ISU Football "Pro Style Offense"

[jburke]

The so called Skill players aren't even involved in the game plan! Throw to Lazard!! That didn't happen. How many times when you watch the replay of a run play does our WR's have there thumb up there ***. They don't block down the field. Changing the offense now wouldn't matter as the guys we have haven't proven themselves. Were averaging 24 points a game! I don't think going to the pro style offense is going to decrease that number at all. With the offense we have we should be averaging at least 30ppg in our first 3 games.

I am soo tired of the ignorant fan-base we have created. Suggestions are just asinine. Everyone jumps to such idiotic conclusions, with no thought process behind anything..... You are basing you thought process on 3 games, one against an FCS that we left 13 pts on the field against, that other 2 who at the end of the year I bet we look back and have Top 25 defenses in the nation. I am on the same page with everyone that the offense is not producing like we expect, but a change like this would definitely cause a start fresh aftermath to the program...

 

[jburke]

Oh really? Here are Walden's records

1988 5-6
1989 6-5
1990 4-6-1
1991 3-7-1
1992 4-7
1993 3-8
1994 0-10-1
yea.. Rhoads 3-9, 2-10, and soon to be 2-10 records are so so much better.

Funny thing is, you know what they have in common? They won early on and tanked.

Record is only part of it.... The product that you saw on the field back then was way worse that anything we have seen since the late McCarney years.

 

[awd4cy]

Record is only part of it.... The product that you saw on the field back then was way worse that anything we have seen since the late McCarney years.

Oh really? Wins aren't a good measuring stick? I don't know how you can deny the bad product out there now.

 

[ISUonthemove]

McCarney ran a conservative style offense like this and everyone hated it. Everyone said we need to do something original and unique because we would never be able to get the recruits to beat the big boys at their own game. I don't really think that has changed.

That's because most teams were running the same offense and defense as Iowa State. Now that everyone runs a spread offense, and defenses have adjusted, why not go back to a pro style.

Seems easier to recruit guys that can match other teams physicality upfront, rather than athleticism.

 

[Clonefan94]

Meh, I've come to the conclusion that it really isn't anything to do with scheme or style. Paul Rhoads is just a bad coach. No matter what kind of offense we were running, it's going to be tough to overcome 13 - 15 penalties a game. It's tough to overcome a stop, force a punt, then give the ball right back to them because you were off sides, when you weren't even going for the block. False start after false start on the line. There just seems to be no discipline on this team at all. It takes discipline to play football well. And as much as I've watched of Rhoads coached teams, I truly believe it doesn't matter who we have at QB, what our offensive scheme is, or what kind of talent is really out on the field, Rhoads is just not a good football coach.

 

[jburke]

Oh really? Wins aren't a good measuring stick? I don't know how you can deny the bad product out there now.

I agree that wins in the end will decide if Rhoads keeps his job or not. But if you sat through any of those Walden/McCarney loses you would appreciate being in a full game till the end even if it ended in losing to Toledo....

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

Record is only part of it.... The product that you saw on the field back then was way worse that anything we have seen since the late McCarney years.

For the most part Walden won games he should have. Rhoads cant even win those games.

 

[jburke]

For the most part Walden won games he should have. Rhoads cant even win those games.

So are you saying we should have won Saturday, should have as in prior to the start of the game.....
We were a 10 pt underdog at kickoff.....

 

[CyRann22]

So are you saying we should have won Saturday, should have as in prior to the start of the game.....
We were a 10 pt underdog at kickoff.....

Exactly... why is this?

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

So are you saying we should have won Saturday, should have as in prior to the start of the game.....
We were a 10 pt underdog at kickoff.....

Oh course we should have won! We are a Big 12 team against a team from a lower tier conference. Thats the saddest part is that we were an underdog, thats where we are now under Rhoads. You reap what you sow. We cant beat teams we should so of course we are underdogs in every game.

 

[JohnnyFive]

So assuming Paul is fired at the end of the season. Do we bring in another spread offense type of coach or do we bring in a Pro style offense like Iowa, Stanford and Wisconsin? I personally think we need to switch to a pro style and go under center more. I think with the talent we go up against we need to have a different offense that defenses need to prepare differently for.

As far as recruiting, I think this would benefit us as we wouldn't be going after the same type of talent that the rest of the Big 12 is already going after. The next 5-6 years will be rough as no coach will be able to come in and flip this program right around. Anything is better than the crap display we watch every week.

They used a fullback for the first time in god knows when Saturday. That was a breathe of relief.

 

[Spam]

So are you saying we should have won Saturday, should have as in prior to the start of the game.....
We were a 10 pt underdog at kickoff.....

That we were a 10 point underdog as a B12 team with a 6th year HC against a MAC team tell us something.

 

[2clones4cy]

I am soo tired of the ignorant fan-base we have created. Suggestions are just asinine. Everyone jumps to such idiotic conclusions, with no thought process behind anything..... You are basing you thought process on 3 games, one against an FCS that we left 13 pts on the field against, that other 2 who at the end of the year I bet we look back and have Top 25 defenses in the nation. I am on the same page with everyone that the offense is not producing like we expect, but a change like this would definitely cause a start fresh aftermath to the program...

Giving up over 450 total yards the past 2 games will not get you a top 25 defense! They play in the MAC, time to come to realization that our players we have now cannot go out and compete with any other team that puts the same style of offense on the field. In order for us to have any chance in games this year we have to play between the lines, look how many games in the past 3 years we have had the lead at half and come out and lay an egg. This is the norm for this football team.

 

[aeroclone]

McCarney ran a conservative style offense like this and everyone hated it. Everyone said we need to do something original and unique because we would never be able to get the recruits to beat the big boys at their own game. I don't really think that has changed.

The change is the league. Most of the Big 12 is now running the spread.

The issue at Iowa State isn't which system is better on paper. The Key is that we need to be going against the grain, and running something that isn't popular with the rest of the league. This makes us a more difficult match up for defenses designed to stop another style of play and it allows us to recruit a different pool of players.

I don't think this is too far off from the approach Hoiberg took. He brought an uptempo, positionless system that was different from what everyone else in the league was doing it. And he combined it with a unique approach to recruiting that allowed him to land some good talent that fit the system before he had any concrete results to sell to future players.

Contrast this with what we are doing in football. We recruit the conference for spread athletes. Given geography, budget, history, etc. nobody chooses us over any of the other schools and we just get what is left over, ending up with classes ranked 9th or 10th depending if we beat out Kansas. We then go run the same system that these teams play against week after week, and we do it with the least talented athletes. The fact that we can't win this way shouldn't surprise anyone. If you tack on the fact that we often lack discipline and haven't shown much in terms of player development after they get here, and you get yourself 2 win seasons.

 

[bawbie]

I didn't see this mentioned, but maybe I missed it:

You don't hire a coach based on style-of-play. You hire the right coach who has a plan and the capability to execute it and let them implement their plan.

 

[Goothrey]

I think it is a boring style but as far as strategy goes, it may not be a bad move.

 

[hawkfan]

Posted this in another thread, but think a guy like Troy Calhoun would be a good hire at ISU. With everyone in the Big 12 getting smaller/faster on defense to combat spread passing attacks, going to an offense that is almost entirely run based would make ISU tough to prep for in one week and would run clock to help out the defense.

In addition, Calhoun has always appeared to me to be a great coach. He's won 8+ games at a service academy in five of his eight seasons. His overall record is 59-44 (and that includes a 2-10 disaster in 2013, take that out it it looks much better), and he's only currently getting paid $600K - not sure he'd leave Air Force (as he's an alum), but it wouldn't be difficult for ISU to double/triple his current salary.

I just don't see how ISU can ever recruit spread type athletes that will be better than what Baylor/TCU/Oklahoma/TTech/Texas/Etc. can recruit, so winning shootouts is a pipe dream, long term. With Calhoun's attack, you don't need a four star QB to run it successfully - his offense is about discipline and execution more so than requiring great talent to be successful.

 

[isuno1fan]

It doesn't matter. I'm fine with the offense so long as we go under center at the goal line or 4 and inches type of situations.

 

[klamath632]

I didn't see this mentioned, but maybe I missed it:

You don't hire a coach based on style-of-play. You hire the right coach who has a plan and the capability to execute it and let them implement their plan.

This, and add the ability to teach the game. Winning is a by-product.

ISU isn't going to recruit 4-star kids to campus. ISU needs a coach that can bring in 2-star kids, coach them up for a few years, and then let the chips fall where they may in their junior and senior seasons. Build that, and sustain that, and you'll start seeing the basement for ISU be .500, with the occasional 9- or 10-win season where all the breaks falls their way.

 

[heitclone]

They used a fullback for the first time in god knows when Saturday. That was a breathe of relief.

We ran the same set/play that we ran last year with Syria at FB. There was no FB, just 2 HB's. I think the coaches we have had try to install a spread offense didn't get the right athletes to run it, its centered around a talented QB who makes sound decisions based on good playcalling.. We have never had a QB who looked they grasped the spread offense or who looked confident that they could get the ball where its supposed to be. I think once we get a coach who can bring in a QB or develop a QB to actually run the spread we will be fine. Non p5 and FCS teams find the right athletes, why can't we?

The spread is tailor made for ISU, it is designed to negate a lack in talent in the trenches with playcalling, execution and a few good athletes at the skill positions.