Two Interesting Statistics

by Abbas_Cincinnatus on Nov 29, 2010 4:57 PM CST

As I watched the Iowa season implode I had a number of theories about what was happening on the field. One of my biggest concerns was why Iowa seemed so hesitant to run the ball after Adam Robinson's concussion in the Michigan State game. Was it that they felt that Coker was so ineffective? Was it the fact that Coker was virtually the last running back available? Regardless, I wanted to see whether this perception was even true and what I found was kind of eye opening.

		rush	pass
Date	Opponent	plays	plays	diff.
Sept. 4	EASTERN ILLINOIS	39	26	13
Sept. 11	IOWA STATE	50	20	30
Sept. 18	at Arizona	26	33	-7
Sept. 25	BALL STATE	44	29	15
Oct. 2	PENN STATE	36	22	14
Oct. 16	at Michigan	36	24	12
Oct. 23	WISCONSIN	30	37	-7
Oct. 30	MICHIGAN STATE	42	16	26
Nov. 6	at Indiana	29	33	-4
Nov. 13	at Northwestern	28	43	-15
Nov. 20	OHIO STATE	25	31	-6
Nov 27, 2010	at Minnesota	27	22	5

I highlighted in yellow the five losses plus the Indiana game, which was a near miss. For purposes of analysis let's identify all of the yellow games as "losses" and all of the non-highlighted games as "wins". There were two really interesting things that I noticed here:

1.) Iowa ran the ball more than 35 times in each of its wins and ran the ball 30 or fewer times in each of its losses.

2.) Iowa ran the ball at least ten more times than it threw in each of its wins. Iowa threw the ball more than it ran the ball in each of its losses except Minnesota. At first blush you can say that's because they were constantly playing from behind, but the only game where that seems to be clearly true is Arizona.

Also, it's worth noting that average yards per carry is a minor issue. Iowa's lowest three YPC performances this season came against Arizona, tOSU and Minnesota. But Iowa ran the ball better against Wisconsin (3.93 YPC) than against Michigan State (3.86 YPC) and better against jNWU (3.61 YPC) than Penn State (3.39 YPC). And against Indiana, which was a damn near disaster, Iowa averaged 5.34 YPC but still only ran the ball 29 times.

I don't know what it means and I don't think it's THE issue in our slide (this ignores such things as our inability to stop game-clinching drives and the complete mess that is special teams), but I think it's interesting nonetheless.

Unless otherwise expressly indicated by BHGP editors, this FanPost is strictly the viewpoint of the author and is not endorsed by BHGP in any way.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

yeah, but since we were up early in most of the games with more rushes, it makes sense.

Also, those final drives in the 4th quarter of the losses were almost exclusively passes, so the numbers get skewed a bit late

by rupertj on Nov 29, 2010 5:04 PM CST reply actions

I would expect this to be true of almost every game

under Ferentz. Although 2009 might be interesting to look at, given that we won many close games.

"You're going to go out there with a dick full of confidence. Then, you're going to go out there and shoot that confidence all over the stadium." -Blue Mountain State

by Hawkaloogie on Nov 29, 2010 6:40 PM CST reply actions

I've never been fully on board the KOK hate train...

but, if I’ve had one consistent complaint over the years, it’s not his conservatism, it’s that he sometimes seems to get a little pass-happy when the run game either seems to be working, or feels like it’s on the verge of working once the opposing defense gets worn down a little more. He also, IMO, passes too much on first down, leaving too many 2nd and 10s. I wish he’d run more on first down against defenses like IU and NW where it will probably mean 2nd and 5 and more options for the next play.

by DonnyDonovan on Nov 29, 2010 7:21 PM CST reply actions

Some observations

I have never really liked KOK, mostly due to how predictible he can get and also with how he can fall in love with specific plays. How many times this year did we telegraph what we were doing by lining up in an offset I with two tight ends and one wide out. Not only one wide out, but it is Keenan Davis. While talented, he is not yet a Big10 burner yet. That means that team’s best corner can cover one on one and leave 10 guys in the box to defend the run. And 90% of the time it was a run.

He also has gone away from the Wide Receiver Screen, the Running Back Screen, (even though one of the three times he ran it this year it led to A-Rob’s concussion), running the Fullback,(which was very sucessful earlier in the year) and the draw play on early downs with the D spread out. It has been replaced with that god damed reverse which had been blown up since the Alamo Bowl vs. Texas, going deep on a first down deep in our own territory, and that single wide play mentioned earlier. I have never had a problem with our offense. It has been the lack of creative play calling and the fact that defenses can key on certain plays, especially on first down.

Too often in the losses this year I have seen incomplete pass on first, run for 1 yard on second, pass for 6 yards on third, punt, rinse and repeat. I was pretty pissed off watching the Indiana game where KOK tried to win the Heisman for Stanzi by watching Big Marcus rumble down the field, only to have Stanzi try and throw the same route 3 times inside the redzone in an attempt to pad his touchdown stats. Coker was destroying the Indy D, but KOK fell in love with that fucking fade, and forgot that the human bowling ball had gotten them down there in the first place. Hell he even forgot 7 got 6.

I am a traditionalist when it comes to the offensive side of the football. Pro style offenses work against any D. I hate the spread, the read option, and even traditional option offense. But the strength of the Pro Style offense is to be diverse in play calling to keep the opposition guessing. That is something that we have not seen in the second half of the season. I sat in Minneapolis last week knowing the exact play that was being run just simply by the formation that the offense was in.

And one last thing, how about giving the QB a play earlier in the play clock so he can get to the line and assess the defense and make his adjustments. Too often KOK takes his sweet time in his non scripted portion of the playcalling to get the play in and leaves the QB no time to audible into a better play.

I learned a great many things in the Marines that helped me as a football coach. The Marines train men hard and to do things the right way, just as a football team must train. - Hayden Fry

by NileKinnickIronman on Nov 30, 2010 8:16 AM CST reply actions

I don't understand the "reverse" hate

1) it’s not a reverse, it’s an end-around.
2) it is a constraint play, part of our rushing package, and we only call it when the defense is overpursuing on our stock zone run. It’s there to keep the defense honest and to scratch where it itches.
3) Usually it is a missed block that causes it to go for a loss, not something inherently wrong with the play, and just as often it goes for a big gain. There is also a fake end-around that we run just as often that works pretty well.
4) This year we saw a third play from this look, when McNutt took the end-around and passed to DJK streaking down the sideline. It almost went for a touchdown.

I do agree on the fades in the red zone. It’s a medium-percentage play… I much prefer misdirection and clearouts, tossing to the fullback in the flat or rolling out with a TE if we’re gonna pass down by the goal line. I’m always leery of passes across the middle in the end zone, because there is so little room for error, and so much to be lost if a pick is thrown. However we don’t have much in the way of a power running game, and zone blocking against goal-line defensive personnel doesn’t really work so well. We need a more diverse and effective short yardage package.

It’s funny… much of our success in Ferentz’ early years (I’m pointing at 1999-2001) came from screens and passes to the flats. The reason we ran these more often was because we had undersized and overmatched linemen and defenses were pinning their ears back.

KOK is a competent OC, but I do agree that he does have some very identifiable tendencies. However I think these are by design, because on the rare occasion that he breaks the tendency, it can result in a huge play.

I think KOK and KF are dreaming of the day when they have a healthy stable of quality RBs and can pound the ball 35+ times a game without worry (see Wisconsin). That day has eluded us in recent times however.

Brunettes not fighter jets

by rockyh on Nov 30, 2010 3:46 PM CST up reply actions

Why the hate?

Becuase it is (1) over-used, meaning that (2) opposing defenses know it’s coming, usually because of the personnel package and definitely because of formation. It rarely goes for more than 5 yards, doesn’t fool the defense, thus it is an utter failure as a “constraint” play, it’s not keeping anyone honest.

I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.

by HoyaGoon on Nov 30, 2010 5:03 PM CST up reply actions

The "reverse hate"

stems from the fact that end around or reverse is called a very inopportune down, distances, and field positions. It seems to be called early in games with very little setup. Not only that but when I see Paul Chaney Jr. on the field split wide ~~the entire world~~ I can diagnose it.

I learned a great many things in the Marines that helped me as a football coach. The Marines train men hard and to do things the right way, just as a football team must train. - Hayden Fry

by NileKinnickIronman on Nov 30, 2010 5:40 PM CST up reply actions

Our WRs have 13 carries this season.

Chaney has six carries, DJK has five and McNutt and Sandeman each have one. I assume all of them are on the end-around. Those 13 carries resulted in a net 101 yards (we gained 113 and lost 12 on the play). DJK broke one for 16 yards, Chaney has one for 19. The net YPC on this play is 7.77. I would say if we had a play that averaged almost eight yards we would be likely to keep it in the playbook.

by Abbas_Cincinnatus on Dec 1, 2010 12:09 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

I'm tired of the coaches saying we should have "executed" better

This is merely coach speak for blaming it on the kids. Yeah, if you execute perfectly everytime you will probably win. But that never happens, except for the MSU game. One of many priorities of the coaching staff is to give their team schematic advantage every once in a while. Our team only gets that once in a blue moon. I can not count how many times the D had 8 or more in the box on an obvious passing down and we run. When we spread them out on a 1st down we throw. KOK’s inability to get plays in early doesn’t allow Ricky time to check out of plays that the defense lines up for. After watching tape on the Hawks through the first half of the year it wasn’t hard for teams to get a bead on what we were doing and that is why we lost the last 3. Everyone deals with injuries, look at Wisconsin. Down to their third running back and pounding the ball like no ones business. Mabye if they would have unleashed Coker a bit more things would be different. Also, stating that you really don’t know what happened to your team means either you are a bad coach or just don’t give a shit. I know Kirk is a great coach so the latter has to be true.

"I don't believe in quotes" - Karl Klug

by Nature Boy on Nov 30, 2010 9:29 AM CST reply actions

But execution is partially true.

Let’s go back to the fade on first and goal in the first series against Indiana. Stanzi flat overthrew DJK. If he throws a better ball, Iowa scores. Going back to it wasn’t necessarily a bad call either because Indiana wasn’t expecting it. But Stanzi overthrew it again. So in that case execution did play a pretty big part in coming away with three points instead of seven.

That said, Nile’s point still stands. The bigger issue isn’t execution and it isn’t the play calling on second down. It was the play calling on first down. Coker was absolutely tearing up the Indiana defense but we went away from him when it really mattered — in the red zone. We averaged over 5 YPC against Indiana yet inside the ten we repeatedly threw the ball. Maybe Coker wouldn’t have been as effective on a compressed field and we would have gotten stopped anyway. But all evidence is to the contrary.

As for running the ball with eight in the box, I think you have to do that just to show you’re willing. The biggest weapon in the pro-style offense is play action but only if the team can either run OR throw in every situation. If there are clear situations where you’re unwilling to run the ball then play action loses its effectiveness. Yes, that includes 3rd and 24 — although occasionally your back makes a play and you pick it up anyway (see Robinson in last year’s Arizona game).

The problem for me, as I mentioned above, is the run/pass mix. For some reason we went away from a 50/50 balance and we lost games. Whether that was because we lacked confidence in Coker (which is strange because he seemed to run the ball VERY effectively) or we were worried about him getting hurt too, I’m not sure. What I don’t believe is that it’s because we were in close games. Teams like Iowa. MSU and Wisky either run the ball or they lose.

by Abbas_Cincinnatus on Nov 30, 2010 10:21 AM CST up reply actions

I agree with the Indiana game and Coker

We actually ran the ball 27 times and threw it 22 times against Minnesota.

"I don't believe in quotes" - Karl Klug

by Nature Boy on Nov 30, 2010 10:48 AM CST reply actions

I saw that.

What i think is strange is that every win featured us running the ball at least 12 more times than we passed. I don’t think there’s anything magical there. In fact, there’s probably plenty of third-party correlation, but it does make me wonder if we committed just a little more to the run early on against Minnesota whether the result would be different. I don’t know.

Of course, if we committed less to the run maybe Coker wouldn’t have fumbled away the potential game-winning drive, but that’s just if’s and buts.

by Abbas_Cincinnatus on Nov 30, 2010 12:10 PM CST up reply actions

Running the ball 12 times more than throwing it means

we were bleeding 4th quarters clocks. I’m tired of trying to bleed the clock with 8 minutes left in the game with a 3 point lead. That strategy has resulted in 3 and outs and the D being on the field the entire 4th quarter i.e. Wisconsin, jNW, PSU, Michigan, Ohio State. If Penn State would have played McGloin against us we would have lost and if Michigan had any sort of defense that could have been a loss as well.

"I don't believe in quotes" - Karl Klug

by Nature Boy on Dec 1, 2010 10:02 AM CST up reply actions