One Question Keeps Being Asked…

We used to see a lot of RPO mixed into the game plan. QB and running back rolls out with the option to keep it, pitch or pass. Seems to have disappeared from the playbook. I find it very puzzling. Thoughts?
It's part of the "protect the QB at all costs" philosophy the staff has. It's why you see Purdy much more mobile in the NFL than at Iowa State. It's why you didn't see Rocco take the 50+ free yards in front of him against Iowa.

I'm not saying it's good or bad, it's just their philosophy.

Personally, I think when you have a weak OL and a young team, it's a great way to try and manufacture some movement, while also keeping defenses honest.
 
It's part of the "protect the QB at all costs" philosophy the staff has. It's why you see Purdy much more mobile in the NFL than at Iowa State. It's why you didn't see Rocco take the 50+ free yards in front of him against Iowa.

I'm not saying it's good or bad, it's just their philosophy.

Personally, I think when you have a weak OL and a young team, it's a great way to try and manufacture some movement, while also keeping defenses honest.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if a team doesn't have some combination of a future NFL O-line, or an NFL RB, or a QB with an NFL arm, said philosophy is not going to be conducive to championship football, or possibly even 0.500 football.
 
Last edited:
It's part of the "protect the QB at all costs" philosophy the staff has. It's why you see Purdy much more mobile in the NFL than at Iowa State. It's why you didn't see Rocco take the 50+ free yards in front of him against Iowa.
Of course, this comment also totally ignores the simple fact that when Brock wasn’t dinged up with leg injuries at ISU, he DID run…but why be bothered by actual reality, when people have a narrative to support?
 
It's part of the "protect the QB at all costs" philosophy the staff has. It's why you see Purdy much more mobile in the NFL than at Iowa State. It's why you didn't see Rocco take the 50+ free yards in front of him against Iowa.

I'm not saying it's good or bad, it's just their philosophy.

Personally, I think when you have a weak OL and a young team, it's a great way to try and manufacture some movement, while also keeping defenses honest.

Watch the NFL every week... and see these multi million dollar QB's running all the time.... yet we're scared to death that Rocco Becht might get hurt, so we don't allow him to use his legs to make plays? Sounds about right. We ruined Brock Purdy that way also. The best Brock Purdy we ever saw was his very first game at Okie State. From then on it was all about protecting him and not allowing him to be himself.
 
I thought we might see this some with Tanner Hughes last week. Might still, yet?
 
The zone read is so good and effective, why would you try anything else? We are basically a bye week for other teams' defensive coach prep.....how easy it must be. And we apparently have zero awareness of this in our coaching staff. "The play was designed well (on xbox), it just wasn't executed". We have fonzi's spiral binder and aren't gonna budge.
 
The zone read is so good and effective, why would you try anything else? We are basically a bye week for other teams' defensive coach prep.....how easy it must be. And we apparently have zero awareness of this in our coaching staff. "The play was designed well (on xbox), it just wasn't executed". We have fonzi's spiral binder and aren't gonna budge.

Yep.. we have to be about the easiest team in the country to defend.

On RPO’s you only have to defend the handoff, that’s it. The QB run never happens, and throwing off of it hasn’t even crossed our coaches minds.

And overall…. you only have to cover the first 10 yards from the line of scrimmage.

It doesn’t get much easier than that folks.

As I’ve said before…. even BF at Iowa throws deep occasionally…. we never do.
 
It is also very frustrating that we have a wide receiver who drops consecutive first down passes in the first half in Noel and yet he is still in the game. Does his backup just have no idea how to run a route? What good does it do to find him open, and throw a ball that hits is hands in a good spot, so he can drop it, twice? Vanilla in the running game and our most experienced wide receiver drops the ball.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Cyismymonkey
We used to see a lot of RPO mixed into the game plan. QB and running back rolls out with the option to keep it, pitch or pass. Seems to have disappeared from the playbook. I find it very puzzling. Thoughts?
Matt is no longer with us, unfortunately. And when he left, so too went our RPO.

We now have Faul Campbell, but he is not really Matt, y'know.

I'm hoping this sheds some light on the situation. We can still make beautiful music with Faul Campbell. :)
 
  • Puke
Reactions: IASTATE07
We used to see a lot of RPO mixed into the game plan. QB and running back rolls out with the option to keep it, pitch or pass. Seems to have disappeared from the playbook. I find it very puzzling. Thoughts?

Too innovative and risky.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
If only we could get some of these message board geniuses on staff!
Well, it would appear most of what has been brought up are legitimate concerns, observations and questions. I watched Washington State keep Wisconsin completely off balance by letting their QB make Wisconsin's D pick their poison. He took what was there and if that meant using his feet, he did it. It would seem it would really help our offense. Watch the 2017 OU game. Even in that game, they let the slow Kempt keep it on a zone read, he picked up 10 plus yards because OU was doing what Iowa did, DE and outside linebacker were crashing in. There were yards there against Iowa, needed to take them.
 
You don't need to be a football guru to see we are slow to adjust and stubborn to change. I hope it's because we are just very limited mentally with the youth. If it's just Campbell digging his heels in that's not great.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: quasistellar
You don't need to be a football guru to see we are slow to adjust and stubborn to change. I hope it's because we are just very limited mentally with the youth. If it's just Campbell digging his heels in that's not great.

I can see the mindset of building up as the season goes along but Campbell seems to take that to the extreme. My recent anxiety about the football program is just as much related to the way I see the total landscape of CFB changing and progressing at a rapid pace. You want to build up great men or whatever then go to the Ivy League or wherever because that isn’t going to be a winning philosophy on the P4 football field for much longer, it may already be here.
 
I can see the mindset of building up as the season goes along but Campbell seems to take that to the extreme. My recent anxiety about the football program is just as much related to the way I see the total landscape of CFB changing and progressing at a rapid pace. You want to build up great men or whatever then go to the Ivy League or wherever because that isn’t going to be a winning philosophy on the P4 football field for much longer, it may already be here.
I agree to a point. You can invest in making great men but that just means their price tag goes up and are more likely to leave for NIL to bigger programs. Still very early but I'm not sure that mindset is conducive to the future landscape of money being thrown around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gunnerclone

Help Support Us

Become a patron