ADVERTISEMENT

BF Talks Necessity of Vertical Passing Proficiency in Todays Interview.

Harbinger273

HB Heisman
Feb 17, 2016
8,492
10,227
113
Iowa needs to be able to stretch the field vertically in order to open up the offense. Progress is being made in this department. In order for this years team to take the next step toward success the downfield attack must materialize. Are we moving toward a Pass to set up the Run type of offense a la Air Coryell?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkhorn
Iowa needs to be able to stretch the field vertically in order to open up the offense. Progress is being made in this department. In order for this years team to take the next step toward success the downfield attack must materialize. Are we moving toward a Pass to set up the Run type of offense a la Air Coryell?

Don Coryell used the pass to set up the next pass. Iowa's offense under KF will NEVER be call The Greatest Show on Turf.

Every OC says this, but you have to have tools to do it. Does Iowa? :)
 
Don Coryell used the pass to set up the next pass. Iowa's offense under KF will NEVER be call The Greatest Show on Turf.

Every OC says this, but you have to have tools to do it. Does Iowa? :)
We might. Guys are developing and with some success hopefully we can recruit the weapons we need. Either way I used the words moving toward to indicate that BF is looking to incorporate more of that type of offense to become more dangerous. I know full well we are not looking to go full Air Raid, but being able to stretch things vertically when we choose to is invaluable. We will still be a power run team of course.
 
We might. Guys are developing and with some success hopefully we can recruit the weapons we need. Either way I used the words moving toward to indicate that BF is looking to incorporate more of that type of offense to become more dangerous. I know full well we are not looking to go full Air Raid, but being able to stretch things vertically when we choose to is invaluable. We will still be a power run team of course.

It would be simply awesome if Iowa could have some success downfield early in the season - and I don't mean 50 yard home runs (although that would be fine!). I just mean if Iowa could complete a bunch of 15-20 yard completions if will keep those DB's and LB's from crowding the LOS. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: luvmyhawks and nu2u
It would be simply awesome if Iowa could have some success downfield early in the season - and I don't mean 50 yard home runs (although that would be fine!). I just mean if Iowa could complete a bunch of 15-20 yard completions if will keep those DB's and LB's from crowding the LOS. :)
Yep Intermediate and deep passing game. Air Coryell. Obviously some of this is already in play, but just need more dependable weapons outside of the TE. Coryell was also instrumental in the expanded use of TE's in the passing game. That part has long been in play here at Iowa.
 
Iowa needs to be able to stretch the field vertically in order to open up the offense. Progress is being made in this department. In order for this years team to take the next step toward success the downfield attack must materialize. Are we moving toward a Pass to set up the Run type of offense a la Air Coryell?
So throw the football to receivers downfield and have them catch it. Got it. Sounds simple enough.
 
I keep coming back to the Patriots and BF's time there. The reason the Pats have had sustained success is that they are very good at exploiting other teams weaknesses by adapting a game plan. Every team does this yes... but some more than others. And the Patriots are the best at it. You keep hearing these things from BF... need to be able to exploit mismatches. That means a balanced attack that can be adjusted based on what the defense is willing to give up. Is that vertical passing, underneath routes, short bubble screens, zone running plays, hat on hat downhill running... a mix of all of the above? Its his job to identify these things and exploit them... but thats hard to do if you don't have the tools. If beating Wisky means exploiting man coverage on the outside, and we don't have a guy that can do that... then that option isn't so good. That is one thing that BF seems to recognize at least is the need to have those options in your pocket. GD Greg pretty much went away from throwing downfield much and abandoned deep middle of the field... relying more on short passes to get athletes in space. Well that's great when you have guys who can make a man miss in space and turn it into a big play... something the Hawks were limited on during his tenure. Defending the GDGD offense became pretty easy. BF is trying to develop the tools to attack all parts of the field to keep the defense on their heals.
 
I keep coming back to the Patriots and BF's time there. The reason the Pats have had sustained success is that they are very good at exploiting other teams weaknesses by adapting a game plan. Every team does this yes... but some more than others. And the Patriots are the best at it. You keep hearing these things from BF... need to be able to exploit mismatches. That means a balanced attack that can be adjusted based on what the defense is willing to give up. Is that vertical passing, underneath routes, short bubble screens, zone running plays, hat on hat downhill running... a mix of all of the above? Its his job to identify these things and exploit them... but thats hard to do if you don't have the tools. If beating Wisky means exploiting man coverage on the outside, and we don't have a guy that can do that... then that option isn't so good. That is one thing that BF seems to recognize at least is the need to have those options in your pocket. GD Greg pretty much went away from throwing downfield much and abandoned deep middle of the field... relying more on short passes to get athletes in space. Well that's great when you have guys who can make a man miss in space and turn it into a big play... something the Hawks were limited on during his tenure. Defending the GDGD offense became pretty easy. BF is trying to develop the tools to attack all parts of the field to keep the defense on their heals.
Even with Ken O'Keefe at the helm, teams would tend to crowd the box - because of the difficulties that Iowa's run-blocking can pose. Ken's philosophy wasn't to spread the field horizontally as much as forcing opposing Ds to defend the whole field. Even with the different philosophy, the Hawks were still forced to do things to exploit the crowded box ... or pay the consequences for failing to diffuse the aggressiveness of the D.
 
Right exactly. So the difference between W's and L's last year was that usually in the W's... Iowa was on the attack offensively. The bad L's like Purdue and Wisky... those defenses were attacking and the offense just couldn't make them pay. OSU sat back and let Iowa do their thing relying on talent to win the day. When the offense started clicking... OSU tried to get more aggressive but BF pulled the right strings and the boys executed and made them pay.

There are so many examples last year where there were opportunities to make people pay and the execution missed. The best example is ISM vs Minnesota. Had a chance to burn them deep... bounces off his facemask and ends up being an INT (still a BS call but whatever). Iowa was lucky to win that game because they really didn't execute very well. I think Stanley has improved enough and so have his pass catchers to recognize those chances and make defenses pay for being too aggressive.

In 2009, Iowa's run game was really meh... RBs were fine but not special. But Stanzi attacked downfield a lot in those games. Kept teams off balance. The defense was better that year but it had to be since Stanzi would throw the obligatory pick 6 to start every game. Hopefully Nate is better with mistakes but is able to attack deep.

So much in defensive football is that first step and anticipating what the offensive player is going to do. If you can make the defender doubt the first step that is usually the difference in a big play or not. Another example of this is on Drake Kulick's TD last year against OSU... he comes out the backfield into the flat... OSU LB reads and moves to cover, but sees something that makes him hesitate for a second. Kulick pulls away and is wide open for the TD.
 
It's sad to think a 25 yard pass down the middle would be "exciting" in my eyes ... Come on Hawks, time to get this passing game going. Too many 5 yard out passes. Granted, we saw the worst under Davis ... With our TE combo I think we could be surprising in the passing game ...
 
Hayden used to pass to open the run. That's what "scratch where it itches" is all about. It's crazy that we're getting all excited about an OC who says he's going to do that very thing--game plan for specific opponents--when that's what Iowa did under Fry twenty years ago. But until now, KF had ONE game plan and used it against everybody every year, which is why NW and others said game week prep for Iowa was nothing to worry about because Iowa always tries to do the same stuff.

Well, maybe those days are about to end. Finally. That took long enough....
 
Need to see receivers capable of getting separation and making the catch.

I'll believe it when I see it happen on field in a meaningful game.
 
I don't disagree aristotle... but KF won a lot of games doing that. They lost a lot too...

Truth is though, that I would say most teams do that. They are who they are and they employ wrinkles in their system for each opponent but for the most part... they stick with what they know.

Why? I would guess its enough work to constantly be teaching the basics of a given system to new players all the time. If you can't execute the basic offense... forget wrinkles. Last year was the first year for BF as OC so he was probably a little slow in recognizing spots to take advantage of. But he also showed he could do those things in certain games. Same with Stanley. I'm obviously high on the offense at this point... I think we'll see some good things.
 
I see the resemblance now...

AR-171109983.jpg&MaxH=500&MaxW=900
captain-obvious.jpg
 
Right exactly. So the difference between W's and L's last year was that usually in the W's... Iowa was on the attack offensively. The bad L's like Purdue and Wisky... those defenses were attacking and the offense just couldn't make them pay. OSU sat back and let Iowa do their thing relying on talent to win the day. When the offense started clicking... OSU tried to get more aggressive but BF pulled the right strings and the boys executed and made them pay.

There are so many examples last year where there were opportunities to make people pay and the execution missed. The best example is ISM vs Minnesota. Had a chance to burn them deep... bounces off his facemask and ends up being an INT (still a BS call but whatever). Iowa was lucky to win that game because they really didn't execute very well. I think Stanley has improved enough and so have his pass catchers to recognize those chances and make defenses pay for being too aggressive.

In 2009, Iowa's run game was really meh... RBs were fine but not special. But Stanzi attacked downfield a lot in those games. Kept teams off balance. The defense was better that year but it had to be since Stanzi would throw the obligatory pick 6 to start every game. Hopefully Nate is better with mistakes but is able to attack deep.

So much in defensive football is that first step and anticipating what the offensive player is going to do. If you can make the defender doubt the first step that is usually the difference in a big play or not. Another example of this is on Drake Kulick's TD last year against OSU... he comes out the backfield into the flat... OSU LB reads and moves to cover, but sees something that makes him hesitate for a second. Kulick pulls away and is wide open for the TD.
Having rewatched a lot of the 2009 and 2015 seasons along with some other bright points in the seasons prior to those, I can confidently say two things:

- If Iowa had Shonn Greene in 2009, they go undefeated in the regular season. Yes, I rewatched the Ohio State game. Has anyone else?....

- If Iowa has a healthy Drew Ott, they beat Michigan State. There are just some guys in pressure situations who are capable of pinning their ears back and winning those one on one matchups to get pressure on a QB or a sack. Ott would've been that guy Iowa needed, especially on the final drive. That's more of a what-if than the first one, but when you look at what Ott was able to do that year when he did play, there's no doubt he would have been a factor.


Oh well.....
 
This is going to be the mostt entertaining offense we have had in a long, long time. BF's work in New England cannot be diminished here.
Look what NS did last year with one year of BF/KOK school. I think we pimp slap a few teams this year by big margins.

And then you can all come see why Indy needs to host all large college sporting events!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Harbinger273
Right exactly. So the difference between W's and L's last year was that usually in the W's... Iowa was on the attack offensively. The bad L's like Purdue and Wisky... those defenses were attacking and the offense just couldn't make them pay. OSU sat back and let Iowa do their thing relying on talent to win the day. When the offense started clicking... OSU tried to get more aggressive but BF pulled the right strings and the boys executed and made them pay.

Here are some odd numbers ....

vs. Penn State: blockers gave up 1 sack + 1 qb hurry
(fascinating numbers given that PSU's DL was deep and talented AND they brought a lot of pressure)

vs. Michigan State: blockers gave up 3 sacks + 8 qb hurries
(Iowa fans lament odd fronts ... but MSU's even front still gave us fits)

vs. Ohio State: blockers gave up 1 sack + 3 qb hurries

vs. Wisconsin: blockers gave up 4 sacks + 4 qb hurries

vs. Purdue: blockers gave up 6 sacks + 2 qb hurries
(try to figure that one out, eh?)

vs. Boston College: gave up 3 sacks + 2 qb hurries

Against the contrasting likes of Penn State and Ohio State ... both of whose rosters are loaded with highly regarded recruiting talent ... the Hawks gave up a combined 2 sacks and 4 qb hurries.

However, in just 3 games (vs. MSU, Wisconsin, and Purdue), the Hawks gave up 13 sacks and 14 qb hurries. For perspective, the Hawks gave up 25 sacks ALL SEASON and 35 qb hurries all season.

What do y'all think about that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harbinger273
Here are some odd numbers ....

vs. Penn State: blockers gave up 1 sack + 1 qb hurry
(fascinating numbers given that PSU's DL was deep and talented AND they brought a lot of pressure)

vs. Michigan State: blockers gave up 3 sacks + 8 qb hurries
(Iowa fans lament odd fronts ... but MSU's even front still gave us fits)

vs. Ohio State: blockers gave up 1 sack + 3 qb hurries

vs. Wisconsin: blockers gave up 4 sacks + 4 qb hurries

vs. Purdue: blockers gave up 6 sacks + 2 qb hurries
(try to figure that one out, eh?)

vs. Boston College: gave up 3 sacks + 2 qb hurries

Against the contrasting likes of Penn State and Ohio State ... both of whose rosters are loaded with highly regarded recruiting talent ... the Hawks gave up a combined 2 sacks and 4 qb hurries.

However, in just 3 games (vs. MSU, Wisconsin, and Purdue), the Hawks gave up 13 sacks and 14 qb hurries. For perspective, the Hawks gave up 25 sacks ALL SEASON and 35 qb hurries all season.

What do y'all think about that?

Arrogance in assuming they could just out-talent our boys?
 
This is going to be the funniest offense we have had in a long, long time. BF's work in New England cannot be diminished here.
Look what NS did last year with one year of BF/KOK school. I think we pimp slap a few teams this year by big margins.

And then you can all come see why Indy needs to host all large college sporting events!


Funniest offense? I hope not.
 
Well what does the coaching staff do the first weekend? If we really start using the passing game as a weapon, do we pour it on NIU if we have the chance? Do we show a lot of options because we need the practice or do we go back to grinding it out so we don't show our playbook to Iowa State and Wisconsin? I'm not saying we're going to kill NIU buttttttt just what if...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harbinger273
Well what does the coaching staff do the first weekend? If we really start using the passing game as a weapon, do we pour it on NIU if we have the chance? Do we show a lot of options because we need the practice or do we go back to grinding it out so we don't show our playbook to Iowa State and Wisconsin? I'm not saying we're going to kill NIU buttttttt just what if...
I'd imagine that the Hawks would try to establish an efficient passing game, supported by a strong, grinding running game. As always, we'll take our shots down field too. I would guess that the goal will be to distribute the ball around to a lot of guys ... and give each guy a good opportunity to work on his fundamentals.

The Hawks might show some looks ... but, for the most part, I think that the intention will be to execute pretty standard stuff out of the different formations.

Thus, down-stream .... particularly against Iowa State ... we can then execute different stuff out of the same look ... and it might be able to keep the D guessing to some extent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harbinger273
Right exactly. So the difference between W's and L's last year was that usually in the W's... Iowa was on the attack offensively...

The ability to attack offensively is largely dependent on the ability to run the ball.

The difference between Iowa and Wisconsin in the past 10 years (in which Iowa has been good, but Wisconsin has been great) is the running game. Defensively, I think Iowa has been every bit as good as Wisconsin, and I think we've been as good with the passing game (save a couple of exceptions, e.g., 2007, 2012). The difference is that since 2008, Wisconsin has finished no worse than 3rd in the conference in rushing (except for 2015), while Iowa's high water mark is finishing 4th in 2008. The only time Iowa has finished higher than Wisconsin was in 2015 when Iowa was 5th in rushing and Wisconsin was 10th.

In the last 3 seasons, Iowa is 28-1 when rushing for more than 100 yards, and 0-11 when rushing for less. The last game they won when rushing for fewer than 100 yards was in 2011 against Pittsburgh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: td77
Here are some odd numbers ....

vs. Penn State: blockers gave up 1 sack + 1 qb hurry
(fascinating numbers given that PSU's DL was deep and talented AND they brought a lot of pressure)

vs. Michigan State: blockers gave up 3 sacks + 8 qb hurries
(Iowa fans lament odd fronts ... but MSU's even front still gave us fits)

vs. Ohio State: blockers gave up 1 sack + 3 qb hurries

vs. Wisconsin: blockers gave up 4 sacks + 4 qb hurries

vs. Purdue: blockers gave up 6 sacks + 2 qb hurries
(try to figure that one out, eh?)

vs. Boston College: gave up 3 sacks + 2 qb hurries

Against the contrasting likes of Penn State and Ohio State ... both of whose rosters are loaded with highly regarded recruiting talent ... the Hawks gave up a combined 2 sacks and 4 qb hurries.

However, in just 3 games (vs. MSU, Wisconsin, and Purdue), the Hawks gave up 13 sacks and 14 qb hurries. For perspective, the Hawks gave up 25 sacks ALL SEASON and 35 qb hurries all season.

What do y'all think about that?
Either our OL got worse as the season progressed......or those teams blitzed or won individual matchups and our youth and inconsistency showed on the line in keeping with the tradition of consistently inconsistent football here at Iowa. :confused:


It'd also be worth pointing out if any injuries or shifting of positions on the line occurred at certain points in the season.

Damn if Daniels would've stayed this could've been a VERY promising OL.
 
The ability to attack offensively is largely dependent on the ability to run the ball.

The difference between Iowa and Wisconsin in the past 10 years (in which Iowa has been good, but Wisconsin has been great) is the running game. Defensively, I think Iowa has been every bit as good as Wisconsin, and I think we've been as good with the passing game (save a couple of exceptions, e.g., 2007, 2012). The difference is that since 2008, Wisconsin has finished no worse than 3rd in the conference in rushing (except for 2015), while Iowa's high water mark is finishing 4th in 2008. The only time Iowa has finished higher than Wisconsin was in 2015 when Iowa was 5th in rushing and Wisconsin was 10th.

In the last 3 seasons, Iowa is 28-1 when rushing for more than 100 yards, and 0-11 when rushing for less. The last game they won when rushing for fewer than 100 yards was in 2011 against Pittsburgh.
Of these games in the last 3 seasons and going back further, I believe there could be some in which getting to 100 yds rushing was facilitated by our ability to pass. Teams throw passes to the boundary to spread defenses out even if the yardage gained is 2yds or less. Iowa and any team can loosen up a defense with passing and that will open up the running game. It is not just the running that brings wins, its running and passing. How the 2 different facets contribute to the other is a topic of further study. I'm reminded of years where we won 10+ and had little to no running game. We ran to keep the defense honest with little expectation of significant gained yardage. To touch on the inconsistency factor it also appears to have a different interplay from game to game.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT