Obviously Jim Reid was an exceptionally valuable and talented coach for the Hawks over the prior 3 years. He brought a wealth of experience, having had college head coaching experience ... and extensive coordinator experience at the P5 level. Ferentz knew he had struck gold getting Reid "on the cheap" after Reid was essentially fired as a scapegoat from his DC position at Virginia before (coming to Iowa).
Jim Reid, given his repository of experience, he knew how to convey what their reads should be and he seemingly relished the scheming side of defense. He had some notoriety within the confines of Fort Kinnick of distributing very substantial game-prep notes each week for his players (they were reputed to be like mini-books). He was also an exceptionally high-energy coach whom the players really seemed to respond well to.
Jim was a great resource in the defensive room and he likely was important in helping Phil find his own identity as a coordinator. Norm Parker is a tough act to follow - and should be viewed in hindsight as a historically important figure within the overall context of Hawkeye football.
So now Jim is gone. What should we make of it? When departing to go back home out east to be the new DC for Boston College, he tried to recruit Seth Wallace to follow him. Perhaps this, in itself, is part of the endorsement for Wallace. What else do we know about him?
Most importantly, we know that he was previously a graduate assistant for the Hawks. He knew Iowa's D as it was run under Norm, while still being one of Phil Parker's proteges, working primarily with the secondary. Upon returning to the Hawks, he also worked with the secondary while also acting as our recruiting coordinator. I emphasize Wallace's close interactions with Phil ... because clearly Phil Parker has had a significant impact on his development as a coach. I say this because Ferentz is on record stating that Phil Parker is the absolute best secondary coach he has ever associated with on ANY level. That is high praise! Phil Parker is a guy who emphasizes fundamentals and is known for being VERY detail oriented. Given all the past players who now have NFL resumes ... there is nice circumstantial evidence supporting Kirk's assertion.
When asked about how he might be different than Reid, Wallace is on record stating that he's a bit more of a fundamentals-guy. I imagine that this is in contrast to Reid being a bit more about the X's and O's. Furthermore, Josey Jewell has described Wallace as being very detail-oriented. The sort of descriptions I've read about Wallace lead me to believe that he's clearly a great fit at Iowa. His own approach mimics his DC (Phil). Furthermore, his emphasis on fundamentals is in perfect philosophical lock-step with Ferentz.
If I were to have ANY complaint about Reid-coached LBs ... it would be that I witnessed too many attempted arm-tackles ... and too many missed tackles. That isn't an uncommon observation made of players who are coached by schemers rather than "fundamentalists." While the Hawk LB play left something to be desired in '14 ... on the flip-side, the turnaround in LB play in '15 seemed nothing short of miraculous. Clearly Reid is a great teacher ... and helped guys to learn how to make their reads faster so that they could flow to the ball faster.
It will be fascinating to see how the LBs develop under Wallace. For those unfamiliar, Wallace doesn't just have a background as a secondary coach. He also had experience working with the defensive line AND, he was also the defensive coordinator at Valdosta State for a few years. The implication there is that he obviously understands football BOTH in the "little picture" AND the "big picture." Between his big-picture understanding of defensive football, combined with all his prior experience working with Iowa's D (both recently AND as a grad assistant) - he obviously knows Iowa's schemes inside and out.
How will things play out? I don't know? However, I do expect that Iowa's LB play should continue to be a strength in '16 ...
Jim Reid, given his repository of experience, he knew how to convey what their reads should be and he seemingly relished the scheming side of defense. He had some notoriety within the confines of Fort Kinnick of distributing very substantial game-prep notes each week for his players (they were reputed to be like mini-books). He was also an exceptionally high-energy coach whom the players really seemed to respond well to.
Jim was a great resource in the defensive room and he likely was important in helping Phil find his own identity as a coordinator. Norm Parker is a tough act to follow - and should be viewed in hindsight as a historically important figure within the overall context of Hawkeye football.
So now Jim is gone. What should we make of it? When departing to go back home out east to be the new DC for Boston College, he tried to recruit Seth Wallace to follow him. Perhaps this, in itself, is part of the endorsement for Wallace. What else do we know about him?
Most importantly, we know that he was previously a graduate assistant for the Hawks. He knew Iowa's D as it was run under Norm, while still being one of Phil Parker's proteges, working primarily with the secondary. Upon returning to the Hawks, he also worked with the secondary while also acting as our recruiting coordinator. I emphasize Wallace's close interactions with Phil ... because clearly Phil Parker has had a significant impact on his development as a coach. I say this because Ferentz is on record stating that Phil Parker is the absolute best secondary coach he has ever associated with on ANY level. That is high praise! Phil Parker is a guy who emphasizes fundamentals and is known for being VERY detail oriented. Given all the past players who now have NFL resumes ... there is nice circumstantial evidence supporting Kirk's assertion.
When asked about how he might be different than Reid, Wallace is on record stating that he's a bit more of a fundamentals-guy. I imagine that this is in contrast to Reid being a bit more about the X's and O's. Furthermore, Josey Jewell has described Wallace as being very detail-oriented. The sort of descriptions I've read about Wallace lead me to believe that he's clearly a great fit at Iowa. His own approach mimics his DC (Phil). Furthermore, his emphasis on fundamentals is in perfect philosophical lock-step with Ferentz.
If I were to have ANY complaint about Reid-coached LBs ... it would be that I witnessed too many attempted arm-tackles ... and too many missed tackles. That isn't an uncommon observation made of players who are coached by schemers rather than "fundamentalists." While the Hawk LB play left something to be desired in '14 ... on the flip-side, the turnaround in LB play in '15 seemed nothing short of miraculous. Clearly Reid is a great teacher ... and helped guys to learn how to make their reads faster so that they could flow to the ball faster.
It will be fascinating to see how the LBs develop under Wallace. For those unfamiliar, Wallace doesn't just have a background as a secondary coach. He also had experience working with the defensive line AND, he was also the defensive coordinator at Valdosta State for a few years. The implication there is that he obviously understands football BOTH in the "little picture" AND the "big picture." Between his big-picture understanding of defensive football, combined with all his prior experience working with Iowa's D (both recently AND as a grad assistant) - he obviously knows Iowa's schemes inside and out.
How will things play out? I don't know? However, I do expect that Iowa's LB play should continue to be a strength in '16 ...
Last edited:
