100% wish they would do that homer. Ask him what o-cord he wants and say thank you for your service here are the keys.
The keys to next years offensive growth...
- Thread starter Muskie5
- Start date
If that was the case, KF wouldn't have handed BF the OC job, while simultaneously hiring 2 former OC's to the offensive staff. Why not hire one of those 2 to actually be..you know, an OC? The current OL coach(former OC) is here to take Brian's place when he gets the HC job.
I've weighed these staff decisions from every angle and it's the only way the pieces fit to solve the puzzle. The situation where Brian is evaluated by Gary Barta is even a convenient angle for Gary Barta's decision to hand BF the job. " As Brian's direct supervisor and evaluator of his job performance, I have worked closely with Brian Ferentz and he is an outstanding football coach, etc etc, blah".
Nope. Brian Ferentz is the next Iowa head coach. Wasn't Drunk just lost $50.
Your not accounting for the 115 out of 130 "actually his performance has been piss" variable that is going to handcuff the he'll outta Bart a when he has to fire KFs son. I would say at MINIMUM THE offense needs to be in the top 80 next year or some serious questions are going to be asked of Brian. You don't get 2 years ojt at 600k. Barta eventually would think of his phoney bologna job. Barta may be ok with attaching his life line to KF, I don't know after his performance, "professionalism, and temper have been taken into account Bart a would be willing to.attach to BF. Like I said in another thread. If BFs last name was Smith he would NEVER get through the U of I interview process and for that exact reason he could go down as the greatest coach we ever have.
Last edited:
One issue you're not accounting for is that Brian isn't trying to simply implement "Kirks's" offense. The nucleus of the O is certainly O'Keefe's O ... I will not dispute that. Furthermore, the philosophy of the O, as it always has, reflects Kirk's football philosophy. However, Brian is also trying to incorporate other elements into the O .... bringing in ideas from Copeland, Polasek, from his own work with O'Brien at New England, and O'Keefe's more recent experiences with the Dolphins.
Also, as Muskie rightly pointed out ... we have some bright offensive minds in the offensive room. Sometimes that seems to have produced stellar results. Through the first few games of the season, some of the "flavors" we were seeing seemed rather attractive. However, sometimes ... we may have seen the effect of having "too many cooks" in the kitchen. Thus, I don't think that it is unreasonable to suppose that the offensive staff still will take a little time to reach a natural "equilibrium." Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if the Iowa O hasn't yet reached equilibrium as a coherent "whole" yet. Once you have a collection of ideas and you fit them together ... there is still the process that is involved in optimizing the implementation, making the implementations for the running and passing games better complement each other, and coming up with a myriad of adjustments/adaptations to account for how defenses might adjust to defend you.
It was poor but some of it had to fall on CJ. Let me put it this way, some of the worse pocket presence I care to remember.
Unlike most assistants, that are retained on a year-to-year basis ... O'Keefe was given a 3-year deal from the outset. To me, that tells me that O'Keefe is going to be retiring at Iowa ... and that he's here only in the short term to mentor Brian. Polasek was hired because he "fit" the program ... he matches our culture of toughness and our emphasis on development. Polasek's prior OC experience was likely perceived as a "plus" because he'd be a great person for Brian to bounce ideas off of (even after O'Keefe retires).
Have you been watching Seth Wallace closely. The guy has Iowa in his DNA at this point ... he was a GA for Norm and was mentored by Phil. Not unlike Polasek - Wallace, himself, was a former coordinator. Jim Reid was so impressed with Wallace that he tried to lure him out to BC with him. After only one year of the being the LB coach, Ferentz gave Wallace yet another promotion.
Frankly, if Phil Parker were to get the head spot ... Wallace is on the fast-track to become the DC. This scenario appears every bit as likely as Brian taking over as HC and Polasek moving up to OC .... frankly, it almost seems more likely to me.
Last edited:
CJ's first big injury seemed to first manifest when he scrambled for the TD vs Pitt. IF that was the initial event ... then that wasn't attributable to a hit allowed by failed pass-pro.
As for how CJ acquired the bum knee ... that came during camp, if memory serves. Given how the QBs are covered in bubble-wrap during camp ... it must have been a bit of a freak occurrence.
Don't get me wrong ... Iowa's pass pro issues obviously impacted CJ's productivity in '15 and '16, but it doesn't seem to be the actual CAUSE of his primary ailments.
Not sure how that is relative to the discussion? The discussion was about failure to recruit O linemen, not how adept Myers and Boetgger at pass blocking their soph yrs. We can't seem to stick to one point in this discussion.
But, back to the NFL draft board comments, Iowa has put lineman in the NFL that really weren't on anyone's draft boards and we didn't get to see what a healthy Myers and a healthy Boetgger could do their SR yr. with 2 years of playing under their belt. I think they would have been pretty damn good and much improved in passpro technique and moving up the 'board'. It wouldn't surprise me if Boetgger still gets a usfa chance. I think he is as good as a Van Sloten or a Donnal when healthy. Myers has always been an above average run blocker, but would have had to show great improvement in passpro this year, which is quite possible.
You have a selective memory because the beating he took was partially his fault (and he admits it) by holding the ball too long and not getting down when he ran etc... Also, our backs were atrocious at blitz pickup and those were the biggest hits he took on sacks, and there were breakdowns all over the line. To blame it ALL on Myers and Boetgger is simply not very accurate and simplistic ....especially since Croston played more tackle than either Myers of Boetgger and didn't fair much better. People love to place blame and practice confirmation bias.
"They were not good tackles? Lol. Well somehow we went 12-0 with those 2 starting at tackles as sophs"
"So every OT in the country is only good if he's on an NFL draft board? There are a lot of good OT's that won't make all-conference, let alone the NFL draft."
You are the one that was discussing thier play.
"So every OT in the country is only good if he's on an NFL draft board? There are a lot of good OT's that won't make all-conference, let alone the NFL draft."
You are the one that was discussing thier play.
I could argue these recruiting 'failure' comments and provide solid data to support my argument, but it would take time and the people that believe that we constantly fail in recruiting are not going to change their 'beliefs', so I'm not going to bother. Believe what you would like to believe, doesn't change anything. But I'll say that attrition, injuries, and a couple 'misses' affected our depth and development on the O line way more than any failure in recruiting.
When you say "the Iowa offense has been poor the last 18 of 19 years" you mean by offensive yards per game??? Cause doesn't our offense have something to do with our 5 Top 10 finishes or all the bowl games? Ever think our offensive and defensive philosophies are less about yds/game than W's? Just a thought.
Putting together some numbers here. I have 02,04,09,15 as top 10 where is the other one? Per https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/iowa/2003.html
2003 fin8shed 13th.
2003 fin8shed 13th.
Van Sloten wasn't drafted. Neither was Markus Zusevics. We got spoiled at LT when we went from Bulaga to Rieff to Scherff. Ward or Pierschbacher could have been the heirs after Scherff but 4* Ward never panned out and Pierschbacher jumped ship on us at the last minute. Try to remember where we get most of our O linemen from and some years those 'bodies' just are there in our Linemen Garden. In 2012 there wasn't a single O lineman in the top 15 ranked recruits in the state. Our recruiting did fall off a little for a few years and that's been well discussed and over with. Recruiting is on an upswing and attrition is down, so we have much better depth right now than we have had in years.
2003, finished 10-3 as a part of 3 straight 10 win, top 10 finishes.
No, I just went back to 2010 to give a couple examples. If they don't get hurt, you have no idea if they would be drafted. And by the way, Boetgger is on draft boards still even though he's hurt. WalterCamp board has him going in the 4-6th rounds. Isn't information fun!
Really? I'll do you a favor and put together the entire list of starting OTs during the KF era and we'll take a look. It won't be until later this evening, but we'll revisit this. Boettger WAS the 14th rated OT by one draft board I saw but wasn't in the too 200 players according to their Big Board. Which = not drafted. I don't know if that's pre-injury or post injury. Doesn't matter. We'll get back to this when I put the list together.
Correct. There will be some differences that BF will bring. But the OL system will be the same. The problem is not the offense. Every offense can succeed with the right personnel and the right people making the right adjustments. Our offense is tried and true at the college and NFL level. My problem with KF has always been his lack of flexibility to adjust the offense to the changing personnel and the changing defensive schemes employed. He seems determined to leave the outcome to execution (which, not coincidentally is what he always blames after a loss). In the NFL, that's fine because the salary cap and draft pool is set and the playing field is fairly level. In the College game, that's a recipe for a .500 coach at a non-blue blood program (which, not coincidentally, is what we have).
Coaches and programs that want to exceed and ascend, know they have to hire better, more creative minds in their coaching ranks. They know they need to spend more time and money in recruiting to improve their talent level. I know some KF fans hate to hear it but we need only look to Wisconsin for the proof of that statement. They change head coaches. They change offensive and defensive philosophies to try to get ahead of where they were. And it's payed off in spades. We have the same thing we had since 1999 and the only difference is the assistant coaches. Our results aren't even as good as they were in his first 5 seasons.
Tobin stepped up in '12 at LT when Scherff went down. He didn't get drafted ... but he's managed to "stick" in the NFL thus far. Not bad for a former walk-on who was railed upon by 'expert' Iowa fans ... not unlike how Boettger and Myers have been through their respective careers.
Tobin battled injuries his entire career. He never really could lock down a spot and stay healthy. He could have been a good draft pick if he had stayed healthy.
I'm not even sure if Welsh will be drafted. One draft site had him as the 9th ranked Center. They didn't even have him listed as a top 20 Guard prospect.
Yes. I know these draft predictions and mock draft boards don't mean crap.
Yes. I know these draft predictions and mock draft boards don't mean crap.
Again, I want to remind people that KF took scholarship numbers away from the OL/DL area to use for more WRs, for Greg Davis. So, we are getting both edges of that sword. Those WRs transferred and didn't contribute AND our OL depth is poor. So, some of our Offensive woes are not the fault of BF or our current OL coach.
You have me at a loss. It appeared to me that the O got adapted to revolve around Tate in '04. Similarly, in '08 ... the O revolved around Greene. Whenever we have depth and talent at TE ... the TE position is leaned on more heavily. In '11, the passing game was Vandenberg to McNutt ... rinse, repeat.
Watching this season, Brian has changed many of the things we normally do so that he can try to increase the number of touches to Wadley. Without question, we've struggled running the ball ... so Brian has tried to get him the ball more in the passing game. Now teams are spending more resources to make sure Wadley is covered in the passing game. Also, we obviously have really good TEs ... it strikes me that the O is definitely trying to use them.
I agree that Iowa's O almost always is a statistical stinker. But, you're not going to field a statistical behemoth when your team philosophy is to limit the total number of snaps and play ball-control football. The only way that Iowa's O is statistically "good" is when they can possess the crap out of the football ... and that occurs when we have sustained drives. In such situations, our average number of offensive snaps goes up. However, we only see that when the offensive execution is good.
When fans "get mad" it's typically reflective of a duality ... where the execution by the players is poor ... which typically is also, in part, attributable to excellent play by the opposing D ... AND when the OC "guesses wrong" about how to game-plan against the opposing D. Herein, the in-game adjustments rarely matter as much ... because when the O isn't executing well, nothing is going to look good.
For whatever reason, it infuriates fans to put losses on "player execution." However, while fans didn't like Greg Davis ... I can recite tons of games where I thought that the game was called great by Greg ... but the players shot themselves collectively in the foot. Of course, fans will say that player execution falls on the coaches ... and that can certainly be the case. However, we've seen a long-standing precedent with Ferentz-led Iowa teams ... the players are typically very well-coached ... Iowa players are typically one of the best trained groups in terms of fundamentals out of ANY college team ... that is why NFL personnel people respect the Hawkeye program so much. Thus, categorically blaming execution on the coaches AT Iowa seems to miss the mark. Thus, things swing back to player execution.
The biggest key to next year's growth is what happens in the offseason regarding OL development. We really need Alaric Jackson and Tristan Wirfs to take the next step and be as good run blockers as they are natural pass blockers. Would be nice to potentially develop a couple of tackles to really push those two as well, and maybe push one of the tackles inside as one of the 5 best (like Kallenberger). Guards are just as important in how they step up and improve as well.
The next big area of need is the WRs must get better by a factor of 10. They have played pretty bad collectively this year. To me, Brandon Smith is the key, since he is the only one who has a real chance to be a quality X wide reciever. Marsette could too, but he needs to hit the weights big time with Doyle to have a chance, otherwise he is a slot guy. I think an underrated part of the scheme of zone blocking is having guys that can seek out and block the safety. We really didn't do that with the frosh playing.
The rest of the offense will be ok if we get just moderate improvement.
The next big area of need is the WRs must get better by a factor of 10. They have played pretty bad collectively this year. To me, Brandon Smith is the key, since he is the only one who has a real chance to be a quality X wide reciever. Marsette could too, but he needs to hit the weights big time with Doyle to have a chance, otherwise he is a slot guy. I think an underrated part of the scheme of zone blocking is having guys that can seek out and block the safety. We really didn't do that with the frosh playing.
The rest of the offense will be ok if we get just moderate improvement.
Alright. I give up. I can find the list of drafted players but I cannot find a participation chart (the only way to track starts on the OL) that go back far enough.
I'm curious about why you think the recruiting is better. Not saying you're wrong, necessarily, but the recruiting rankings don't seem to bear that out. Are you saying that they are doing better to find players who fit the schemes Iowa runs? If that's the case you may be right, but so far there's little evidence that is true. Yes, we'll find out one way or the other in the next 2 years.
Just looking at the B10 recruiting rankings from 2013 to 2017 (to include fifth year seniors), these are Iowa's results:
RIVALS
2013: 8th
2014: 11th
2015: 13th
2016: 8th
2017: 8th
RIVALS (ranking by points averages)
2013: 9th
2014: 9th
2015: 10th
2016: 8th
2017: 8th
Not one class in the top half of the B10 by either overall rankings or points-based rankings. I guess compared to 2014 and 2015 the classes are marginally better. Still in the lower half of the B10, though.
247 (B10 rankings; all rankings are points-based)
2013: 12th
2014: 12th
2015: 12th
2016: 9th
2017: 8th
Significantly better recruiting the past two years according to Scout, but only because they had Iowa's 2013-2015 ranked near the bottom. Still no classes in the top half of the B10 conference.
ESPN team rankings require payment so screw that.
So based on these rankings why suspect Iowa to climb to the upper echelon of the B10?
Now let's look at the 2011 and 2012 rankings that led the 2015 squad to 12-2:
Rivals (B10; 1st # is overall ranking/2nd # is points-based ranking)
2011: 4th/7th
2012: 6th/6th
247 (B10)
2011: 3rd
2012: 7th
In both ranking sites, Iowa had classes ranked in the top half of the B10. The 2011 class (fifth year seniors in 2015) was particularly strong. The juniors on the 2015 team were also in the top half of the B10. Based on that, what makes anyone think that the recruiting is better? I mean, yes, it's better than 2013 to 2015, but just barely. I don't see the reason to think Iowa will improve significantly unless it's because the coaching improves.
Iowa's 2018 class is ranked 13th (247) and Rivals (12th overall/9th points-based). So why are you and others so excited about the recent and current recruiting classes. Tell me what I'm not seeing in the rankings and why 247 and Rivals are just flat out wrong about Iowa's recruiting the past couple years and this year?
The '04 offense was forced to evolve because our first 4 RBs were injured and Sam Brownlee was our only option at RB (IIRC). I can't count that in good conscience, as some sort of choice. When you have no other options, you got no choices. And Sam Brownlee still had 94 rushing attempts. Drew Tate had 89 rushing attempts for -76 yards. Lol. Those were our 2 leading rushers (attempts).
As far as execution goes, it holds some merit but the college game is not an even playing field. Only an idiot would watch me dominate Joe Tomato-can from NW Cal Tech one week, then watch me give up 6 sacks, 8 TFL and 2 forced fumbles to Reggie White from Tennessee the next and blame the difference on "execution". All of the execution on the planet isn't going to help me keep Reggie White out of our backfield. Or, more typically, face a single DE one week and multiple blitzing LBs and Safeties the next. At some point, the coaches have to make adjustments to account for the various changes in personnel and schemes that change from week to week. When those adjustments are non-existent or flat out fail, the coaches need to look in the mirror.
KF teaches fundamental football. No doubt about that. You'll never hear me say otherwise. And NFL scouts appreciate that, of course, as do I. But again, College Football is not a level playing field. And there are times where your best at 1 position, no matter how well schooled they are in the fundamentals, isn't physically good enough to win the match up. Not fast enough to win the match up. Not strong enough to win the match up. No matter how many times they try. Execution be damned. Like running the stretch play to the short side of the field, with an over loaded defense to your strong side and LBs/SSs walked up on the weak side, eliminating your cutback lanes. We saw the PSU defense do that with great success. Then we watched the MSU defense do the same thing. The OSU defense didn't follow that blueprint, fortunately. But the very next week, we saw Wisconsin do it, with great success. Yet the formations stay the same.
You can't pass or run block 8 defenders with 6 blockers. Not against Good P5 defenses. KF can blame "execution" all he wants.
So using these rankings, you will now be able to predicate Iowa's success or wins over the next few years. And go........
I have no idea. Like I said, if some posters who see these last two recruiting classes as special then maybe they know a lot more about why the guys in those classes should play more like top half of B10 recruits. I figured someone probably has reasons for why they are excited about these classes, something the rankings don't show. I mentioned the possibility that these new recruits might be better fits for Iowa's schemes. But I just don't know. That's why I'm asking.
Getting most of our first choices. Better oline recruiting. Instate talent better.
Thanks. I can also understand why so many more young guys have been playing this year after looking at the 2013-2015 rankings.
Outside the top 50-100 'man-child' recruits, I don't lend much credibility in these rankings. They're just for entertainment purposes and the people that created them will tell you that. Our we filling 'needs' and bringing in the right fits for are program? That's all I'm concerned about. We still have some needs for the 2018 class.
I agree with you to some degree, but the recruiting ranking services are much, much better than they were in the early 2000s when rankings were first starting to be available online. I'm sure it does become more of a crapshoot once you get down to the 3-stars, but they do have better scouting than they used to have. I think part of the reason why Ferentz doesn't recruit as well as he did in the first half of his tenure is because other coaches caught up to him and learned how to spot the diamonds in the rough much better. It doesn't help when a coach like Saban offers a potential commit to Iowa (Daviyon Nixon). I sort of felt like, Why, Nick, why? You can get whoever you want so lay off our 3-star recruits, please!
We've been recruiting well on the Oline. 2015- Daniels 4*, the Paulsons were high 3*s, and Waechter was doing really well until he had to quit. 2016 we picked up a starting tackle (Jackson), a guard that is making noise (Banwart) and a probable starting center at some point (Williams). 2017 we brought in 3 damn good ones in Wirfs, Kallenberger, and Kirkpatrick (2 of them are 4*s). We have highly regarded Jenkins, Ince and Plumb for 2018 (and I don't think we're done). And we have 2 4*s committed for 2019 already. What the heck do you want?
P.S.- sorry, I don't have their 40 times, lol
Muskie, you misinterpreted his post. He was answering my questions about why recruiting looks better than the rankings suggest. In other words he was saying that Iowa is getting its first choices more often now, Iowa's O-line recruiting has been better last two years, and the in-state talent has been better. Just letting you know.
They are only as good as the kids that actually go to their 'camps' and that is still very subjective and puts too much emphasis on 'numbers' in my opinion. Shuttle times are not necessarily a prognosis to how good of a 'football' player someone is. There is shit loads of kids and talent that don't go to these camps (In fact the fast majority don't).I agree with you to some degree, but the recruiting ranking services are much, much better than they were in the early 2000s when rankings were first starting to be available online. I'm sure it does become more of a crapshoot once you get down to the 3-stars, but they do have better scouting than they used to have. I think part of the reason why Ferentz doesn't recruit as well as he did in the first half of his tenure is because other coaches caught up to him and learned how to spot the diamonds in the rough much better. It doesn't help when a coach like Saban offers a potential commit to Iowa (Daviyon Nixon). I sort of felt like, Why, Nick, why? You can get whoever you want so lay off our 3-star recruits, please!
@Muskie5, @millhawk
Thanks for the responses. That gives me a better idea of why you're more excited about the last couple of classes. I think I can extrapolate from that that Iowa is getting higher ranking guys at the positions of most importance/need while the lower ranked guys are being recruited for depth at positions of strength currently. If that's the case then that is good news. Iowa's WRs are much better this year, but clearly young and suffering from growing pains. But as ISM, Easley, B. Smith, and others mature it seems like we'll at least have some quality talent for the first-string in the future. I say that mostly because it has seemed like they've been able to get separation much better than WRs last year.
Thanks for the responses. That gives me a better idea of why you're more excited about the last couple of classes. I think I can extrapolate from that that Iowa is getting higher ranking guys at the positions of most importance/need while the lower ranked guys are being recruited for depth at positions of strength currently. If that's the case then that is good news. Iowa's WRs are much better this year, but clearly young and suffering from growing pains. But as ISM, Easley, B. Smith, and others mature it seems like we'll at least have some quality talent for the first-string in the future. I say that mostly because it has seemed like they've been able to get separation much better than WRs last year.
Similar threads
