Iowa simplifying the offense?!

Hawkatheart

Team MVP
Jan 9, 2017
174
400
63
You don’t really need to help me you really made the point… It’s pretty consistently been affective. Padilla on the other hand has failed a couple times because he’s not very big and I said as much in another post he might’ve even been the quarterback at the time you’re referencing….

Sorry you didn’t get the point to begin with.
Are you auditioning for the white house press secretary job by trying to twist and turn the facts of monumentally bad offense? PETRAS failed on back to back QB sneak attempts versus Purdue. Look it up. Purdue front dominated us the entire game there was no reason to believe the first one would work let alone the second one.

The other situation I was referring to was failed fullback dives back to back against Wisconsin. Same scenario of full domination of the line of scrimmage by Wisconsin. We had 24 rushing yards that game. Both situations were laughable calls.

Funny thing was BF himself admitted after the Purdue game that it was obviously regrettable play-calling. He adjusted by calling FB dives in the same situation.

So add the double Petras fail and the couple times you mentioned that Padilla has failed, seems like it may be time for the offense to "become more simplified"...
 
  • Like
Reactions: obfuscating

cmhawks99

HR Heisman
Jul 23, 2002
9,290
3,441
113
Are you auditioning for the white house press secretary job by trying to twist and turn the facts of monumentally bad offense? PETRAS failed on back to back QB sneak attempts versus Purdue. Look it up. Purdue front dominated us the entire game there was no reason to believe the first one would work let alone the second one.

The other situation I was referring to was failed fullback dives back to back against Wisconsin. Same scenario of full domination of the line of scrimmage by Wisconsin. We had 24 rushing yards that game. Both situations were laughable calls.

Funny thing was BF himself admitted after the Purdue game that it was obviously regrettable play-calling. He adjusted by calling FB dives in the same situation.

So add the double Petras fail and the couple times you mentioned that Padilla has failed, seems like it may be time for the offense to "become more simplified"...

Which press secretary the ones under Trump or the ones under the current president? Because quite frankly they all suffer from the same bullshit you do….

Man do cats like you wear me out… Listen oh great “sage” if we run outside and didn’t get it, it would’ve been a bad call (actually it would’ve been a terrible call) if we throw the fade and didn’t complete it, it would’ve been a bad call, if we throw a slant and didn’t complete it, it’s a bad call, if we threw the Tight End curl and didn’t complete it, it would’ve still been a bad call dumb ass..

See I have a mind capable of cognitive thinking…I’ve been on this board and other boards when every call made that didn’t “work “was a bad call. When your percentage of making it on third and one with a quarterback sneak is 90+ percent that by definition makes it a pretty good call.

When Tom Brady makes a third & one or fourth and one quarterback sneak 54 Straight times you could pretty much call it anytime and never be questioned about it being a bad call… even if you fail 10 straight.

But apparently not here….

Let’s get to some more important things…

You’re suggesting I said Petrus didn’t get stopped. Never did I say that but again you are the press secretary they do love disregarding actual facts.

Whats laughable is message board Dolts who clearly aren’t coaches or they wouldn’t be on this damn message board to begin with parsing judgment on what is or isn’t a good call when we all know damn good and well if we lose or the call doesn’t work we immediately have presuppositions!!

I wouldn’t however expect you to understand that…

Taking it a step further if we had third and a yard and fourth & a yard and threw it on two straight plays and didn’t get it…there’s gonna be a lot of pissed off people on this board and you’d be one of them. So go sell your tripe to someone that might be interested in your bullshit.

there’s an old saying you can lie to your friends you can’t lie to me….
 

Hawkatheart

Team MVP
Jan 9, 2017
174
400
63
It was not "message board Dolts passing judgement", it was Brian Ferentz himself passing judgement. Keep up your passive aggressive wordsmithing though. I really enjoy it.
 
  • Love
Reactions: obfuscating

cmhawks99

HR Heisman
Jul 23, 2002
9,290
3,441
113
It was not "message board Dolts passing judgement", it was Brian Ferentz himself passing judgement. Keep up your passive aggressive wordsmithing though. I really enjoy it.

Holy shit dude really…?! i’ll make you a deal I’ll keep on being me and you keep on bitching how about that? 😊
 

The Deplorable Sleeping Dog

HR Heisman
Gold Member
May 9, 2018
5,831
7,802
113
I am not sure what I can do to help you out, however there was failed QB sneak attempts in 2022 on 3rd and 1 then followed up with another failed attempt on 4th and 1. Very predictable and uncomplicated was my point.

Sorry, I can't help you with your poor memory though.
That play undoubtedly has a 90% plus conversion rate. Does the sneak occasionally fail, of course. But it almost always works. Most of us have watched Iowa football for decades. Outside of the handful of Ferentz bitter enders no one on this board thinks the sneak has been ineffective in general.

As for the specific plays, we did have a 6'5" QB running behind the best center in the country so actually not running a sneak with a yard or less to go is pretty ****ing stupid. While we had a monster at center we did not have a monster line. Would you run wide? That almost never worked last season. Would you run between the tackles, a possibility but it increases the risk significantly because at least 2 offensive linemen and the full back have to execute, then the timing of the hand off needs to be perfect, and we lacked perfect timing in the running game. You needed a runner that hits the hole hard and fast, so it would need someone other than our star back, who did not hit holes all that hard last season. Of course you could fake the sneak and bootleg but the sun dial timed QB would not outrun anyone on the defense. You could also fake the sneak and put the maximum pressure on a skittish QB by hoping we had a receiver get open AND catch the ball. I've not forgotten Noah Fant dropping the winning TD against NW in Nate S's soph year, and I feel Noah Fant was at least a superior receiving option than anyone on the Iowa roster last season.

Finally, if the oline couldn't sufficiently execute to get 1 yard with the easiest and probably the most reliable play in football, what would make you think that the would have executed on any other kind of play?​
 
Last edited:

The Deplorable Sleeping Dog

HR Heisman
Gold Member
May 9, 2018
5,831
7,802
113
Kirk DOES implement a philosophy that permeates the program. That is true. He wants the team to be fundamentally sound and he wants the guys to truly know and understand the game. He doesn't believe in "shortcuts" ... he believes that people have to put in the work if they're going to refine their craft. A great distillation of his intention is that he wants his guys to be tough, smart, and physical.

Apart from "imposing" a philosophy ... you do realize that Kirk is renown for putting enormous trust in letting his assistant coaches "coach?" He's very much a delegator ... and his assistants have tremendous freedom as it relates them accomplishing their tasks at hand. Go back and read pretty much any article where Norm Parker gets a chance to talk about working with Kirk. He supplied great descriptions as it relates to the freedom that Kirk gave his coaches.

Kirk has plenty of foibles ... but throwing players or support staff under the bus is not one of them. If you're aware of Kirk's approach - every year everyone in the program is asked to be highly reflective ... about changes that might improve themselves, the program, etc. That sounds more like the sort of ingredient that you expect from a learning and adaptive organizational structure.


Please refrain from the age-old argumentative strategy of flinging feces until something sticks. Try to frame a consistent and cogent argument.

As for the "that's football" rebuttal ... consider weather prediction. Tons of people complain about the faultiness of weather prediction. They just assume that those doing it are dumb-shits and they just don't trust the results. However, the truth of the matter is that turbulent flows play a significant role in such predictions. The problem is that turbulent flows are truly chaotic. For folks who possess some quantitative literacy, there is the realization that chaotic phenomena is highly sensitive to the conditions of the system. To a modeler, it's not only sensitive to such conditions ... it's also sensitive to the uncertainties of your model. Consequently, any predictive ability is only valid over very short periods of time in the future. The point here being that the fault in weather prediction isn't (necessarily) with the predictors ... but it's just the nature of the beast that is weather prediction.

Similarly, when you're considering a football game - you're essentially considering a non-cooperative dynamical game (in a game-theory sense) ... just like weather prediction, we can try to tease out some "predictive" determinations. However, the problem is imbued with so much uncertainty (injuries, mental state of the players, both-teams possessing imperfect information about the other, etc) - that there are a combinatorially large number of possible outcomes. Some days, your team might play a perfect game ... but the other team played even better! That's still a loss! Fans like to blame coaches, blame players, blame schemes, etc ... but because the us-against-them nature of fandom, fans rarely give the opponents their due.

That's football ...
Maybe the smartest post I've ever read on Hawkeye Report.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cmhawks99

cmhawks99

HR Heisman
Jul 23, 2002
9,290
3,441
113
That play undoubtedly has a 90% plus conversion rate. Do they occasional fail, of course. But the almost always work. Most of have watched Iowa football for decades. Outside of the handful of Ferentz bitter enders no one on this board thinks the sneak has been ineffective in general.

As for the specific plays, we did have a 6'5" QB running behind the best center in the country so actually not running a sneak with a yard or less to go is pretty ****ing stupid. While we had a monster at center we did not have a monster line. Would you run wide? That almost never worked last season. Would you run between the tackles, a possibility but it increases the risk significantly because at least 2 offensive linemen and the full back have to execute, then the timing of the hand off needs to be perfect, and we lacked perfect timing in the running game. You needed a runner that hits the hole hard and fast, so it would need someone other than our star back, who did not hit holes all that hard last season. Of course you could fake the sneak and bootleg but the sun dial timed QB would not outrun anyone on the defense. You could also fake the sneak and put the maximum pressure on a skittish QB.

Finally, if the oline couldn't sufficiently execute to get 1 yard with the easiest and probably the most reliable play in football, what would make you think that the would have executed on any other kind of play?​

Kudos….but he struggles with reason.
 

The Deplorable Sleeping Dog

HR Heisman
Gold Member
May 9, 2018
5,831
7,802
113
I could see Bruce doing it. Also, a guy like Jaziun Patterson could maybe pull it off too.
This might be a little too razzle & dazzle, work Cooper into that position, confident he could get a handful of reads down, and let him run or pass. A two way player would garner some nice national publicity if it worked.
 
Last edited:

walleye hunter16

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Sep 25, 2016
5,481
5,060
113
And yet somehow we are in the top 15 in wins with such poor coaching. We can probably get that coach from Nebraska next year to solve all your problems:)
For me this is what drives my frustrations.
Iowa has been good to very good so where could they be with a more open offensive system?
 

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
12,829
15,604
113
For me this is what drives my frustrations.
Iowa has been good to very good so where could they be with a more open offensive system?
It’s not necessarily about being more “open” to me. I’d argue that part of iowas success under kirk has been the conservative philosophy that is designed to limit your mistakes and force the opponent to make mistakes instead. Where Kirk has gotten in trouble is when conservative veers into risk avoidance. Knowing when to take that gamble vs taking the safe option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cmhawks99

walleye hunter16

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Sep 25, 2016
5,481
5,060
113
For those of you complaining about defenses knowing what the play is when our QB does audibles. I believe our coaches aren't as stupid as you want to believe they are.
If I am the coach, and know that defenses "know" we are going to run the ball when the QB is audibilizing, I would then run a play action play on the fake audible count. Our coaches would run this "fake audible/play action" play if other teams were countering our audibles.
I have come to modify my opinion about the D knowing what play is coming.
I believe Iowa's run system has been diagnosed to a high enough degree that the D can blast to the LOS in a defined area and have a very high % chance of blowing up the play.
They have over 20yrs of tape so I would be surprised if they haven't done this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawkatheart

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
12,829
15,604
113
Wasn't the Greg Davis offense really simple and also predictable?

His problem is that he got incredibly predictable with formation tendencies. I think lestikow researched it for a year and found that Iowa passed something like 95% of the time when we were in a 3 WR, 1 RB formation for example.
 

90-0

Scout Team
Nov 21, 2014
87
95
18
Never understood why people want to argue on the internet. Present your opinion and I will present mine. If we don't agree so be it. I'm not going to argue about it. Do better
 

The Deplorable Sleeping Dog

HR Heisman
Gold Member
May 9, 2018
5,831
7,802
113
Never understood why people want to argue on the internet. Present your opinion and I will present mine. If we don't agree so be it. I'm not going to argue about it. Do better
Get used to it brother. We have a number, not that large but very noisy, of guys that don't understand the difference between argument (facts, logic and conclusions arising therefrom) and quarrelling.

Most of the posters are good guys with interesting insights and opinions. You've come to a good place, rookie. Welcome aboard.
 

90-0

Scout Team
Nov 21, 2014
87
95
18
Get used to it brother. We have a number, not that large but very noisy, of guys that don't understand the difference between argument (facts, logic and conclusions arising therefrom) and quarrelling.

Most of the posters are good guys with interesting insights and opinions. You've come to a good place, rookie. Welcome aboard.
Thanks buddy
 

HawkLogic

HR Legend
Feb 20, 2011
13,499
9,368
113
We have been missing the great running game for years, not just under BF. We need to run the ball better.

yeah, that is usually the problem with Iowa offense....if you have great OL, great RB, then you have a good run game and you win most games if you are also strong on defense. That is the Wisconsin formula. Iowa usually has the strong defense, offenses have been spotty and run game spottier.

IF you have below average QB play (Mertz/Petras) when you face a really good defense you fold because it takes those exceptional/ improvisational QB plays to make the difference when run game gets taken away.

If you have a Russell Wilson like Wisky had one year, then you have a special team.
 

HerkysDad

HR All-State
Feb 15, 2014
999
1,074
93
Simple possibly means some of the newer players can get in quicker and learn under game conditions.
 

HerkysDad

HR All-State
Feb 15, 2014
999
1,074
93
Simple possibly means some of the newer players can get in quicker and learn under game conditions. They will make mistakes, but that is part of the learning process. Find the right times to make it happen in a game or schedule.
 

cmhawks99

HR Heisman
Jul 23, 2002
9,290
3,441
113
You can't reason with that nutjob lol

here’s what’s funny there are whole crap ton of people on this board that think “you” are the nut job…perspective friend it’s all about perspective!

I do enjoy though, when people leave an open window like this!!!😘
 

walleye hunter16

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Sep 25, 2016
5,481
5,060
113
Get used to it brother. We have a number, not that large but very noisy, of guys that don't understand the difference between argument (facts, logic and conclusions arising therefrom) and quarrelling.

Most of the posters are good guys with interesting insights and opinions. You've come to a good place, rookie. Welcome aboard.
EXACTLY!.
I greatly like to see others view points and ideas. One doesn't have to agree or change to others way
but knowledge is always good and there is a TON of good knowledge here when you can get past the jackholes that insist that everyone needs to see things their way and no other option is possible.
 

Latest posts