I would say that KJ and Bruce both are based on what we have seen.
Last edited:
For all you Brian Haters
- Thread starter tony0051
- Start date
Then you really want to fire Kirk. Because that is the only way all of this changes.
Agreed, but it seems like there’s now a huge drop off after them, unfortunately
I've seen KF run, and based on what I've seen we are in a lot of trouble my friend.
No I don't. But just because I want BF gone doesn't mean I want KF gone. I'm a realist I know he won't get rid of his son and we are unfortunately stuck with him most likely till he retires.
Does football have the position that maintains high pay but takes away duties? You see it in companies, where they don't want to fire someone so they just kind of move them and put them in charge of not much and maintain their pay and they hire someone to backfill.
He runs pretty damn good for 67 years old. Bet he can outrun most middle aged guys on these forums.
I'm sure he had some quicks back in the day. Maybe it was an acid flashback.
I might have of overreacted just a tad.
Although "if his most vicious critics are some anonymous message board posters then I think he's going to be fine" is true it doesn't mean the actual Ferentz haters don't exist, just they're trivial. On which point we agree.
We don't know that to be true. Rags is the only one we've seen play and he's better than average.
It's a very young position. There are several high potential options so a couple should work out. Everything we've heard out of the leaky camp says Vines is really good. My last remaining peeps down there say Wick really is a very good receiver that will surprise everyone.
So we don't know the room is weak. The lack of depth is concerning but the top end is really good and there might be some unknowns that surprise.
Davis just retired. Kirk has no standards when it comes to offense other than maybe turnovers, OC is an unfireable position at Iowa for performance clearly. Just mind blowing stubbornness and ineptitude on that side of the ball. Kirk is very lucky Phil is as loyal as he is
Absolutely ... I didn't read your post until after I posted. Our points are entirely complementary to one another.
Hell, when some of the folks here complain about us running the ball on 2nd and 10 after an incompletion ... they're not accounting for the fact that the O is still trying to bleed something from the clock. The whole problem with passing too much ... particularly with low-percentage passes ... is that no time goes off the clock. The absolutely nemesis to our bend-but-not-break D would be an O that too frequently goes 3 and out ... particularly those resulting from three straight incompletions.
That's a good point. There are a number of stats that should indicate whether the offense is doing a good job of complementing the defense. I think average yards per play, first downs per possession, percentage of 3 and out possessions, and red zone TD conversion rates are all excellent indicators of whether the offense is effective in this role or not. We know red zone offense and average yards per play were both among the worst in FBS, but what about first downs and 3 and outs? Like you said, 3 and outs are killers for the defense. Are those available?
The goal should be getting a 1st down not milk the clock. If that is reason why to run over 80% of the time that's a big red flag in our strategic philosophy. Especially when like last year our 3rd conversion % was so low causing so many 3 and outs. So that nemesis you speak of our D still had to overcome even when we ran it over throwing it on 2nd and 10 so much.
If you want to bleed the clock...you need to move the chains
Too many like the Big 12 style of trying to score 45 and still lose. But hey it was "fun" to watch.
Too many here think we can't have a decent offense without completely overhauling our offense....
Btw NOTHING is more entertaining than dominating a team and running the ball down their throat!
Sure we want it all and we will complain for the next 4 or 5 years until Kirk is done. And then probably a few years after he is gone we will fondly remember the Kirk years like we did Hayden.
Are you dumb enough to think people disappointed with our recent offense, have also been disappointed for 23 straight years??
Lmao
Sheesh
Good lord - do honestly believe that when a run-play is called on 2nd and 10 that the intent isn't towards ALSO working towards getting a first down (and moving the chains)?
Iowa is a play-action team ... so that is still predicated upon establishing the TENDENCY of running the ball, particularly on early downs. Consequently, when you break tendency - you attempt to do so with surgical precision.
On any given play, there are likely a bunch of different considerations.
- They want to possess the ball ... they achieve that simply by having there be no clock stoppages.
- They want to move the chains ... so part of that is attempting to either stay on schedule (in terms of down and distance) OR try to get BACK on schedule. Consequently, I'm sure that the desired outcome is for the O to AT LEAST gain their average on any called run play ... thus, the ideal would be for a 2nd and 10 run play to at least gain around 4 to 5 yards. The result being a 3rd and 5 or 6 ... which is a much more makable 3rd down situation.
- Also there is a flow or logic to a succession of play-calls. The point isn't simply to be unpredictable and catch the defense guessing. You call plays to probe how the D responds. You call plays to set things up based upon HOW the defense responds.
- They also want to develop the OL to the point where the unit CAN exert their will on the opposition. When Iowa is blocking well ... it can be hard to prevent the Hawks from getting their 4 to 5 yards per run. That level of play doesn't occur out of vacuum - it needs to be built. The whole offensive unit needs the experience in order to learn from their successes and failures.
So often a play is unsuccessful, NOT because it was a bad play ... but because there was failure in execution. A guy missed a block ... a runner missed a crease ... the center or QB missed a read and didn't get the line set up correctly based upon what the D was showing ... etc. If the same play is called again and the execution improves ... what once appeared as a bad play becomes a "good play." Furthermore, you hopefully realize that from practice - the coaches ALREADY have a feeling for what plays the guys execution consistently and which ones they don't. Coaches typically hone things down to just what the O has demonstrated that they can execute well (or, at least with some consistency).
Hard to answer with exact numbers, but I'd say doing better than being in the bottom 10-20% of the nation in pretty much all offensive categories would be a good start. Can we at least get to middle of the pack?
I get the talk about KF's philosophy, but folks seem to forget that KOK and even GD were also limited by the same philosophy (this was the narrative when O'Keefe and Davis were our OCs as well) and often produced offenses that were not as bad as the ones we've had under BF. I don't have the stats in front of me and I don't feel like putting it all together, but I know this has been laid out before. Edit: I see someone did it above.
BF's offenses have been just as bad (worse, typically) than his predecessors. I don't have anything against the guy, but he needs to get something figured out, or not be our OC. Since he won't be getting removed from that position, I guess it needs to be the former.
Last edited:
Good lord...do you honestly expect to gain 5yds on 2nd and 10 when the opponent knows you're running it? Maybe vs an inferior opponent
Offensive touchdowns per game has to get better. I think Iowa was something like 2.1, which in 2021 is embarrassing. Averaging one offensive touchdown per half is asking way too much of the defense.
Correct. You can only achieve that consistently if you have a really high quality running game are able to physically impose your will on your opponent. Otherwise simply "out executing" your opponent is not a consistently viable option. I wish I knew what percentage of stretch runs resulted in negative yardage last year.
Similar threads
