Tim Lester has revealed his goal for Year 2

[2D_]

"Be more explosive with the pass game"

In year 1 he said he wanted to cut our numbers in half, which for many stats, he did. He also mentioned that he wanted to be explosive with the run game, and be efficient with the pass. According to him, both of these were accomplished, but now he wants to focus on passing. Reports from beat reporters all mention how impressed they are with how the pass game is looking. Some have even said that the most improved group is our WRs. With an experienced QB like Mark on the field, Lester seems to be determined to work on the pass game and improve it from being 130th in the nation. Mentions specifically we won't be super explosive, because there is a step between where we were last year, and being super explosive. It's a part of the process.

What are your thoughts about his goal?

Tim talking about Year 1 and Year 2's goal can be found here (28:34):

 

[eyesofhawk]

Run the ball

 

[2D_]

Run the ball

 

[eyesofhawk]

Why?

 

[2D_]

Why?

Proof that Tim Lester won't run the ball?

 

[eyesofhawk]

Proof that Tim Lester won't run the ball?

Why would you respond, "no" to, "run the ball"?

 

[2D_]

Why would you respond, "no" to, "run the ball"?

Why would you respond "run the ball" when the professional coach, Tim Lester, with experience at every level, says he wants to improve a lacking part of our offense? Did he specifically mention that he wouldn't run the ball? If so, do you have proof?

 

[eyesofhawk]

Why would you respond "run the ball" when the professional coach, Tim Lester, with experience at every level, says he wants to improve a lacking part of our offense? Did he specifically mention that he wouldn't run the ball? If so, do you have proof?

You asked for our thoughts

 

[2D_]

You asked for our thoughts

I specifically asked about thoughts on his goal of improving the pass game to be explosive. It sounds like you believe he is wrong, as you directly confronted his goal with arguing we should be doing something else, in this case, running the ball. So you believe Iowa should avoid improving the pass game? Do you have any reasoning behind this logic? Can you prove, definitively, that we can operate strictly on the run? Do you have data to back that up? What reasoning would you use if you were to speak to Lester in person and tell him to not pass the ball, but instead, just run it?

 

[eyesofhawk]

I specifically asked about thoughts on his goal of improving the pass game to be explosive. It sounds like you believe he is wrong, as you directly confronted his goal with arguing we should be doing something else, in this case, running the ball. So you believe Iowa should avoid improving the pass game? Do you have any reasoning behind this logic? Can you prove, definitively, that we can operate strictly on the run? Do you have data to back that up? What reasoning would you use if you were to speak to Lester in person and tell him to not pass the ball, but instead, just run it?

I specifically gave my thoughts about TL's goal of improving the pass game to be explosive.

I didn't say Iowa should avoid improving the pass game. I didn't say Iowa should only run.

I gave my thoughts

 

[eyesofhawk]

People are going to love this thread

 

[2D_]

I specifically gave my thoughts about TL's goal of improving the pass game to be explosive.

I didn't say Iowa should avoid improving the pass game. I didn't say Iowa should only run.

I gave my thoughts

And I asked you to further expand on them, using specific questions. Why argue Tim's goal of improving a lacking part of the offense, with one he has already improved? Why directly confront his goal? Do you believe the state of our passing attack should be left as is, in favor of just running? If so, do you have data or evidence to prove this would be an effective strategy for Iowa?

 

[eyesofhawk]

And I asked you to further expand on them, using specific questions. Why argue Tim's goal of improving a lacking part of the offense, with one he has already improved? Why directly confront his goal? Do you believe the state of our passing attack should be left as is, in favor of just running? If so, do you have data or evidence to prove this would be an effective strategy for Iowa?

I didn't argue or confront Tim's goal.

I gave my thoughts

 

[2D_]

I didn't argue or confront Tim's goal.

I gave my thoughts

There's that terrible reading comprehension we've all come to know and laugh at.

 

[eyesofhawk]

There's that terrible reading comprehension we've all come to know and laugh at.

I don't think so.

Those are my thoughts

 

[2D_]

I don't think so.

That is my thought

Exposing you by simply questioning your own tired, old spam response is about as sweet as breaking you in that other thread. Knowing that you don't have the ability to back it up makes it all the more pathetic.

I appreciate you giving us some off season entertainment.

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball.

 

[eyesofhawk]

Exposing you by simply questioning your own tired, old spam response is about as sweet as breaking you in that other thread. Knowing that you don't have the ability to back it up makes it all the more pathetic.

I appreciate you giving us some off season entertainment.

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball.

No shit.

Run the ball

 

[2D_]

No shit.

Run the ball

Like many topics, I'm not sure you realize who is making himself look like the dumbass.

 

[eyesofhawk]

Anybody still with us?

 

[2D_]

Anybody still with us?

Calling for help after the ass kicking I'm giving you?

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

 

[eyesofhawk]

Calling for help after the ass kicking I'm giving you?

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

No. Pointing out how ridiculous you've made this thread. Many people won't read this far.

Spot on comprehension.

P.S.
No shit.
Run the ball

Have I done something to upset you?

 

[2D_]

No. Pointing out how ridiculous you've made this thread. Many people won't read this far.

Spot on comprehension.

P.S.
No shit.
Run the ball

Have I done something to upset you?

I've only asked questions, which you have refused to answer. The more I asked to expand upon your statement, the more resistance you've given. Is asking questions ridiculous? Is challenging another's position ridiculous?

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

 

[eyesofhawk]

I've only asked questions, which you have refused to answer. The more I asked to expand upon your statement, the more resistance you've given. Is asking questions ridiculous? Is challenging another's position ridiculous?

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

I haven't refused or resisted any question.

I gave you my thoughts. They don't extend beyond that.

I'm not saying anything is ridiculous. You just seemed upset in your responses to me from the jump in this thread.

P.S.
No shit
Run the ball

Having fun yet?

 

[2D_]

I'm not saying anything is ridiculous.

Pointing out how ridiculous you've made this thread.

Like many topics, I'm not sure you realize who is making himself look like the dumbass.

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

 

[eyesofhawk]

Oh yeah, I did say you've made this thread ridiculous.

Meaning you asked for the thoughts of others. Then you attacked the first person who responded, and turned it into a 1 on 1 battle, and essentially sabotaged your own thread. Then you prolonged it.

Whatever though. It's your thread

 

[2D_]

Oh yeah, I did say you've made this thread ridiculous.

It really is that easy.

you attacked the first person who responded

Using a meme isn't attacking. I then asked a few follow follow up questions so that we could have a conversation, as you intentionally left a vague and meaningless statement. You then refused to expand on said vague and meaningless statement.

Threads are here for conversation, and I did my best to keep it going by asking questions on your thoughts. Your thoughts aren't even a thought, simply an irrelevant statement to the topic at hand. But if you say it's your opinion to Lester's goal, which is "run the ball", that directly disputes his goal in the first place, meaning you're making an argument against what he is saying. If that's not the case, then you need to expand on your statement.

You've written yourself into a corner. It really is that easy.

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

 

[eyesofhawk]

Listen man, I'm just a Hawkeye fan.

I like the run-game.

I haven't meant to upset you. If you're excited for the passing game, ok.

Myself, from my limited perspective, and by default taste, I already don't feel Iowa runs the ball enough. I worry that Iowa could lose too much of an identity that has been successful.

If that happens, and TL proves my worries wrong, all the better.

I've only expressed my thoughts about your OP to the best of my ability. Run the ball.

Time for me to look at the back of my eyelids

 

[2D_]

Listen, I'm just a Hawkeye fan.

I like the run-game.

I haven't meant to upset you. If you're excited for the passing game, ok.

Myself, from my limited perspective, and just by default taste, already don't feel Iowa runs the ball enough. I worry that Iowa could lose too much of an identity that has been successful.

If that happens, and TL proves my worries wrong, all the better.

I've only expressed my thoughts about your OP to the best of my ability. Run the ball.

Time for me to look at the back of my eyelids

That wasn't so hard, was it?

Tim Lester knows this is a run first offense, and no one is disputing that. At all. But as a professional, he knows that the performance of our passing game is not where it should be. And to be an effective offense, we need to be a threat with both the run and the pass. Use one to open up the other, and vice versa. Kaleb Johnson was just outside of the top 10 for RATT, only missing it by 17 attempts. That doesn't include snaps to other RBs on the team. Meaning we run the ball at minimum, in the top 5th percentile of college football. Anymore, and we'll turn into a military academy.

If we keep the pass game as poor as it is, we'll keep running into what happened with Ohio State or Nebraska. Where we couldn't move the ball no matter what we did on the ground, because defenses were selling out on the run, and it worked. It was only thanks to a pass play, and Kaleb's incredible skill, that we won against Nebraska. If you think we'll lose our identity simply because Lester wants to improve the passing game, then I can't help you. And I suggest we leave it at that.

 

[Packer54]

We can run the ball AND improve the passing game dramatically at the same time...on the same drives....during the same games.
A more explosive game will improve the effectiveness of the run game most likely.

MANY other teams do it.

 

[ICWestfan]

 

[IowaHawk1994]

"Be more explosive with the pass game"

In year 1 he said he wanted to cut our numbers in half, which for many stats, he did. He also mentioned that he wanted to be explosive with the run game, and be efficient with the pass. According to him, both of these were accomplished, but now he wants to focus on passing. Reports from beat reporters all mention how impressed they are with how the pass game is looking. Some have even said that the most improved group is our WRs. With an experienced QB like Mark on the field, Lester seems to be determined to work on the pass game and improve it from being 130th in the nation. Mentions specifically we won't be super explosive, because there is a step between where we were last year, and being super explosive. It's a part of the process.

What are your thoughts about his goal?

Tim talking about Year 1 and Year 2's goal can be found here (28:34):

View embedded media

Haha ... avoid 2-10 is this team's goal. This offense will be worse than last year's and the D will be complete garbage again.
Do not underestimate how bad this team is going to be.

 

[General Tso]

 

[OutbackBowl2017]

Haha ... avoid 2-10 is this team's goal. This offense will be worse than last year's and the D will be complete garbage again.
Do not underestimate how bad this team is going to be.

Harder schedule but the pass game will be much improved which will help the run game and screen abilities with the backs too. Sprinkle in 5 to 8 tight end pass plays and you’ve got a good mix of run and pass which is what you want in that 40 to 60 percent mix depending on the opposing team and their goal to shut down the run vs Iowa or pass game.

Iowa lives in that 50/50 mix of pass/run complimentary football but you’ve got to be able to lean on the side of the game that is open to you and continue to exploit it. Can’t do that if one is so bad that you can’t reply on it when needed, such as the pass game with terrible qb play or wide receivers that can’t read coverage or run routes worth a damn. Lester will have the offense improved with a solid qb and wide receivers that are athletic and know how to get open. Just wish we had KJ for one more year to help make it easier on the pass game with him in the backfield. Other backs are good but no KJ.

 

[LarryMullenJr.]

Goal 1:

 

[eyesofhawk]

That wasn't so hard, was it?

Tim Lester knows this is a run first offense, and no one is disputing that. At all. But as a professional, he knows that the performance of our passing game is not where it should be. And to be an effective offense, we need to be a threat with both the run and the pass. Use one to open up the other, and vice versa. Kaleb Johnson was just outside of the top 10 for RATT, only missing it by 17 attempts. That doesn't include snaps to other RBs on the team. Meaning we run the ball at minimum, in the top 5th percentile of college football. Anymore, and we'll turn into a military academy.

If we keep the pass game as poor as it is, we'll keep running into what happened with Ohio State or Nebraska. Where we couldn't move the ball no matter what we did on the ground, because defenses were selling out on the run, and it worked. It was only thanks to a pass play, and Kaleb's incredible skill, that we won against Nebraska. If you think we'll lose our identity simply because Lester wants to improve the passing game, then I can't help you. And I suggest we leave it at that.

More mischaracterization. Which isn't surprising given you earlier managed to mischaracterize 3 simple words.

I've told you, I've given my thoughts on the matter and they don't extend beyond that.

Which means my interest doesn't extend beyond that either. So I don't care to hear more of your thoughts about it. Especially ones that I don't necessarily agree with.

But you can carry on and post whatever you wish. Just leave me out of it. Although I don't necessarily agree with everything you've posted, I haven't commented on or challenged any of it. And guess what, my thoughts on the matter aren't going to change.

I've posted what I wished to post. And those were my thoughts.

Run the ball

 

[2D_]

More mischaracterization. Which isn't surprising given you earlier managed to mischaracterize 3 simple words.

I've told you, I've given my thoughts on the matter and they don't extend beyond that.

Which means my interest doesn't extend beyond that either. So I don't care to hear more of your thoughts about it. Especially ones that I don't necessarily agree with.

But you can carry on and post whatever you wish. Just leave me out of it.

I've posted what I wished to post. And those were my thoughts.

Run the ball

Facts aren't mischaracterization. Nor is asking to expand on your vague, meaningless response that did nothing to actually address Lester's goal. Your concerns about losing our indentity are unfounded and speculative at best.

If you want to be left out of something, don't comment in the first place, dumbass.

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

 

[desihawk]

lester is clearly having fun doing his job and that's a great thing. it's going to rub off on his players. the o is going to be pretty good .

 

[eyesofhawk]

Facts aren't mischaracterization. Nor is asking to expand on your vague, meaningless response that did nothing to actually address Lester's goal. Your concerns about losing our indentity are unfounded and speculative at best.

If you want to be left out of something, don't comment in the first place, dumbass.

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball

I didn't expect my comment was going to be badgered.

Again, I haven't badgered any of your perspective.

I didn't say "Iowa would lose their identity simply because TL wants to improve the passing game." That is a mischaracterization.

Again, to me, Iowa already passes too much. Last year got a little better, in terms of less passing attempts. But I also understand that not to be Lester's plan going forward. I fear Iowa could lose too much of an identity that has been successful, not by wanting to improve the passing game, but by actually ending up a program that passes too much/doesn't run enough.

I fear Iowa could lose too much of their identity by losing their identity. Desires to take "the next step" in the passing game, although somewhat necessary, end up spending time, energy, desire, focus, emphasis, attention, to try to achieve. Just like installing the offense last season was necessary, but required time, and attention, and desire, and emphasis.

Identity can't be at all scattered. Identity is a level of mastery and focus. Iowa lost it's identity last year as a team with a dominant defense. Not a whole lot of people were predicting that before the season, on paper. I have every confidence believing the loss of identity was at least in part due to time, and energy and attention at a program level, given to the task of installing a new offense.

Will Iowa take the step forward in the passing game? Probably so. But what gets spent where in the process? Can Iowa take that step while primarily remembering who they are? That is what needs to happen.

The primary focus needs to be on who you are, just as it's always been. And build with the "advanced" steps incrementally and organically by way of being good at being who you are.

So, ultimately it's upon KF to ensure that Iowa remains Iowa. And he has done an unbelievably consistent job of that. But he won't be around forever. Iowa was/is in a transition period with a newish OC. Probably in a few more years Iowa will be in another transition period with a new HC. How much will Iowa remain Iowa? These are my overall concerns. And part of why my thought about your OP is, "run the ball." Rather than explosive passing, I hope the primary thoughts of the staff are on an identity that has been successful.

And I don't know if you've been paying attention, but, "run the ball", in part or in totality, is going to be my thought in pretty much any and every football conversation. Pretty much everything can come back to running the ball. If something doesn't, I'm still probably only really interested in running the ball. That's how I see the game. And it's also my default taste. Run the ball. Those are my thoughts.

And you did also mischaracterize my OP of, "run the ball", by asserting I "directly confronted and challenged TL's goal." And that, I was imposing to "only run the ball."

RUN. THE. BALL.

 

[jerbob36]

I thnk it's a great goal. Teams will continue to stack the box on us unless we can stretch the field.
Knowing Lester (and KF), this doesn't mean we are abandoning the run game, just that he knows we need to be more dangerous through the air, which will also make the run game better.

This was an awesome interview and well worth the watch.

 

[2D_]

I didn't say "Iowa would lose their identity simply because TL wants to improve the passing game." That is a mischaracterization.

You explicitly said you were worried that we would lose too much of our identity in regards to Lester's desire to improve the pass game. Those were your words. Which of course, is both unfounded and preposterous as you can still be a run focused offense, while working on a different aspect of the offense. Are running drills not being done during practice? Is the team not practicing running plays? Of course they are. That isn't changing, and Iowa will continue to be one of the heaviest run offenses in football. Improving one aspect of the game does not correlate to the degradation of another. That is a total falsehood.

Again, to me, Iowa already passes too much. Last year got a little better, in terms of less passing attempts. But I also understand that not to be Lester's plan going forward. I fear Iowa could lose too much of an identity that has been successful, not by wanting to improve the passing game, but by actually ending up a program that passes too much/doesn't run enough.

Iowa hardly passes at all, at least when you compare them to other teams. To say we pass too much sounds borderline psychotic. I think more people would respect you if you simply came out and said we should eliminate passing altogether. No matter what you believe, Iowa will never turn into Oregon. But we cannot completely abandon a vital part of the game. Passing is important. Passing matters. Passing helps the Run. The Run helps passing. These are fundamental truths in football, whether you like it or not.

I fear Iowa could lose too much of their identity by losing their identity. Desires to take "the next step" in the passing game, although somewhat necessary, end up spending time, energy, desire, focus, emphasis, attention, to try to achieve. Just like installing the offense last season was necessary, but required time, and attention, and desire, and emphasis.

Identity can't be at all scattered. Identity is a level of mastery and focus. Iowa lost it's identity last year as a team with a dominant defense. Not a whole lot of people were predicting that before the season, on paper. I have every confidence believing the loss of identity was at least in part due to time, and energy and attention at a program level, given to the task of installing a new offense.

Well, there it is. In your own writing. You've finally said that the installation of our new offense was part of the reason why our defense took a step back. Of course you have no actual data to back this up, you do realize that teams ebb and flow from year to year, right? Not every year we'll have a defense as salty as we did in 2023. This can be due to guys graduating, being moved to different positions, etc. Things won't be the same every single year, this happens with the best of programs. And that's because these players are human at the end of the day, not robots. But the implication that Tim Lester being hired and working with the offense is why our defense took a step back, is in no exaggeration, one of the most idiotic, unfounded, unlikely, and deluded things I have ever seen in regards to football. At this juncture, I can no longer take you seriously.

Will Iowa take the step forward in the passing game? Probably so. But what gets spent where in the process? Can Iowa take that step while primarily remembering who they are? That is what needs to happen.

The primary focus needs to be on who you are, just as it's always been. And build with the "advanced" steps incrementally and organically by way of being good at being who you are.

So, ultimately it's upon KF to ensure that Iowa remains Iowa. And he has done an unbelievably consistent job of that. But he won't be around forever. Iowa was/is in a transition period with a newish OC. Probably in a few more years Iowa will be in another transition period with a new HC. How much will Iowa remain Iowa? These are my overall concerns. And part of why my thought about your OP is, "run the ball." Rather than explosive passing, I hope the primary thoughts of the staff are of an identity that has been successful.

Quite the word salad. But again, you don't have definitive proof that Iowa will abandon its identity. Talking about Kirk and the future of Iowa is beyond what this thread is about anyway.

And I don't know if you've been paying attention, but, "run the ball", in part or in totality, is going to be my thought in pretty much any and every football conversation. Pretty much everything can come back to running the ball. If something doesn't, I'm still probably only really interested in running the ball. That's how I see the game. And it's also my default taste. Run the ball. Those are my thoughts.

And you did also mischaracterize my OP of, "run the ball", by asserting I "directly confronted and challenged TL's goal." And that, I was imposing to "only run the ball."

RUN. THE. BALL.

Oh trust me, we all know about your run the ball slogan and how it's your go to, even when it presents no point, argument, or even relevancy to the topic at hand. Your entire post explains your concern with Lester's focus on the pass, which directly opposes his goal when you tell him to focus on the run instead. So I didn't mischaracterize anything.

If you're such a genius, why don't you take your own advice and leave yourself out of this thread? We'd all be thankful for it.

P.S Tim is going to be passing the ball.