You must have missed the thread where eyes educated us all about how the offense purposefully s*cked balls under BF because of this amazing long-term plan he had, and he have BF himself above all to thank for the great OL's we've had since he left.
Quarterback battle thread…
- Thread starter RagnarLothbrok
- Start date
Couple of days of practice, which started Wednesday. Not a lot to report yet.
The focus should be the team ending up with more points than the opponent.
It's just amazing that although TL's scheme has value, no scheme would have done much with an o-line the was close to two years underdeveloped, physically.
It's just amazing (literally) that's fans don't understand that/aren't equipped with that specific information about the physically underdeveloped line/feel the need to publicly speak about things they are underinformed about.
It's just amazing that KF, GB, and players have all since commented that there was no way to get bigger and stronger overnight.
It's just amazing that KF told GB, while interviewing him for the position, that the o-line would be a long rebuild.
It's just amazing that KF told us going into '22, that there would be no quick fixes. And that it would be a lengthy, step by step, rebuild process up front.
It's just amazing that KF told us before the '23 season that the o-line was seeing incremental growth, but still had a lot of growing to do.
And it's just amazing that KF told us before TL was even hired, that he expected the offense to make a jump in '24, as he expected the o-line to be in a good place.
And it's just amazing (literally) that fans have come up with all these laughable narratives, rather than simply listening to what the coach was saying.
Football fans.....just amazing (literally)
Assuming you're referring to the term, "complimentary football", that term goes back many decades.
Welcome to football
Once again, eyes has ruined a thread. Such a di*k. Man, I wish I could read better. Better yet, I wish we didn't have to "read" him in the first place.
I felt the same way, which is why I made a code to block his lies. It was necessary to make this place tolerable again. I wish Tom would do some moderating to help the rest of you out. Maybe if we all message Tom requesting a permaban, that could finally get him off the board?
Once again, one poster can't ruin a thread by himself.
My initial post would have stood as my lone contribution to this thread, had it not been challenged.
And I am allowed to respond, when my posts have been challenged
Quarterback battle thread… - Page 2 - Forums
Didn’t see a thread about this other than the Ferentz quarterback controversy history that was started a few months ago. Any tidbits on who might be separating himself a little bit or is it still neck and neck?
Post #46 in linked thread
Receipts
Let me guess? Mischaracterizing?
Yes, absolutely mischaracterizing.
Nowhere have I said the offense purposefully sucked balls under BF.
And you have cherry picked certain posts that don't necessarily represent my overall sentiments.
Because many times I have posted that it was a staff decision (not BF's), and ultimately KF's decision, to approach the o-line (offensive) rebuild with a pared down, brick-by-brick approach.
And benefits of that approach can still be felt across the entire program today
in response to your email if tom decides it’s easier to just shutdown this free board let’s all meetup on clemson’s football forum and make a niche for ourselves. they are a rather welcoming bunch. im mentioning this right now so it’s easy to continue iowa fb discussions without missing a beat.
Do yourself a favor and use the ignore function.
<<Once again, one poster can't ruin a thread by himself>>
Bullshirt. You do it on the daily.
<<And I am allowed to respond when my posts have been challenged>>
To all on the board, I think we may have just realized one way to stifle this guy...
Which, unequivocally, means move the football and put points on the board. Unequivocally.
This is not difficult, eyes.
I ignored him a long time ago. Never read his garbage.
No, it does not.
I've already explained how that's the case.
And it actually goes so much farther than what I've even explained
Last edited:
Just because your moronic syllogism makes sense to you doesn’t mean it’s correct or disproves the almost unanimously accepted understanding of what the primary purpose of offense in football is.
This. I never used the ignore feature before this douche. Glad that I did.
Don’t think we will know till first depth chart comes out. Unless word leaks out of the building about one qb getting lot more 1st team reps late into camp.
I just hope KF and Lester stick with starter and don’t do shared reps (like stanzi and Jake to start 08’) minus end of game blowout when 2nd string gets in. Need who ever wins the job not be looking over his shoulder and get as much playing time as he can during non conf with our tough start to big 10 play.
I’ve heard this narrative more than once. One was friend at coaching clinic with a subtle comment made by Barnett and other from credible source that Lester is lot more in synch and on same page with Barnett. Think is why we’ve seen OL get back to way were have been accustomed to at Iowa. BF and Barnett didn’t always see eye to eye on blocking schemes and other stuff with how OL was used was one of many reasons in long list why offense bottomed out by end of 22’.
I am quite certain that if you asked Tim Lester what the primary purpose of the offense is, he would say “to score points”. Or any coach for that matter.
While it is true that late in the game you want to run out the clock, that is purely situational. The entire rest of the game the offense is trying to score. Period. Because you never know how many points will be “enough” to win.
To say “the primary purpose of the offense is not to score points” is asinine. And wrong.
I would bet if you ask any player or coach on either side of the ball, they would agree they failed if they didn't score/allowed the other team to score.
Does the example I gave not prove my position, Ragnar?
Again, when I have more time today, I will cite many more examples.
You guys are really making yourself look silly.
That's what football fan does though. SMH
That's what football is. A situational sport.
Guess what, the are many other situations in games where the offense is not trying to score. Period.
I will provide those when given time today
I am going to stop you right here.
This discussion concerns the primary purpose of the offense. You claimed the primary purpose is not to put points on the board. That is wrong. You are going to attempt to offer your opinion and specific down and distance examples as “proof”. But those won’t be proof.
(I also admit my saying "the rest of the game" could be construed by some to think I meant every play, but that is not what I meant, as the next paragraph will clarify. A minor bit of semantics that does not change the main point.).
I will save you further embarrassment. It is not the purpose of every play to score. Nobody is saying that. But the overall purpose of the offense IS to put points on the board. And that’s that.
To say otherwise is idiotic.
Another thing....you said the purpose of the offense is to do everything it can to help the team win. Which primarily means put points on the board. Because, well, that's their job.
You also said the focus is for the team to end up with more points than the opponent. And who is primarily responsible for scoring those points? Yep...the offense.
So basically, you have proven yourself to be wrong.
Priceless!
(I am not going to be dragged into another one of your p*ssing matches. This debate is over, and you lost. If you want to continue to make a fool of yourself, by all means. Knock yourself out.)
Last edited:
Correct. Again, primary.
If you can’t get on board with that, I have no idea what your understanding of football is.
When arguing against what the primary purpose of offense is in football, no, it doesn’t.
I really don’t understand what your end game is here, eyes, other than to argue frivolous absurdities. Yes, everyone (or mostly everyone) is aware of how piss poor the OL was for a couple years. The greater question is, how did a 20 + year veteran coach, who specializes in OL play, allow the OL to get so god awful that a multiple-season reboot was required? A down year? Sure, it happens. But you’re trying to convince everyone it’s logical for that many P4 college O-linemen to require 3 years to get big and strong enough to be at least reasonably competitive? That is honestly your hot take? That is insanely idiotic. It makes no sense.
Why is it so hard to admit KF took a gamble by trying to launch Tommy Boy’s career and it absolutely backfired? At the end of the day, Brian was instrumental in recruiting players, developing players, coaching players, evaluating players, game planning, game managing, etc. I mean, this really isn’t difficult, eyes. It really isn’t.
Yes, absolutely, so much more goes into fielding a competitive football team than what the average football fan would understand. Most of us get that. The problem is a high football acumen is not required to understand that after multiple seasons of the offense being at the bottom of the country in nearly all statistical categories that something just isn’t working. And I don’t care how many times KF came out to the media to try to put lipstick on a pig. No father can ever be objective about their son. It’s just not possible. At the end of the day, Brian just wasn’t working out. And KF was never going to admit it.
Again, I don’t know what your end game is here, eyes, but you are on a fool’s errand and looking absolutely ridiculous in the process. Seriously. This is not a matter of “you guys just don’t get it.” This is a matter of you stubbornly and unfathomably trying to make chicken salad out of chicken sh*t when it comes to the sh*t show disaster that was the Brian Ferentz OC experiment. Just stop. No one is taking you seriously.
2023: worst ypg in all of FBS. Next-to-last in scoring offense. No one should ever have survived that as an OC. And Biff would still be in that position if a new AD hadn't made the decision she did.
Why do you have to derail every f*cking thread on here? Serious. You're a weird dude.
The real purpose of Iowa’s offense is to cover the point spread, so that I can win my sports bets!
I am not a coach but I think the offense's job is to have the team be ahead on the scoreboard when the clock reads 00:00. Sometimes you accept spending possessions on attriting the other team, winning field position, resting your defense. One of KF's guiding philosophies, it seems, is don't give the game away, especially in the first 3 quarters.
I know, not sexy, and comes back to bite you sometimes. But the kind of teams the Hawks lose to usually have very talented QBs, WRs and RBs. The kind of teams that can run you out of the building if you don't treat your offense as a part of your defense.
I know, not sexy, and comes back to bite you sometimes. But the kind of teams the Hawks lose to usually have very talented QBs, WRs and RBs. The kind of teams that can run you out of the building if you don't treat your offense as a part of your defense.
- No, this discussion concerns how qb's can help their defense by not putting them in bad spots.
As a rebuttal, in attempt to minimize the importance of risk assessment, Ragnar stated that the "primary purpose of the offense is to score points."
He has also doubled down by stating the "job of the offense is to score, unequivocally."
I'm pretty sure he's not even conceding running out the clock situations. There are people that will tell you, that even in that situation, nothing better than a TD could possibly occur.
For one thing, that is incorrect. Scoring a TD will give the ball back to the opponent. And if the opponent in turn, scores a TD+2, the original offense comes out behind on that exchange, and worse off than if the opponent had never touched the ball. Same dynamic if the opponent in turn, scores a TD and recovers an onside kick.
But mainly, those who believe this, don't understand that to strive for maximum offensive production, carries a level of risk, that at some point just isn't worth it, when you're playing against the clock. That's why at the extreme end of this dynamic, teams literally take a knee to close the game.
- I clearly said, "the primary purpose of the offense is not to put points on the board, BUT RATHER, to do whatever it takes to help the team win the game."
And you clearly left that 2nd part (the point) out. People can read.
And if you're going to try to play semantics, you should be reminded that in addition to "primary purpose", the "job" of the offense has also been taken into question in this thread.
- Whether you want to call it the job of the offense, or the priority, or the assignment, or the strategy, or the approach, or even when talking "primary purpose", the most accurate and all-encompassing way to describe it is, "to help give the team its best chance to win."
There does come a point in games when it's time to prioritize playing vs the clock.
The most extreme downing of the ball is at the end of a sliding scale of risk tolerance, that can correspond with a sliding scale of priority to clock.
For programs like Iowa, that have strong running games and defenses that can be weapons, those sliding scales can extend to the majority the 4th quarter.
Similarly, the entire game requires risk assessment. When is potentially giving up field position not worth the risk? When is potentially giving up momentum not worth the risk? Every offensive drive comes with TL, KF, and PP taking the defense into consideration. They manage all the spots in which scoring is not the priority, that you have called, "situational".
But if not prioritizing scoring seems too situational for you, let me tell you what is fundamental. Punting. How "primary" can scoring be to offense, when the majority of offensive possessions end up with an offensive down literally being forfeited, for the sake of the defense?
This literal forfeiture of the ability to even try for offensive production, is so fundamental to the game, that it's part of how a sport that rarely sees the ball touch a foot, got named "football"
Latest
-
01
Hawkeye Report
Kenneth Merrieweather leading Iowa's defensive line
-
02
Hawkeye Report
Lucas Allgeyer on his rapid rise at Iowa
-
03
Hawkeye Report
Hecklinski trying to put his best foot forward
-
04
Hawkeye Report
Hank Brown discusses his growth and the quarterback competition
-
05
Hawkeye Report
Hawkins competing for a spot at safety