to the (elbow) brace.

 

[TKingpin]

It all depends on the O’s ability to handle the blitz. IMHO, we have been very bad at that for a long time.

Did you know Stanley was sacked 25 times last year?

We are particularly awful at delayed blitzes and stunts. If they come straight at us, we are actually not bad.

It would help Stanley, particularly in this first game against Sutton Smith, if they kept one of the TE’s in to help that side OT and then become a release valve for the QB if the pocket starts to collapse. Stanley can help the cause, too, if he pulls it down and takes off a little more often this year.

We need to get better at this!

 

[Pepperman]

The OL is the most worrying part to me.

What are the odds we won't have injuries all season long? Somebody is always dinged. Now, maybe there's a surprise or two waiting in the wings, but my sense is the first team OL is very good. Problem is they won't be out there every game, and I'd guess they won't even be out there together for more than 4 games.

 

[SDHawkDoc]

It all depends on the O’s ability to handle the blitz. IMHO, we have been very bad at that for a long time.

Did you know Stanley was sacked 25 times last year?

We are particularly awful at delayed blitzes and stunts. If they come straight at us, we are actually not bad.

It would help Stanley, particularly in this first game against Sutton Smith, if they kept one of the TE’s in to help that side OT and then become a release valve for the QB if the pocket starts to collapse. Stanley can help the cause, too, if he pulls it down and takes off a little more often this year.

We need to get better at this!

Agree, they have not been good against the blitz.
Nate is unlikely to outrun a lot of the pressure, do I see improvement there coming through better pick up by oline and backs, better reads at the line sniffing it out before the snap, and throwing the ball quicker.

 

[sober_teacher]

It all depends on the O’s ability to handle the blitz. IMHO, we have been very bad at that for a long time.

Did you know Stanley was sacked 25 times last year?

We are particularly awful at delayed blitzes and stunts. If they come straight at us, we are actually not bad.

It would help Stanley, particularly in this first game against Sutton Smith, if they kept one of the TE’s in to help that side OT and then become a release valve for the QB if the pocket starts to collapse. Stanley can help the cause, too, if he pulls it down and takes off a little more often this year.

We need to get better at this!

Three things should help with pass protection ( which actually did improve from prior years)

1) more experience for Stanley in recognizing/feeling pressure
2) offensive line continues to gel, having two freshmen at the tackle spots last year certainly didn’t help
3) development by receivers, it cannot be understated how bad the position was two years ago and then how inexperienced it was last year. Having receivers and tight ends recognize when a play is breaking down and entering the scramble drill/hot routes will also help

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

The OL is the most worrying part to me.

What are the odds we won't have injuries all season long? Somebody is always dinged. Now, maybe there's a surprise or two waiting in the wings, but my sense is the first team OL is very good. Problem is they won't be out there every game, and I'd guess they won't even be out there together for more than 4 games.

Why can't we get Urban Meyer's luck? During the game last fall, they said that, up to that point, every Urban Meyer coached tOSU team started and played the same 5 at O-line every season. I can't remember Iowa ever going through a season with the O-line intact.

 

[HawkIDrummer]

The Beantronic Ultra forecasts an average of 33.75 points per game and it is 99.9% accurate so I would say 34 is a fairly accurate guess.

No way we put up 52 on Nebraska. They won't be world beaters, but Frost will improve this team significantly. Last year, they just gave up.

 

[anon_snp6dc585nnj4]

People seem to forget we lost one of the biggest playmakers in Iowa football history.

Not to take away from this offense, I think they’ll be a blast to watch.

 

[hexumhawk]

2 Games still drive me nuts from last year

1) @MSU- Really feel we had an awful game plan at MSU and wasted a great D effort. Mistakes and lack of coaches trusting in Stanley imo.
2) @WIs- not a great gameplan and equally as bad of execution

 

[H4wkfan4life]

Against PSU, MSU, PU, NW and WI we never scored more than 17 offensive points in any of those games.
The OSU game was great and helped pad the ppg! BUT, but.....
What we did vs braksa, il, isu, n texas etc doesn't mean much to me

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

It all depends on the O’s ability to handle the blitz. IMHO, we have been very bad at that for a long time.

Did you know Stanley was sacked 25 times last year?

We are particularly awful at delayed blitzes and stunts. If they come straight at us, we are actually not bad.

It would help Stanley, particularly in this first game against Sutton Smith, if they kept one of the TE’s in to help that side OT and then become a release valve for the QB if the pocket starts to collapse. Stanley can help the cause, too, if he pulls it down and takes off a little more often this year.

We need to get better at this!

The OL is the most worrying part to me.

What are the odds we won't have injuries all season long? Somebody is always dinged. Now, maybe there's a surprise or two waiting in the wings, but my sense is the first team OL is very good. Problem is they won't be out there every game, and I'd guess they won't even be out there together for more than 4 games.

Agree, they have not been good against the blitz.
Nate is unlikely to outrun a lot of the pressure, do I see improvement there coming through better pick up by oline and backs, better reads at the line sniffing it out before the snap, and throwing the ball quicker.

Ask and ye shall receive ... given the valid comments and concerns regarding the pass-blocking ... I dug up some numbers that some folks might find interesting. The following are the number of sacks and QB hurries that opposing Ds have recorded against Iowa since '07.

'17: 25 sacks, 35 qb hurries (implication is an objective measure of at least 60 pressures on Stanley - it would be interesting to find out about pressures that also only lead to very short gains - those are obviously numbers not included in the stats)
'16: 30 sacks, 30 qb hurries (no wonder Beathard gets hurt, eh?)
'15: 30 sacks, 35 qb hurries
'14: 22 sacks, 18 qb hurries
'13: 15 sacks, 20 qb hurries
'12: 22 sacks, 11 qb hurries (I almost don't believe these numbers)
'11: 28 sacks, 1 qb hurry (really?)
'10: 19 sacks, 8 qb hurries
'09: 29 sacks, 11 qb hurries
'08: 27 sacks, 13 qb hurries
'07: 46 sacks, 11 qb hurries

So what are the thoughts? First off, do you think that maybe the coaches are having the support-staff be more detail oriented when tallying the analytics (like QB hurries)? OR has the Iowa OL just been giving up a lot more pressures ... perhaps due to all the shuffling?

If you look at our "smart QBs" like Vandenberg and Rudock ... those guys were quick ... they make quick pre-snap reads and got rid of the ball quick if they thought that there was trouble. Consequently, there were generally fewer sacks on them AND fewer QB hurries.

An odd thought struck me ... one of our better OLs was the 2008 group. Oddly enough, they weren't even necessarily a group that was loaded with multi-year starters either. Guys like Bulaga, Calloway, and Vandervelde were each just in their 2nd year of starting. Seth Olsen was the "old man" of the group ... but his prior experience wasn't any more extensive than Render's. Lastly, our starting C was Bruggeman ... and that was his lone year of starting for us. However, apart from snap-exchange issues that he and Stanzi seemed to experience ... that was one heck of a first year of starts for Bruggeman. After all, he beat out Eubanks for the spot!

The reason why I bring up the '08 group was because nearly everybody from the '07 OL returned to start in '08. The '07 OL was arguably the worst I've seen at Iowa since maybe the '00 season (the '04 OL was rough around the edges too ... at least until Brian returned from injury).

Anyhow, if you look at the '18 personnel on the OL ... I could really see them developing into a darn good unit.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

It all depends on the O’s ability to handle the blitz. IMHO, we have been very bad at that for a long time.

Did you know Stanley was sacked 25 times last year?

We are particularly awful at delayed blitzes and stunts. If they come straight at us, we are actually not bad.

It would help Stanley, particularly in this first game against Sutton Smith, if they kept one of the TE’s in to help that side OT and then become a release valve for the QB if the pocket starts to collapse. Stanley can help the cause, too, if he pulls it down and takes off a little more often this year.

We need to get better at this!

Here's the odd thing about the 25 sacks ...

In Iowa's 13 games, Iowa gave up 16 of the 25 sacks in just 4 games. In other words, we gave up 64% off all the sacks allowed in just 30.8% of the season!

 

[Pepperman]

Here's the odd thing about the 25 sacks ...

In Iowa's 13 games, Iowa gave up 16 of the 25 sacks in just 4 games. In other words, we gave up 64% off all the sacks allowed in just 30.8% of the season!

That may not be as odd as it appears. I'd imagine those games were ones where the Hawks trailed and were forced to be one dimensional, but I could be wrong. There aren't too many games where that happens to Iowa, but when it does things tend to snowball.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

People seem to forget we lost one of the biggest playmakers in Iowa football history.

Not to take away from this offense, I think they’ll be a blast to watch.

Iowa lost Albert Young and Damian Sims to graduation following the 2007 season .... how would we ever replace their talent at RB? Our only hope was some guy who had reputedly let himself get overweight while at Kirkwood. I believe the young man's name was Shonn Green. His best prior season rushing for the Hawks, he rushed for 205 yards. Not necessarily a really proven commodity ...

The more I think about the '18 O, the more parallels I see that can be drawn to the '08 O. And, what is more exciting, we don't have to deal with a protracted QB competition!

Having a power running game balanced by elite TE play and WRs who can keep Ds honest ... the end result is an Iowa O that should be capable of scoring points.