Thank you for the insight!He was a defensive analyst in Green Bay. At first I was quite upset with the hire, but I believe it is an upgrade in quarterback coaching and upgrade in play calling. I am in the minority and believe Brian is a hell of coach, very good Xs and Os guy but not one that had a great game day feel and over his head in coaching QBs. I have been an OC/QB coach for many years, obviously not at the Big Ten or Power 5 level, but nonetheless. I have had full reign on play calling during the game, but I run what the head coach wants me to run. I ask to take shots during the game, usually 3rd and 4th down I ask what the HC wants. He tells me I call it out of a formation I like it to. I control the install during the week on what we as a staff like against our opponent. As OC I had complete control on how to block the box and I told the OL coach what drills would help us in the scheme that week.
I think Lester will run much more h back stuff (instead of true full back look), or more 3 back look with 2 h backs to balance up the back field to make the defense declare a strength side. I hope its more gap game scheme with power and counter instead of true inside and outside zone. I hope the zone stuff morphs into the duo stuff, basically modified zone game with those h backs and TEs.
RPO is different than a Zone read, which you may be confusing. RPO (run/pass option), very simplistically put, is two plays ran simultaneously, one run and one pass. CM has a read and chooses to hand the ball off or to sling it based on his read. It messes up defensive keys, puts them in in conflict, forcing them to pick the "wrong" thing to defend.Thank you for the insight!
It appears that Lester runs a lot of RPO action in his plays. With Cade's injury history, do you think he is capable of running those plays effectively? Also, we all know that Iowa has been a play-action team forever, can play-action be inserted in place of the RPO and have the same effect?
Not enough athletes to spread the field out too much. There is no way in hell kirk allows a hurry up/tempo offense.Spread offense concepts, hurry up tempo, new schemes of any kind?
Feels like he’s just going to run the same stuff, the same way as Brian did. But maybe not even as good at TE schemes 🫤
KF will allow the up temp offense, but it will only be to "hurry up and get off the field so the defense can play".Not enough athletes to spread the field out too much. There is no way in hell kirk allows a hurry up/tempo offense.
What I am hopeful for is a new passing scheme that will open up the running game and someone that can actually teach our qbs something. Our offensive line and running backs are getting killed because of poor route schemes and predictability. That is all I am hoping for.
Too much is made of his offensive #'s. There are far too many variables to even have an intelligent conversation about how he will do. What I would say though, is i'm not sure he's called enough plays in games to get this job.
Iowa needs a qb that will complete 60-66% of his passes. Throw a few deep balls, fades, wheel routes, and has a well developed screen game.
But it's a change, right?Change would be an actual OC with a proven track record of success on the field and with developing QBs. We went from one warm body who is a yes man to another.
No, it's not change.But it's a change, right?
Just not to your liking.
Amazing how everyone thought Kirk would swing for the fences.
Googled the definition of change.No, it's not change.
I didn't think Kirk would swing for the fence, I assumed he'd at least step to the plate.
Yep--what we needed was a proven OC and QB developer, something we didn't' have with BF. What did we get??Googled the definition of change.
(make (someone or something) different; alter or modify)
(to exchange one thing for another thing)
You don't know that yet as the new OC has not had a chance to change things one way or another.Yep--what we needed was a proven OC and QB developer, something we didn't' have with BF. What did we get??
No change
JFC, we do know that one had a better track record in those areas and one didn't. You are just arguing to argue.You don't know that yet as the new OC has not had a chance to change things one way or another.
oh Tommy Boy. You better go tell Beth!JFC, we do know that one had a better track record in those areas and one didn't. You are just arguing to argue.
We're not talking about track records. We're talking about a change that has been made that you keep denying because it doesn't satisfy you. We all have to wait till fall to see if the change in OC will develop into a presentable offence. Mabe Johns didn't like the incentives and turned it down leaving Lester. Still got a change.JFC, we do know that one had a better track record in those areas and one didn't. You are just arguing to argue.
Oh pistachio, you silly nut you!oh Tommy Boy. You better go tell Beth!
You cannot be this dense. This is semantics. You’re arguing to argue.We're not talking about track records. We're talking about a change that has been made that you keep denying because it doesn't satisfy you. We all have to wait till fall to see if the change in OC will develop into a presentable offence. Mabe Johns didn't like the incentives and turned it down leaving Lester. Still got a change.
Clearly you are.You cannot be this dense. This is semantics. You’re arguing to argue.
You can call it whatever you want, I guess lol.Clearly you are.
You are so angry about this CHANGE that you have no control over you can't see change if it hit you in the face.