You are either a raging idiot or a gigantic dick because this isn't the first time you've done this to posters on the site.
I'm a generous person, so I'll spell this out one more time. Feel free to disagree all you want. But I don't appreciate words being put into my mouth, so if that is your intention don't bother responding.
Many fans are perpetuating a narrative that if X (Iowa had a better offense the past couple seasons), then Y (they would have had a better record in those seasons). To say if X, then Y is called a hypothetical statement.
I point out that the narrative is a hypothetical statement because by nature, hypothetical statements are only so important.
Why is this narrative being discussed on a daily basis rather than all the praiseworthy elements of what did actually happen? Iowa won 10 games. They won 7 games with a backup QB. I happen to believe that that situation was self- inflicted, as the staff should have never played Cade while he was hurt to start the season. But nonetheless, how the team responded and won 7 games with a backup QB was tremendous. How they responded to losing other key players was tremendous. How they responded to tough circumstances like the Minnesota officiating, and announcement of the release of Brian was tremendous. This team has major balls. They consistently made winning plays in key moments. Some of this shit was literally hair-raising. The togetherness and the fight of this team has been absolutely phenomenal. Time and time again these guys have had each other's backs. Some of what lead to the bad offense was also self-inflicted. But nonetheless, the ability to navigate the bad offense as a team in a way that produced wins was phenomenal. I could go on and on. In the end, this is one of Iowa's most winning teams of all time. And it's bullshit that people would rather find something to complain about than celebrate this team.
To help clarify, and I know I've stated this before in one of these threads, I obviously believe it to be most likely that a better offense would have produced more total wins. I just don't believe the hypothetical narrative to be the fact that many are imposing. I've illuminated a couple of ways in which the hypothetical might not play out as has been proposed. This has also been for the purpose of showing how the narrative isn't as important as fans make it out to be. Not only is this narrative a hypothetical, but the hypothetical might not even play out to be true in all cases. So why stay stuck on it?
I don't support the crappy offense. I just don't think it's as big of a deal as fans are making it. And I understand what has contributed to the downtick in offense the past couple years and understand that much of it is something that can and probably will be grown out of. Call it excuses or whatever you want. I call it a perspective that can keep one from feeling the need to complain about the offense on a daily basis.
The reason I ask what exactly you would do to improve the offense isn't a "deflection". And I don't "typically" deflect, so you need to accuse me of that again. I have no problem taking any of this head on.
The reason I ask what your fixes for the offense are is because many fans give answers to this that could compromise the defense. If someone has a complaint, but their only way to address the complaint is to potentially compromise the defense (ie: use a spread offense), then it isn't really a valid complaint because potentially compromising the defense is a terrible idea.
As it is, most of your suggestions don't necessarily compromise the D.
1. Less predictable play calling- Brian will be gone so it isn't something fans need to complain about anymore, right?
2. Blockers who can block- This is a great point and the most important point. It also gives me opportunity to point out how the negativity of the fans because of the offense has been over the top. The O-line has improved some this season. But last season it was certainly the main reason for Iowa's struggles on offense. It's very easy to understand, yet somehow fans struggle to understand that everything in football is won up-front. If you have a bad O-line, you can't really have much of an offense. And it was very easy to see why Iowa didn't have a good O-line. Significant unexpected attrition to highly rated upperclassmen in the O-line left Iowa having to play some underdeveloped lineman. Iowa losing its strength coach at the same time that younger players were losing developmental workouts due to Covid pronounced the underdevelopment of the lineman that were forced into action. This was all very clear to knowledgeable fans. It was a situation where Iowa fans should have expected a bumpy ride as it was clear that it would take some time for the line to develop. It was a situation where fans should have been ecstatic to have gotten to a bowl game.
3. Receivers that can catch- well usually receivers can catch so I have to think this year was an outlier. Trying to develop a rythm with the backup QB was part of it. That fact that Hill doesn't throw a very catchable ball was part of it. And I think extra pressure to get the offense going, and the pressure from being in so many tight situations was part of it. Also the lack of rythm from simply the offense being broken was part of it. I think we can expect a higher percentage of balls to be caught in the future. One question I do have is if doing what it takes to bring better recruits in at receiver would compromise the D. Kirk has said throwing the ball around makes it harder for the D. So having a more receiver happy offense for the purpose of attracting better players at the position is not an option. Also, we don't know how the staff allots their recruiting resources. If there is ever a choice that has to be made between pursuing a receiver and pursuing a defensive player, the resources need to be allotted to the defensive player.
4. A mobile Qb- I agree with this completely. I think it's an absolute must in this day and age. Hopefully KF has figured this out. Lainez, Resar, and the latest recruit (can't recall his name-Simmons?) would suggest that he has. Although Hill being on the roster raises doubt. Hopefully it was just a situation where KF knew Labas was smoking pot and felt he had to add depth at QB regardless of Hill's immobility.
5. A QB who can compete passes and
6. A QB who can read through his progressions- obviously coaches everywhere are recruiting QB's who they feel can do these things. Obviously Iowa had some trouble in the passing game this year. Also, obviously a lot of that was to be expected with a backup QB trying to gain a rythm with backups to his best weapons and a below average O-line. Again, to win 10 games with that aggregate dynamic was damn impressive and should definitely be the main story rather than the bad offense.
My point all along has not been that Iowa's offense isn't terrible. But rather that it isn't as big a deal as fans are making it. Same with the narrative that a better offense would have produced more wins. Not that important overall. What is important is everything that should be being celebrated.
Also, we have the same fans saying that Iowa would have beat Michigan with a decent offense that claim Iowa has no shot vs a shell of a Tennessee team. Obviously the variable is a decent offense for Iowa. But that's a gigantic difference in expectation. Fans don't want to hear this, but when you have a defense and a punter as good as Iowa's, offense just isn't as important as they make it out to be.
Again, flip Iowa's situation around. Give them one of the best offenses in the country and one of the worst defenses in the country and have them go 10-3. There would be no deafening negativity in the fan base, period. For fans to give a winning team such a hard time because they aren't entertained is wrong. For one thing, it's just their opinion. I, for one, am thoroughly entertained by Iowa football