I won't make any argument for FSU being good, but their 2 losses are to the AP #16 and 18 teams by 1 score. I don't think they are "really bad" either.
BLUM: Iowa State has an offense
- Thread starter brentblum
- Start date
I won't make any argument for FSU being good, but their 2 losses are to the AP #16 and 18 teams by 1 score. I don't think they are "really bad" either.
Those are fair points, though, the jokes aside.
They are #35 on FPI. Iowa State is #24.
ISU is 51st in offensive efficiency. That isn't exactly one of the top offenses in college football.
UNI isn't close to the best defense ISU will face. Right now here are the defensive efficiencies of Big 12 teams.
6. KSU
13. TCU
26. OU
27. Texas Tech
40. Baylor
44. OSU
48. Texas
68. WVU
86. KU
For reference on the teams that ISU has played.
23. Iowa
111. ULM
UNI isn't close to the best defense ISU will face. Right now here are the defensive efficiencies of Big 12 teams.
6. KSU
13. TCU
26. OU
27. Texas Tech
40. Baylor
44. OSU
48. Texas
68. WVU
86. KU
For reference on the teams that ISU has played.
23. Iowa
111. ULM
And ESPN has them something like 88th in defensive efficiency.
Those are fair points, though, the jokes aside.
They are #35 on FPI. Iowa State is #24.
They’re not at all consistent series to series. A brand name like that will be blood in the water for a team like ULM.
In our game it seemed ULM relented, or quit, once Purdy caught fire.
Fair point. ESPN's offensive/defensive efficiency, where you are getting this from, are based on raw points per drive, which frankly, haven't been great for Iowa State as documented because they weren't able to punch in scores on drives against UNI and Iowa. This number should get better over time once Iowa State capitalizes more often.
It's like when you're in High school. Sometimes you need to punch a third grader in the face to get the confidence to face the 6th grade bully who keeps taking your lunch money.
Is converting red zone possessions more of a lucky thing or a skill thing?
I know we have a small sample size, but UNI and UOI did not fill me with confidence.
Even more, the average doesn’t fully articulate the offensive problems we have had, but it doesn’t indicate some of the frustration.
We can be productive, we can score, but generally only do when our defense mandates. This results in the average being okay, but the margin gained in individual games from having a good offense being slim.
Somewhere in the middle IMO. Generally speaking if you can move the ball in other areas of the field (and Iowa State has) red zone offense would also be good. For whatever reason, the dots weren't connected in first two games. I think those were more aberrations than anything.
It also felt like in the Iowa and UNI games we kind of tried to get "too cute" and went away from what was working on a lot of those productive drives. Saturday we put the pedal to the floor and never looked back.
Anyone using the UNI game as some sort of measuring stick/baseline for the offense needs to sit a few threads out.
It's patently obvious that ISU's offensive game plan for UNI had 2 facets:
(1) Get all 4 RBs as many carries as possible in order to distinguish a pecking order
(2) Keep Purdy in the pocket and have him make plays without scrambling
The coaching staff needed to see how the offense could do those things against live opposition, and basically treated it like a preseason game. UNI's defensive "scheme" had much less to do with it.
It's patently obvious that ISU's offensive game plan for UNI had 2 facets:
(1) Get all 4 RBs as many carries as possible in order to distinguish a pecking order
(2) Keep Purdy in the pocket and have him make plays without scrambling
The coaching staff needed to see how the offense could do those things against live opposition, and basically treated it like a preseason game. UNI's defensive "scheme" had much less to do with it.
Isn’t our defense somewhat built on this not being true? The red zone is somewhat an arbitrary cutoff, but given enough iterations a mistake will occur, and the field does compress as you get to the red zone.
Given the defenses we have played, I don’t know if the success rate in those two areas will converge just from a larger sample. The skill positions making the available play will go a long ways.
Defenses can say they specialize in red zone and sure Iowa State has done well in this area. But IMO that is because the defense is good everywhere. Yards are yards, essentially. I do think randomness and luck do play into turnovers, which alters red zone numbers, good and bad. Long story short, if you are gaining lots of yards per play, points almost always follow.
ISU's going to need to run the ball in true form for the offense to continue to be effective.
It’s not saying they specialize in the red zone, although the number of plays needed for an offense to make a mistake is likely to correlate to that offense at times approaching the red zone. Bend but don’t break is largely just testing the quality control of an offense more than specializing in the red zone (although teams to change their approach once the offense is only a few iterations from scoring). Our offense has had quality control issues, not necessarily red zone issues, against two play forward-defenses. That can be hidden in average yards per play, particularly when we also have a bend don’t break defense that leaves a lot of field position swings.
Good call, very true. Absolutely see this side as well, appreciate the discussion.
You do not think the short field has a "crimping" effect on the offense? The defense does not have to worry about being beat over the top in the red zone, and therefore they can allocate resources towards making a more limited playbook less successful.
Spacing spacing spacing. Spacing is key in both basketball and football. Imaging if you shortened a basketball court to a quarter-court (so basically the free throw line to the baseline) and trying to score in that situation with ten men packed into that space.
It is a similar effect in cramming 22 men into a smaller and smaller field.
There are basketball teams with very different half-court efficiency numbers from fast-break numbers. They are different because trying to score in those circumstances are very different, particularly given a fast break is predisposed to good spacing because it is usually <5 on <5. I would say the same thing about moving the ball on a football field.