Are you sure? What I've read from about everyone around here is that Jantz can't get more accurate if he improves his mechanics and gets coached up more. All of our players are already maxed out /CF
MESS named OC
- Thread starter Mycology
- Start date
Are you sure? What I've read from about everyone around here is that Jantz can't get more accurate if he improves his mechanics and gets coached up more. All of our players are already maxed out /CF
1.)You're right, any player can excel in any system
2.)Hermans offense did magnify the talent deficiencies, because like previously said, the players who had the talent and were made for his system were the ones who were redshirting or only freshmen or sophomores. I'm not sure how much you know about football and recruiting, but especially for a school like ISU you need to develop players.
3.)We aren't going to land many guys who can start as true freshman, and we weren't going to screw over the players they recruited for their system they want to run by making them learn a system that fit the current players better first.
1.) Are you still working on that list of attributes that Herman's offense requires from players that prevents them from not excelling in an offense focused on deception and creating mismatches?
2.) WTF? Herman's offense magnified talent deficiencies because of his schemes, not because better players were on the bench. Regardless of how illogical your statement was, it does not matter why Herman was forced to play inferior talent, it matters that his offense magnified that. I'm not sure how much you know about football and recruiting, but especially for a school like ISU you will always need to hide inferior talent. We aren't going to land many guys that will be better than their senior and junior counterparts at other Big 12 schools.
3.)Are you still working on that list of attributes that Herman's offense requires from players that prevents them from not excelling in an offense focused on deception and creating mismatches?
Ha ha, fair enough
I do agree our QB's can improve their accuracy- from many things. Core strength, mechanics, experience, better passing schemes and receiver play, play-calling, etc.
My mind is really blown by you not comprehending that ISU didn't have players for a spread offense. Its not just because he was the coach, they wouldn't fit anyones spread offense.
Our linemen were too big and not quick enough. Our WR's weren't that quick. We were a team built for power, CPR wanted an offense of speed instead.
Big slow players aren't going to produce when used in an offense based around speed and agility.
Our linemen were too big and not quick enough. Our WR's weren't that quick. We were a team built for power, CPR wanted an offense of speed instead.
Big slow players aren't going to produce when used in an offense based around speed and agility.
But yes I'll just go ahead and agree with you since your skull is so thick. Herman ran that offense because it didn't play to our current players strengths, not because CPR wanted us to join the new millenium. We were a great team with high expectations, and Herman set us back by changing our top notch offense.
How dare CPR and Herman make a major overhaul that would set us back temporarily and make us better in the long run.
How dare CPR and Herman make a major overhaul that would set us back temporarily and make us better in the long run.
My mind is blown by you not understanding my contention is Herman's offense magnified those weaknesses- weakness that ISU will likely have in comparison to other Big 12 teams. I'm not sure how much you know about football and recruiting, but especially for a school like ISU you are better served having an offense that does not magnify deficiencies in quickness, speed, and overall team athleticism.
Again, why will these spread players we recruited, who are still likely to be not as fast, quick, and as athletic as needed, not be better served in an offense that will not rely on or magnify the need to out quick/run/athlete the opponent?
It does not matter if Herman's offense was in-vogue (it was not), an offense that magnifies a lack of quickness, speed, and athleticism, is not for ISU. Better in the long-term? What support do you have for that claim? It will have to pay-off big time to be worth the futility of the first 1-? (3?,4?, 5?, 6?) years.
Sort of like last year when Jordan Wynn (Utah) sliced and diced our defense with his "noodle" arm.
Interesting. Occasionally, I would see him barking, but I never really thought much about what was going on. I would think that the conflict-oriented stuff would take place in private coaches meetings, but maybe it was taking place during the game. There are enough people around on the sidelines, surely somebody could comment on what was going on during those sessions.
Serious question:
What offense do you think we should run, or should have run from the start in the CPR era?
He wants the pistol or some other multiple look like aTm. It really wouldn't matter but he will contend it would.
Thanks Tre. Personally, I would also like to see some more pistol added to the offense. It has worked well for us at times. I'd really like so see more of the diamond package and get more of our RBs on the field.
I will be interested to see what Messingham has to add to the offense. I'm guessing he didn't go 100% shotgun in his last stint as an OC so maybe we will see a few under center packages.
As for the spread, personally I think it does a lot for us now. Specifically in the running game. It keeps the defense from keeping everyone in the box and if we could keep them honest with more efficient passing, we could have a lot more success.
If we lined up in the poer run game, the defense would be able to bring 8 or 9 into the box. To control the line of scrimmage in that situation requires you to be bigger and stronger than your opponent. That will always be tough at ISU. If we can spread the field and go where they aren't we can move the ball. We moved the ball at times this season and any improvement at the QB position should help.
A pistol would be great, it is easier to create mismatches and advantageous angles out of then the Herman Huddle.. Regardless of that, I am not against some versions/implementations of the spread, or even going to a pro set. Misdirection, deception, and schematically creating mismatches can happen from many genres of offense. Herman's didn't, largely due to compressing the field.
Your rebuttal is it does not matter what offense we run, 2nd to last in the Big 12 in scoring is the best ISU can do? Your parents must be proud.
Last edited:
Execution beats scheme every freaking time. Does Houston run a lot of misdirection and scheme? No, but they beat PSU badly didn't they. Did they have more talent? No. Did WVU run a lot mismatch stuff last night? No, and they have a little less talent. You seem to just think we can bring in a system and that's all we need. It's not. Execution is always your limiting factor. Always.
And sometimes, execution on just a few big plays beats everything. A few big plays, unless very early, wouldn't have made a different last night, but a few big offensive plays (or stopping their big offensive play) at the Pinstripe Bowl would have meant a victory for us. This is not to say that we didn't have good execution, because we did, especially on defense, but you could reasonably say that despite other issues of execution, the game's outcome was determined on a few big plays that Rutgers won.
Last edited:
Hell, not holding on a kickoff return and holding on to a dang TD pass would have won it for us.
When the offense executed, we scored enough points to win. See OSU, TTU this year. There weren't any new plays that I saw, just executed better.
Continuity is huge. You don't want players having to annually learn new schemes. With up and down QB play and the 2nd ranked SOS according to Sagarin you were able to rank 61st in offense and 39th in rushing. Pair that with improved QB play and you could have something there as better recruits hit the program.
In what ways? Please, anyone, discuss how the pistol or any other offense inherently makes it easier to get mismatches than last year's offense. You have beat to death the fact that you think deception and mismatches are the key to winning offense, yet you haven't provided any evidence of how your proposed offense would yeild those advantages.
Also, please explain to me how the "pistol" and "spread" are distinct offenses.
Good story. Did you see the sophisticated routes Houston was running? WVU was executing because their scheme did a great job of exposing Clemson.
Your ability to execute is largely a function of how sound your scheme is. Every team has miscues. Those are compounded when your scheme does not put you in advantageous positions. Our lack of execution is largely due to Herman's offense magnifying our talent deficiencies. Sure, if you have NFL guys at every position, just run whatever, and it is on their execution.
I realize I will need to trivialize my point for you. Which will have better execution:
-An offense going against a defense that was in the huddle and knows the play
-An offense going against a defense that is confused and must defend the entire field.
The one thing a pistol can do is get the RB headed downhill faster and you have a more natural spacing for the option but the read option becomes unnatural if we were to stick with that. UCLA tried the pistol thing and it didn't work. Why? Because they didn't execute things correctly.