 Marc MorehouseHi, I'm Marc Morehouse. I've covered sports for more than 15 years, mostly in Eastern Iowa. I've had Hayden Fry [...] |
|
Email the author
Riding the highs, lows of ‘works more’ and ‘than it doesn’t’
Iowa head coach Kirk Ferentz gestures to his team during the second half of an NCAA college football game against Iowa State, Saturday, Sept. 10, 2011, in Ames, Iowa. Iowa State won 44-41 in triple overtime. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)
AMES — You know it works more than it doesn’t. Still, when you see it and it doesn’t work, your blood pressure shoots to 350,000 over eleventy billion.
Iowa doesn’t go for it. It’s not coach Kirk Ferentz’s way. It wasn’t in 2009, when Iowa had first down at its 33 with 52 seconds on the clock and a timeout.
And Iowa didn’t go for it in Saturday’s 44-41 triple-overtime loss at Iowa State.
After ISU quarterback Steele Jantz hit Darius Darks for a 4-yard TD with 1:17 left to tie the score, 24-24, the Hawkeyes had the ball at their 20 with 1:17 left on the clock and two timeouts.
First play was a handoff to running back Marcus Coker for a 2-yard gain. Iowa was called for a false start before the next play, making it second-and-13 from Iowa’s 17. That essentially froze the playbook.
Coker rushed for 4 yards and the clock ran to overtime, the first in the Iowa State-Iowa series.
The foot came off the gas. That’s the Tao of Iowa and Kirk Ferentz. Who knows what would’ve happened, but what did happen was overtime. After 13 years, you have to know it’s coming, but, no, that’s not helping your blood pressure at the moment.
“Had we gotten the ball out there, past the 30, we probably would’ve gone with it,” Ferentz said. “We ran the ball on first down, didn’t get much and just got out of there.”
The questions are asked. The answers also won’t do anything for that BP.
The other one you’re not going to like any better.
On Iowa’s third overtime possession, quarterback James Vandenberg tried to find wide receiver Keenan Davis. The pass hit Davis in the 6 on his jersey and fell incomplete to set up a fourth-and-6 at Iowa State’s 21. That’s a no-brainer field goal in every coach’s book.
Then, Iowa State was called for illegal substitution, a 5-yard penalty making it fourth-and-1 at ISU’s 16. Now, it’s a tough call.
On one hand, it’s fourth-and-1. At times Saturday, Iowa’s offensive line drove the Cyclones to Nevada. The first OT possession was one 7-yard pass to Marvin McNutt and four Coker runs into the end zone. So, that’s there. On the other hand, Iowa’s defense couldn’t stop Jantz. The 6-3, 223-pound juco continually broke contain and simply made plays, eventually driving the Cyclones to three overtime TDs.
Iowa probably wasn’t stopping the Cyclones. The Iowa coaches knew this. They watched Jantz compile a pass efficiency of 166.58, which would’ve led the Big Ten last season. Iowa forced just two three-and-outs all afternoon.
Ferentz made the call to put it on the defense. Sophomore Mike Meyer drilled a 34-yard field goal to give Iowa the short-lived 41-38 lead.
“I thought just get the points right there,” Ferentz said. “I was confident we’d get a stop, or I was hopeful we would get a stop.”
The conservative percentage approach is what Iowa is under Ferentz. It has worked more than it hasn’t. It has worked with better defenses. Jantz shredded the percentages Saturday.
Jantz set off a storm of students bull rushing the field. Jantz sent the Cyclones streaming to the Iowa sideline for the Cy-Hawk Trophy. Iowa receiver Nick Nielsen got caught in the middle and nearly swallowed.
It took a second for the Cyclones to find the trophy. They didn’t seem to mind its interim status.
Every game is “Jenga” for the Hawkeyes. You know, the puzzle game where players pull pieces and score points before the wooden blocks collapse. This is why Iowa hasn’t lost by more than nine points since 2007. Every game is close, percentage close.
That is the “works more” of the Ferentz way in action. It’s also a blessing and curse that the “than it doesn’t” times scream out. You screamed at Ohio State 2009, first down, 33-yard line, 52 seconds and a timeout. You screamed it again Saturday.
You screamed when the clock ran down in regulation. You screamed again on the fourth-and-1 field goal. You love Ferentz during the “works more.” You meltdown during the “than it doesn’t” moments. And you should, that’s your part in this. Of course, it won’t move Ferentz.
And you know that even in their hearts if the players wanted go for it, they weren’t going to say that out loud in front of cameras and notebooks.
“Those plays always give you a feel for what kind of moment you’re going to get,” McNutt said. “Coach Ferentz gave us the signal. We believe in his word and we do what he tells us to do.”
This is Ferentz’s plan through and through. This was a “than it doesn’t.” And hypothetically speaking, there are no hypotheticals in the Ferentz plan. The 1:17 and fourth-and-1 are gone when the decision is made.
You will scream again. And there will be another “works more.”
-u20042.png?1366232523)
Marc, I believe in civility, but I also believe in accountability. This coaching staff would get an ear full from the media in a larger market.
Bob-
1. Explain to me how writers giving coaches “an ear full” does anything? It’s counterproductive behavior. A writers job is to write stories and provide information if they gave coaches “an ear full” they’d get less information making their job harder or impossible.
2. It’s not a large media market. It’s Iowa and Iowa City.
I think I touched on Iowa’s short comings yesterday.
I asked the questions that needed to be asked. The answers are KF’s. My approach is objective, not angry. When things go wrong, I certainly cover it, or at least try.
And that’s cool, Bob. If you don’t agree with me, let me know. I know I’m not always right and I don’t mind respectful debate.
If you’ve followed this team very long, you knew what the decisions in these situations would be. While I would have liked to see a short pass to McNutt and let him see what he could do at the end of regulation, I knew it wouldn’t happen. While I thought Coker could have gotten the yard in 3OT, I knew he wasn’t getting the chance.
I’m frustrated by the outcome, but as we learned last year, it was lots of little things throughout that lost it, not these decisions.
Please change your username to your real name or your profile will be deleted. This is your second warning. The previous one was emailed to you.
Marc, I am a Kirk supporter and hawkeye fan. However, I would like an explanation of how he was playing the percentages. At best it was a 50-50 proposition to go to OT on the road when you had not made the opponent punt since the 2nd quarter (I think it was probably less, but I will say 50-50).
If we accept that percentage, then by running out the clock you are saying that you think there is a better chance they will score than you will score if you try to score, even though you HAVE THE BALL at the 20 with 1:17 left. The percentages cannot possibly back up that a team trying to score in a tie game with 1:17 left and 2 time outs is more likely to let the other team win in regulation than get a field goal (and in fact BHGP discusses the fact that the percentages do not back this up). So it is actually risky to play for overtime because you are decreasing your chance to win.
Same could be said for the 4th and one decision in OT. Teams going first in OT and kicking a fg only win about 25% of the time in college. Thus, unless you think going for one yard gives you less than 25% chance to win it was a bad call. The 25% is probably generous since ISU had gone I believe at least 5 drives in a row for more than 25yds and had scored TDs on 3 possessions in a row.
You are one of numerous media members that have said Kirk is playing the percentages without offering any explanation of those percentages. It is not “safer” to sit on the ball and play for overtime when you have a legitimate chance to score.. I am not suprised by Kirk’s move, and I’m not saying ISU didn’t outplay Iowa. I’m simply saying that Kirk made 2 (obviously lower percentage at the time, not just in retrospect) decisions that decreased Iowa’s chance to win and that is unacceptable (again). Please don’t respond that Kirk is conservative and thats what he does. I know he plays “conservative” football but its actually not conservative to make decisions to decrease your team’s chance to win. I am frustrated as a fan and I feel bad for the kids that their coach continues to do so many good things for the program, but makes poor end of game and clock management decisions that decrease Iowa’s chance of winning.
I am not calling for Kirk’s firing or anything absurd like that. I also enjoy your reporting. I just simply cannot agree that Kirk’s end of game decisions were playing the percentages and I would be interested in some fact based defense of those two particular decisions and how they were the strong percentage moves rather than the generic “he’s conservative” or “that’s how he’s always been” or “he is playing the percentages even though we don’t consider if he actually is.” Thanks
Fact based argument on Ferentz’s game management.
I’m not sure I’m going to be able to give you what you want, Kellen.
Ferentz wins games, lots. That’s really all I have. Does he win enough for you?
You want to know why he undermines his team with conservative game management? The only thing I can say there is he sees his team in practice everyday. He watches film of practice everyday. If he doesn’t have a pretty good measure of what his team can and can’t do after that, then, yes, he should be fired.
Could be perhaps that it’s week 2 and KF needs Vandenberg to quarterback his team for 10 more weeks. Maybe he doesn’t want Vandenberg dealing with the scar tissue of a pick six in the final minute at Ames on week two of 12?
Is it the timing of week 2 weighed against week whatever it was when Iowa ran a successful two-minute drill at MSU two years ago? I’m not throwing that one game out there for defense, either. I think KF is 20-25 in games decided by less than five points. I haven’t done the looking up. I will.
Iowa hasn’t lost a game by more than nine points since Western Michigan 2007. That really is a blessing and a curse, IMO.
That’s alot of games, a lot of close wins and close losses. It’s 8-11, actually.
The close losses are going to leave you feeling burned. Iowa and Ferentz have been together for 13 years now. I think you guys feel the losses just as KF does. They’re harder to take now.
Nothing works all the time. Everyone is fallible.
I shouldn’t have used the word “percentage.” You’re going to have to live with conservative.
Thanks, Marc. You make some good points about not wanting to burn vandenberg’s confidence. And Kirk does win enough for me. I just think with all the good he does it would be nice if he would just start to play the percentages in end of game situations. I’m not asking him to change his overall conservative philosphy, as it has been mostly successful and there is no chance he will change that. I just wish he would make better specific end of game strategy decisions, and I don’t think that would have to be a radical change. And if we lose because he was actually playing the percentages at the end of the game, a la MSU, I am and was fine with that. Thanks
You bet!
I go back to what he sees or doesn’t see in practice. I think DJK is a barometer of that. He probably didn’t like a lot of things about DJK’s practice habits and, thus, Colin Sandeman started ahead of him for a lot of his career.
He’s seen Iowa’s two minute O more than I have. My guess is if he doesn’t see it, he doesn’t believe it. That’s probably how it plays with the team, too.
But is there not a different coaching problem then if Kirk is right and attempting our two minute offense makes it more likely that the other team will score than we will?
Yes, but Iowa is a developmental program. The pieces don’t come together perfectly.
Iowa has lost and will lose close games and to Iowa State again.
Is losing, for whatever reason, a hanging offense?
It’s certainly worth examination. It is frustrating, no doubt. Here’s the tough question for you, how much losing, as an Iowa fan, are you willing to accept?
Losing is not a hanging offense nor have I suggested it was. I have also been very clear that I do not think Kirk should be fired and that he has done an overall good job. I have just always been very interested in end of game decisions by any coach (because I think coaches frequently do not play the percentages), and obviously it hits closer to home when Iowa is in those spots.
Thank you for the thoughtful and respectful (at least I hope I was) back and forth and keep up the good work.