I think we are deeper and more experienced at WR than last year. New guys plus some of the younger guys developing. Better OL/Pass scheme and our passing game should improve.
Reasons for cautious optimism?
- Thread starter RagnarLothbrok
- Start date
No kidding.
That’s actually one of things that is proven to be true. He literally has done #4, and quite successfully more than a few times by any measure.
He hasn’t done it at Iowa yet, but there is documented evidence of him doing it.
Ferentz, Parker, and Woods are reasons for optimism. Lester is a reason to temper that optimism with some caution.
No, but keep trying. At some point something you say is bound to make sense.
And I would suggest that your expectations are completely unreasonable. 10 wins.
Signed,
Eyesofhawk
I got one of those. Don't feel bad. I don't read them anymore.
Although timing can be a big part of winning, especially in close games, nothing about Iowa's recent success has been lucky. A reminder that two seasons ago Iowa also has the worst offense in the country, and won 8 games.
Quick, simplified lesson:
Let's break down last season from a perspective of game theory.
Iowa's offense/opponent's defense vs opponent's offense/Iowa's defense = wash. Again, this is a simplification, but essentially accurate. Iowa scored 216, gave up 207. As we know, not every game was that close; so perhaps a better representation is yards per play. 3.9 for Iowa's offense, while the D gave up 4.1.
So given those components of the game were a wash, we move to special teams. Here, with Iowa's punter, punt coverage, and punt returner, you will find a huge difference in yardage between Iowa and its opponents. Boom, the field gets flipped, and Iowa is at least able to get into FG range.
There's nothing lucky about it. It works because elite defense is a given in the formula. Completely dependable and repeatable. Again, nothing lucky about it. Quite simply, Iowa's defense dominates its opponent's offense.
Nothing lucky about the special teams either. Yes, Taylor and DeJean were great talents. But Iowa has always had great special teams. They recruit to it. They emphasize it. And they develop their coverage and return units.
Looking a little deeper:
Although Iowa's offense vs opponent's offense was essentially a wash, Iowa had a better chance to break a big play than did its opponent. Reason being - the given that Iowa's D doesn't give up big plays.
Furthermore, although it didn't play out this way last season, Iowa has the higher probability of winning the turnover battle. Reason being - Iowa's D traditionally forces a lot of turnovers, and their risk averse offense usually protects the ball.
This brings me to the point that if there were any luck last season for Iowa, it was bad luck. Certainly there is an element of luck to turnovers. But when a program leads the country over a 10 year span in INT's, it goes beyond luck. Iowa's defense just couldn't get the bounce of the ball for pretty much the entirety of last season.
Plus, Iowa wasn't nearly as good connecting on FG's last season as they normally are.
The only thing that's hard to believe about last season is that Iowa wasn't winning easier. This is illustrated by the unexpected lack of turnover margin and FG success.
This is such an obvious formula for winning that a 4 year old could recognize it. Mind you, that's with the worst offense in the country.
The reason people can't understand it, or chalk it up to luck, is because they are looking for something other than simply winning in the first place. Their selfish entertainment needs get in the way and result in emotion. Their anger, frustration, lack of control, lack of patience, clouds their vision and renders them clueless in regards to something very obvious
Some things are just that simple.
Kind of like football.
You innovated a cure for cancer yet, Doc?
"Quick, simplified lesson:"
-----------------------So then this is the dumbed down version for those of us that are halfwits?
-----------------------So then this is the dumbed down version for those of us that are halfwits?
Statistically, it was not a miracle. Each win shared a very important statistic, we had more points than the opponent. Just math.
I thought the same until I say Cade's Stateline at kids day.
Fair enough.
So many did use that reasoning, but I'll take you at your word.
Give you credit for realizing that things can get worse
Similar threads
