 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
Parker keeps it Parker for Iowa’s defense
Parker approach clear: Keep it simple and don't make it calculus
Defensive coordinator Phil Parker speaks to reporters during the media day for University of Iowa football at the practice field in Iowa City on Monday, August 6, 2012. (Cliff Jette/The Gazette-KCRG TV9)
IOWA CITY — As it turns out, the Phil Parker defense isn’t all that different from the Norm Parker version.
The Hawkeyes have remained in a 4-3 alignment. They blitz maybe 17 percent of the time, relying on the defensive line to provide quarterback pressure. And they haven’t used a lot of press coverage with its cornerbacks, sticking with Cover 2 among other zone coverages.
Through five games, the Hawkeyes rank No. 29 in the country in scoring defense (17.4 points per game). Team-wide, that’s Iowa’s best national stat and best foot fowarad.
There was the Central Michigan glitch, allowing 15 points in the final two minutes of both halves in a 32-31 loss, but in year one of Phil Parker’s defensive coordinator-ship, Iowa defense has been Iowa defense.
When the topic of battling the proliferation of spread offenses, Parker laid out Iowa’s plan crystal clear. Everyone knows it. He wasn’t exactly giving away the Coca-Cola recipe.
“We play heavier on the interior line over there,” said Parker, who coached defensive backs at Iowa for 13 years before replacing Norm Parker in January. “We jam receivers a little bit better on the back end than a lot of guys and matchup with their routes. That’s been effective for us and I think that’s the way we see it.”
Last spring, Parker said Iowa would play more press coverage with experience favoring cornerbacks Micah Hyde and B.J. Lowery over what Iowa had coming in on the defensive line.
There is some, but not a ton.
“You’ve got press coverage, they’re going to throw a fade, and usually you’re going to get pass interference or the guy is going to catch the ball,” Parker said, repeating the mantra, no explosive plays. “That’s the way I look at it. Sometimes, we’re going to have to mix it up and sometimes I don’t always want them pressed just to give them the fade. If they’re going to go up and press, press it late.”
Blitzes and pressure came up Tuesday. Iowa’s defense ran a pair of effective zone blitzes against Minnesota, with linebackers James Morris and Anthony Hitchens picking up sacks. That won’t be a staple.
“When you do start bringing an extra guy, you’re susceptible to the big play, and then if you get a big play, I think they’re about 95 percent or even higher than that, if they get a big play in the series, they’re going to score a field goal or a touchdown,” Parker said. “Eliminate the big plays; that’s the biggest thing.”
Parker said Iowa blitzed 17 or 18 percent of the time under Norm Parker and then added that’s about where the Hawkeyes are this season.
“The more you use it [the blitz], they’re going to start picking it up and seeing it, and I think you do it once in a while, holy cow, it’s a surprise to them a little bit,” he said. “But we’ve never been a big blitzing team. I think we’re maybe about 17, 18 percent over the last couple of years, and we’re trying to . . .”
A lot of what Iowa does with its defense, Parker said, is built in. Asked about the tackle-end stunts on the D-line, he said those are a product of down-and-distance. On a passing down, Iowa’s D-line, more often than not, is going to go with that stunt.
Again in line with Norm’s philosophy, Phil Parker believes a defender who’s not worried about where to go will play faster and will less likely be out of position.
He used the example of offenses shifting and going into motion before the snap.
“You see six guys move, if you see six guys move, now six guys need different alignments, there’s different reads, there’s different keys,” Parker said before going into how Iowa defenders read it.
“If you sit there and say, OK, if you play some base stuff and you can call something where you just stand there and you see 10 guys move on their side and not one guy on defense has to move, I think the advantage goes to the defense because they already know where they’re lined up, they have their stance, their alignments, now they have to read the play.”
Boiled down, this simple approach is the fastest and most violent approach. That’s what defense has been at Iowa through all of the Parkers.
“Sometimes, just lining up and playing is a little bit better than saying let’s have 15 defenses to call, and say, boy, let’s have all these different adjustments, just like a calculus equation or physics,” Phil Parker said. “My son is taking physics here at the University of Iowa, so right now, I don’t want to solve one of his problems. I’d just rather stick to what we do.”
-u20042.png?1366232523)
I know we blitzed once (maybe twice) and got a sack so why not blitz more often? In the 2nd half the Gophers QB had way to much time to throw and or run. More Blitz Please
Read the article….If you continuously blitz, your susceptible to the big play. If you press, they go to the fade. Ultimately, the players on the field at this point in time are used/taught/coached that we blitz occasionally, thus our personnel is conducive to playing fundamentally sound/coverage football.
My feeling is over the next few years, we may see a transformation of the athletes we recruit to more athletic, in your face, get after the quarterback types that will bring pressure from everywhere and anywhere on the field. With the exception of Kirksey at OLB, right now, we don’t have the speed necessary to continuously blitz our linebackers nor, the skill set in the defensive backfield to continuously leave them in one on one coverage.
I could be way off for the future but, right now, we don’t have the personnel to send 6-7 guys at a time.
John -
I think that we’ve already see the Iowa coaches shift their approach more towards trying to recruit more speed at LB. Chris Brevi was a DB who we projected to LB … injuries prevented him from ever making much of an impact on the field. Tarpinian was a DB-type who we projected to LB … and injuries prevented him from being a multi-year starter (he still managed to land in the NFL though). Both Hitchens and Kirksey were both safety-types who “grew” into the LB spot.
Heck, as much as Morris gets maligned for being slow, he actually has pretty high-end speed for LB. Coming out of high school he attended a 1-day Nike camp that had many of the best LBs of the midwest there … and he ended up having the fasted 40-time. Many fans perceive him as slow because they remember games when he was playing on a bum ankle.
Anyhow, we’re going to continue to see Iowa transition larger safety-types into LBs. It’s already part of what we’ve been doing for a while now.
A slightly trend that we’ve seen at Iowa is that we’ve had increasingly more luck recruiting defensive backs (and cornerbacks, specifically) who know more technique and cover-skills. For a long time we had a lot of trouble recruiting “true” corners. Instead, the coaches ended up projecting guys who displayed great hip swivel and athleticism and end up developing them into corners (or sometimes safeties). Jovon Johnson, Charles Godfrey, Bradley Fletcher, Amari Spievey, and Micah Hyde are all great examples of guys who came in matching the aforementioned description. However, guys like Prater, Lowery, Lomax, and Buford are all guys who didn’t come in as “projects” for the secondary – they came in with a larger pre-existing skill-set.
Quite frankly, given how Iowa has recruited on the defensive line more recently and given what an excellent teacher Reese Morgan is … I actually think that the future will see Iowa return to the ways of FEWER blitzes … but also return to the ways of absolutely DOMINATING defensive line play. Guys like Trinca-Pasat, Cooper, Davis, and McMinn are only going to improve in the coming years …. and if you look at some of the videos of the DL-drills that Marc posts … guys like Ott, Johnson, and Ekakatie were flashing some pretty nice potential. Heck, I wouldn’t sleep on Spears or Venckus-Cucciara either. Iowa is going to have a darn good defensive line in the coming years … beast-mode good!
One big difference that we likely WILL see in the coming years that we didn’t see quite as much in past years is that I think that Coach Morgan will have our D-line continue to rotate a lot. Given offenses like those of Nebraska and Northwestern, both of which are capable of running a lot of plays …. it’s important to keep the defensive linemen fresh. We didn’t see that (a DL rotation) as much in ’04 or ’10, however I anticipate that we will see it in the coming years.
One more thing … Phil Parker has already demonstrated a greater willingness to pull linebackers off the field if he feels that the O can exploit them in the passing game on 3rd downs. He’s been using nickel and dime looks with greater frequency on those downs to clamp down more in coverage. Of course, the trade-off there is that Iowa is potentially a little bit more susceptible to the run on those downs.
Anyhow, the quick-and-dirty summary of what fans should expect to see from Phil’s Ds is …
- By and large the D will still fundamentally be the same. They don’t want to allow the big play, so they’d rather give a little cushion and simply hit and tackle the receiver … rather than give up the big play.
- The DL will rotate a bit more than we traditionally had under Norm.
- The secondary will continue to try to disguise coverages a little more (moreso than we did under Norm). Also, Phil seems to use cover-2 a bit more, whereas Norm seemed to use quarters coverage a bit more.
- The D will use extra-DB packages with greater frequency based on down and distance.
Steve, its clear that you don’t know what you’re talking about. This isn’t NCAA 2K13 for your Xbox, this is real NCAA football.
All you have to do is to look at the fleaflicker play that Iowa scored on last week. Minnesota came on a run blitz trying to stop Weisman.
Minnesota’s safety cheated down towards the line of scrimmage and as a result–Jordan Cotton blew by his defender and was wide open in the middle of the field for the touchdown.
Steve, Iowa’s defense is +7 in turnover margin, among the best in the B1G. Plus, the aforementioned 17.4 points allowed a game. Nearly every FBS football coach in the country would kill for a defense that allowed that few points per game.
If there is a trademark to Iowa’s defenses during the Ferentz years..is that they rarely get blown out by an opposing offense. So far this year, Iowa’s lost games by a combined 4 points–that says Iowa’s defense has been playing extremely well considering how young they are at several positions this year.
John and Todd, I’m not saying blitz all the time and I don’t play xbox, but there are certain times when you need an extra defender rushing the QB. The Hawks have only did it a couple of times this year and its worked, just like the flea flicker you don’t do it a lot because it would not work, but a little more blitz would work and John I disagree with you I think we do have the athletes, we have good solid LB’s.
It’s not how often as much as it when you blitz. When time is running out at the end of the half or the end of the game, rather than let the opponent sit back and pitch and catch its way into the end zone, BLITZ. Whether you lose by four or 40, it’s still a loss. Iowa has proven its safety first style can keep games close, but not that it can win. ISU, Northwestern, CMU, Wisconsin… Play to win, not to lose close.
Look at Iowa’s opponents. Wouldn’t it be great if they’d leave Vandenburg alone and let him throw at will? Instead, those fools often blitz, and even if they don’t get the sack, they disrupt the timing and Iowa ends up throwing a pass 30 yards across the field for a 4-yard loss. If it’s such bad strategy, why doesn’t Iowa’s offense hate it so much?
Iowa has enough athletes to blitz. Don’t buy the baloney that poor little Iowa can’t do all that fancy stuff.
Keeping it simple on both offense and defense is great. Too many coaches make things too complicated, so I appreciate that about Parker’s approach. But be more aggressive. Dial up a few more blitzes in crucial situations. There has never been a QB who throws well under pressure. Never.
sanji:
You’re wrong. It’s really nice that Iowa that can just be competitive and close in all their games, win or lose (the last 7 years it’s meant winning less than half their close games). Why can’t you just be happy with mostly 7-8 wins a year? I never saw you here complaining online during the seasons in which Hayden only won 7-8 games.
John:
I love your optimism about Iowa’s future recruiting targets. However, recruiting and keeping better athletes would raise Iowa’s sexiness levels too high and hurt our NFL development program. It’s taken awhile, but I think KF is what he is – a 6-8 win coach with a VERY occasional 9-10 win season. That means more losses to double-digit underdogs, some losses to “lack of execution” on special teams and during crunch time, and a general lack of urgency at any point during the season.
Mike -
You wrote … “recruiting and keeping better athletes would raise Iowa’s sexiness levels too high and hurt our NFL development program.”
Huh? If you track Iowa’s recruiting … Iowa offers scholarships to A LOT of young men that recruiting services rate as being 4- and 5-star players. Iowa contacts them in every conceivable way (snail-mail, e-mail, social media, etc) … however, not all of them show reciprocal interest. There are A LOT of highly touted guys who Iowa offers that we simply never hear about it because they never mention their offers (because Iowa is an afterthought to them).
A few related areas where the Iowa coaches had demonstrated some past failings are the following:
#1 – For a time, it seemed as though the coaches had some problems developing some of their more highly decorated recruits. Ironically, most of those were on the OL. It’s ironic because of the reputation that Iowa has when it comes to developing O-linemen. Specifically, guys like Blake Larson, Dan Doering, and Dace Richardson come to mind.
#2 – The coaches seem to have had some problems balancing the equation of “talent” versus “experience.”
#3 – The coaches seem to occasionally have some issues motivating players.
#4 – Lastly, the coaches seem to have some difficulties managing the influence of outside expectations on the team. Furthermore, there have been some issues of managing things when the team fails to meet team expectations.
While some of the above points remain issues today, through the years it’s apparent that the coaches have noticed these issues as well and have taken measures to try to counter them (to varying degrees of success). Since I repeatedly mention how the Iowa staff clearly approach football as “educators” … it’s interesting to note that the staff also is clearly very introspective as well. Ferentz really isn’t lying when he says that they’re always looking to see how they might do things better. This is much akin to how an educator must also adapt to his/her class and self-evaluate to make sure that he/she is reaching the students and creating a great learning environment.
Anyhow, here are some observations of things that the coaches have done to improve things …. and, might I add, the list is limited because I am an outsider to the program. I’m sure that there are many other things that have been done behind the walls of Ft. Kinnick that I’m simply not privy too.
RE: #1 – First off, I don’t really think that Dace Richardson is a fair example of a 5-star guy not working out because of the extent of the injuries he endured through his Iowa career. However, the other guys are illustrious of how the coaches seem to have issues motivating and/or managing guys with HUGE egos. You’re automatically engaged in an uphill battle if a player truly believes everything he reads about his press-clippings. On a larger scale, the ’05 recruiting class is an example where the coaches had a terrible time managing egos. The ’05 season marked the beginning of a dual culture of entitlement on the squad … and it culminated in a team-implosion in ’06. You had an environment where young players felt entitled because they felt that they were more talented … and older guys felt entitled because they felt that they had “put in their time.” Neither group should feel very proud of themselves.
Anyhow, part of what led to the aforementioned downward spiral was part of the very factors that helped them rebuild the program to the heights it reached in ’02. Namely, the coaches placed a great amount of trust in the players … and the coaches were rewarded by having the players exhibit outstanding team leadership. I truly believe that part of the issue there is that that initial group of players had tasted defeat enough that the chip on their shoulder was nearly tangible. They then truly “bought into” Ferentz’s blue-collar approach to football – they were willing to put in the work to achieve success.
After the ’06 regular season, the coaches “pulled the leash” tight and placed a renewed emphasis on discipline and competition. From ’07 and on, I’ve heard quite a bit about how much more open competition was between players for starting spots.
Also, as we’ve heard from stories about Fiedorowicz, the coaches haven’t refrained from being more targeted in how they deal with underachieving high-talent players. The very fact that Ferentz would go so far as to emphasize (in front of many) that CJ wasn’t in the NFL yet goes to show that the coaches don’t want to see the scenarios of Larson/Doering repeat themselves. Similarly, DJK is another guy who the coaches clearly went out of their way to be more creative with in order to motivate and/or drive him towards a more productive path. Obviously they had mixed results with DJK … however, they still managed to pull a lot of positives out of him.
It’s interesting to note that since Doering, every more highly touted offensive linemen who Iowa has recruited has either done really well (like Bulaga), is doing well (like Scherff and Donnal), or has generated plenty of legitimate buzz (like Blythe, Walsh, and Ward).
RE: #2 – The above already addresses some of the “talent” versus “experience” issue to some extent. The fact that the coaches have increased the level of competition for starting spots really undermines some of the prior “fat cat” culture.
However, another thing that the coaches have obviously made a big step doing is that they’re now far more willing to play true freshmen. This definitely used to not be the case … and Ferentz has candidly been on record admitting as much. By letting more TR FR play further ups the level of competition because it puts a larger number of players in the “pool” of potential candidates to see quality reps. That explicitly not only provides younger players with something more tangible to motivate them – it also undermines the development of complacency among the upperclassmen.
While I know that some fans would like to point out that Nico Law isn’t playing over Tom Donatell … and thus clearly the coaches aren’t playing talent over experience – I would counter that with the observations that the coaches had Weisman ahead of Rogers to start the season … that Sash usurped Dalton who was the incumbent at strong safety … that Duzey has been seeing more reps at TE recently than Derby … that Blythe was starting ahead of Boffeli … that Tevaun Smith has been seeing more reps than Don Shumpert. The record overwhelmingly illustrates that the coaches have been playing the best guys (at least going off of what the players have shown them in practice).
RE: #3 – Much of the above illustrates that the coaches have gone to greater lengths to be more creative in how they “motivate” players. Also, while rhabo-gate clearly proved to be a negative … I don’t think that it’s a stretch that it was intended as being a motivational exercise for the players.
RE: #4 – I continue to see this issue as being one of the more glaring deficiencies of the coaching staff. I think that this contributed to the collapse that the team demonstrated in 2010.
I do believe that a significant part of why the defensive line demonstrated significant stretches of uninspired play in ’10 and ’11 was because Coach K’s abrasive approach was counter-productive to the guys when they were losing and already feeling frustrated.
Thus, I think that Ferentz addressed this issue to some degree by ushering Coach K out the “front door” because Coach K clearly wasn’t a great fit on the staff.
It’s clear that Ferentz tries to keep a finger on the pulse of the team and see where they are mentally/emotionally … but I continue to wonder if the staff can do more to address this issue.
David:
You are quite thorough and I give you credit for that. However, since his 3-year run of 02-04, Iowa has been a mediocre to average program save maybe 2 seasons. For the most part he’s proven to be FAR closer to a 6-8 win coach than a 9-10 win coach, and his record over time bears that out. We can talk all day about the reasons why – I don’t disagree with you on too many points, and I really enjoy the back and forth discussion – but it comes down to W’s and L’s in the end. For all the talk of NFL-ready players Iowa likes to tout, it hasn’t paid off nearly as much as it should in wins and losses.(and the NFL-level salary the HC receives here at lil ‘ol Iowa).
And Marc – GREAT pick-up!
Up until the past season, Penn State is a program that had a better “brand name” than the Hawks. What’s more, they’re a program that has also enjoyed more fertile recruiting grounds. However, since ’02, they’ve averaged 8.3 wins per year (with a standard deviation of 2.83 wins). Furthermore, during that same time frame they got hit by a few pretty bad waves of attrition and injuries over a few years and that ended up contributing to a 3-9 season in ’03 and a 4-7 season in ’04.
For the sake of comparison, during the same time period, Iowa has enjoyed an average of 8.5 wins per year (with a standard deviation of 1.96 wins). Iowa has managed to accomplish the above with poorer overall team depth and less fertile recruiting grounds … all the while having AT WORST a 6-6 regular season record.
I’m not trying to argue that Iowa is any sort of top-tier team, because obviously the team’s performance doesn’t merit such a designation. However, I would say that it is more fair to designation the Hawks as being more like a 7 to 9 win team than a 6 to 8 win team. Furthermore, the portrayal of the ’02 to ’04 seasons as being some sort of golden run are a bit dramatized. While it’s true that Iowa had great records those years and certainly enjoyed some magical runs … while it is a subjective claim, I’d claim that only the ’02 season marked a Hawk team that could hold their own against anybody in the nation.
If you truly break down match-ups and go off of the respective squads at their best and when healthy, the Hawkeye squads from ’08 to ’10 mark a collection that could hold their own against anybody. Of course, that is one of the very reasons why Iowa fans also view the ’10 season as being so painful and disappointing. However, is it not exciting to also truly know that those hopes and expectations were legitimate … albeit sadly and eventually fruitless?
I certainly do not ask for anybody to agree with me, but it is my perception that the ’11 season was simply one reflective of a team that was suffering some from the results of so much attrition on the roster. I figured that much of the bleeding would continue into the ’12 season as well. Once we learned that there would be so much change on the coaching staff, I immediately concluded that the ’12 season would inevitably end up being a rebuilding job. Although I know that many Hawk fans were banking too much on our perceived “easy schedule” this year … even before the season began, I figured that the season would be a “success” to me for the young, rebuilding team if they could just manage to go bowling.
If they can do that, and that will clearly still be an uphill battle, then it will obviously give the team quite a lot of momentum going into the ’13 season. If the Hawks can find a passing game in ’13, then they should likely be capable of playing with anybody in the nation, at least by the end of the season. Where things might get even more interesting is in ’14. I’m of the opinion, that the ’13 and ’14 seasons could provide the Hawks with a pretty darn nice 2-year run. An elite run? I don’t know … but I’m pretty sure that they will be good enough to quiet down the grumbling of the fan base.
David:
While “magical” employs a bit of hyperbole, 02-04 are CLEARLY outliers to the KF era. Positively. It’s not subjective at all: in sports, there are wins and losses, and the past seven years (and now this season) are much more the norm than the 02-04 run (and I enjoyed 02-04 as much as the next guy). Yes, I’m aware of the statistical average of Iowa wins since then and have no problem skipping the first 3 years either (they clearly weren’t of his doing).
However, those high-win seasons were definitely the high-watermark of the Ferentz Era. That’s not subjective at all – it’s clear in his records since then. He had a pretty good 2008 and outstanding 2009; other than that, 2005-07 and 2010-current have been nothing short of mediocre. Penn State’s brand, by the way, is borne of decades of playing 1-3 “real” games a year vs. the conference grind that they’ve endured since 1994. It was almost predictable that they wouldn’t be able to maintain their 9-11 win seasons once they entered the B1G.
As for Iowa, a majority of the seasons the past 7+ years have been barely above .500 (mediocre) and in contention for nothing conference-wise. They’ve had 2 really good to outstanding seasons out of 7, making a total of 5 really good to outstanding years out of 14+ seasons, with a majority of those coming in the first 6 years.
As for player development, it’s great to see the Hawks on the field on Sundays; however, my #1 concern for those guys are WINS on SATURDAYS more than making it to Sundays. They do a good job of developing some positions but often, most strikingly at QB, they trumpet the improved statistics, decision-making, etc. of multi-year starters and ignore the fact that their playmaking abilities are almost stripped by the time they graduate. We all know that wins and losses are not always the fault of the QB, but we DO know that lack of killer instinct/football instinct in “developed” Iowa QB’s have affected Iowa in pressure situations for a number of years. Excessive check-downs (throwing to or 1-2 yard slants on 3rd and 7 for example), inability to run 2-minute offenses (though we’re told repeatedly how good they are in practice at it), and paralysis by analysis are prime examples.
Overall, too many of the past 7+ seasons have been far too disappointing. Have some expectations been too high? Absolutely, but overall I believe Iowa IS capable of achieving a 8-10 win standard and they clearly have squandered several opportunities to do so. I’ve NEVER demanded national championships or annual B1G titles, but we haven’t sniffed either except for once (2009) and that’s unacceptable.
“Raise Iowa’s sexiest levels too high.”
This is what we’re all shooting for. Sexy levels off the charts for all!
Mike,
I also care about the bottom line of Ws versus Ls. However, as I believe that we’ve discussed in response to a different article, I’ve previously written that since the Hawks are a team that places such emphasis on fundamentals and playing fast – when the team wins the players deserve the majority of the praise … and when the team loses the players deserve the majority of the blame.
Furthermore, Iowa likes to play a balanced brand of football. Thus, since we do end up running the ball so much, we end up eating up a lot of clock. Furthermore, Ferentz also values a defensive approach where you minimize the number of points that the opposition puts up. Particularly, Ferentz is of the philosophy that if the opposition must score, you have to make it as difficult as possible for them to do so. This combined approach on O and D complements Ferentz’s core “football values” that ultimately a football player must be fundamentally sound … they must be able to block, get off blocks, tackle, etc. He obviously doesn’t want to rely upon schemes to compensate for player deficiencies in fundamentals. This philosophy, combined with our pro-style schemes and Ferentz’s NFL connections, is why Iowa has been so successful placing players in the NFL.
However, the aforementioned approach to football also can often lead to games where there aren’t many possessions. This then can artificially keep games “close” … and, thus, that’s a big reason why Iowa often is involved in close games against seemingly overmatched opponents and why Iowa is involved in surprisingly many close games against highly ranked teams. I don’t think that I need to throw the stats at you about all the close games that Iowa has been involved in since 2001, do I? Of course, this leads to the infuriating result that we occasionally lose to teams that we have no business losing to. However, as Ferentz states, and I agree with him … a team earns the result it gets. When the Hawks lose a close game … it was lost not just due to a single factor. In fact, I don’t recall watching an Iowa game where Iowa was involved in a really close game and was playing mistake-free ball.
An intriguing question is, can Iowa retain Ferentz’s philosophy but also increase the number of possessions in the game?
- Yes, but it also requires Iowa’s running game to be able to still gain yardage in decent chunks. With RBs like Russell and Greene, the Hawks have been able to do this. In those years (with RBs like that), Iowa has also managed to both enjoy more possessions on O and greater scoring efficiency. However, as we’ve all been painfully aware … Iowa has also had some issues in this category.
- Iowa can get more possessions also by getting more takeaways. Given how Iowa’s D is built, this is reliant on the back-7 having success keeping windows in the zone narrow … AND by getting pressure on the QB with the front 4.
- Iowa can also play around more with tempo on O. This is something that Iowa hasn’t done so much in the past, however it is clearly something extra that Coach Davis is adding more to the mix. This element must also be combined with a greater willingness to take risks on D – because otherwise the D could be in danger of being stuck on the field too long.
Frankly Mike, provided that the Iowa passing O can end up turning the corner … I think that you’ll be more happy about the Hawks in the coming years. However, I still anticipate that this season will still be a bit on the frustrating side.