Tom Manning to the Colts

He gets way too much hate for someone who led some of the best or maybe the best offenses ISU has ever had.
His time as OC
FPI
'16- Offensive Efficiency #53 Defensive Efficiency #93
'17 - OE #26 DE #23
'19 - OE #39 DE #36
'20 - OE #15 DE # 14
'21 - OE #21 DE #18
'22 - OE # 82 DE # 8



You can look at football outsiders too and find similar results

'16 - OE #56 DE # 100
'17 - OE # 31 DE #28
'19 - OE #19 DE #36
'20 OE #16 DE #15
'21 OE # 19 DE #22
'22 OE # 85 DE #7


This idea that the defense was far superior to the offense is just false. That only applies to last year and I don't think you can say Manning is solely responsible for the offensive failures last year.
scoring defense? because in some games we gave up yards but not a lot of points. plus, in Manning's offense, there were some games where they just went off, like 70 points, and a few conference games, but come on, you know we had a lot of games that were tight, we played good enough defense to win (which is the hard part) but we couldn't score enough points to win it. He also had some individuals that hid the sins, Montgomery and Hall made something out of nothing so many times. Most teams didn't have guys that could pull the rabbit out of the hat like those two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDClone
scoring defense? because in some games we gave up yards but not a lot of points. plus, in Manning's offense, there were some games where they just went off, like 70 points, and a few conference games, but come on, you know we had a lot of games that were tight, we played good enough defense to win (which is the hard part) but we couldn't score enough points to win it. He also had some individuals that hid the sins, Montgomery and Hall made something out of nothing so many times. Most teams didn't have guys that could pull the rabbit out of the hat like those two.
These are adjusted efficiency metrics. So stopping them from scoring adds to your efficiency. The numbers are what they are. There were also games where they couldn't stop the other team as well or where turnovers killed them.
 
The healing power of and.

Tom Manning can be a good coach, AND we had a confluence of bad circumstances last season, AND Tom Manning (and to be fair, the offensive staff) didn't respond well to those circumstances in 2022.

From an observer's point of view, I think we have earned a healthy reset to the offense in 2023. I don't think there is going to be a huge change in scheme, but I'm excited to see what some new blood in that coaches' room can bring into the culture and execution of the offense.

At the same time, I don't wish ill will toward Manning. We had some incredible offenses while he was here...some of the best ever at Iowa State. Both can have stronger futures and be successful having parted ways.
 
Campbellball is running the ball, limiting possessions, and playing efficiently.

We replaced the best quarterback in school history (who, by the way, led the 49ers to the NFC championship as a rookie), lost the best talent we've had at running back at least since Troy Davis, and lost both of our all-big-12 tight ends.

Our offensive line development has been poor.

Mix these things together, and you get last year's offensive results. Yes, some of the blame lies on Manning. He fell into tendencies and became predictable. His scheme last year didn't really fit our personnel. However, the scheme is just as much on HCMC and the rest of the staff as it is on Manning.

Manning being fired and replaced isn't a statement that Manning was the sole problem and needed to be replaced to fix the issues.. IMO it was a reflection by Matt realizing there needed to be some fundamental changes to the offense, and getting rid of a number of members of the offensive staff to provide a reset was going to be the best path moving forward. Frankly, our offense didn't look very different between when Manning was calling plays and the season when Matt was calling plays.

Manning was good and effective for what he was. Yes, sometimes he was predictable, and yes, last year in particular our offense was horrendous. However, he also produced the best rated offenses in the history of the program. And frankly, he did so with mediocre-at-best offensive line play.

I'm optimistic about the future of the offense, not because Manning is gone persay, but because it seems that Campbell realizes that there need to be systemic changes on the offensive side of the ball. I hope he gives Scheelhaus the same autonomy that he gives Heacock.
You are pretty spot on here, and I agree with what you're saying.

If the struggles persist into the upcoming season, we will know Manning wasn't the issue. I think that's what has me worried most right now.
 
You are pretty spot on here, and I agree with what you're saying.

If the struggles persist into the upcoming season, we will know Manning wasn't the issue. I think that's what has me worried most right now.

I think we have to realize there will be s learning curve with new staff and new systems.
 
Campbellball is running the ball, limiting possessions, and playing efficiently.

We replaced the best quarterback in school history (who, by the way, led the 49ers to the NFC championship as a rookie), lost the best talent we've had at running back at least since Troy Davis, and lost both of our all-big-12 tight ends.

Our offensive line development has been poor.

Mix these things together, and you get last year's offensive results. Yes, some of the blame lies on Manning. He fell into tendencies and became predictable. His scheme last year didn't really fit our personnel. However, the scheme is just as much on HCMC and the rest of the staff as it is on Manning.

Manning being fired and replaced isn't a statement that Manning was the sole problem and needed to be replaced to fix the issues.. IMO it was a reflection by Matt realizing there needed to be some fundamental changes to the offense, and getting rid of a number of members of the offensive staff to provide a reset was going to be the best path moving forward. Frankly, our offense didn't look very different between when Manning was calling plays and the season when Matt was calling plays.

Manning was good and effective for what he was. Yes, sometimes he was predictable, and yes, last year in particular our offense was horrendous. However, he also produced the best rated offenses in the history of the program. And frankly, he did so with mediocre-at-best offensive line play.

I'm optimistic about the future of the offense, not because Manning is gone persay, but because it seems that Campbell realizes that there need to be systemic changes on the offensive side of the ball. I hope he gives Scheelhaus the same autonomy that he gives Heacock.

My statement tailors into a couple people's posts. Some people just don't have nice things to say about others regardless of what they've done, whether it be anything positive at all or not. Some just see the glass half empty over any half full.

While yes, he did help improve the offense and allow us to watch some of our best years, I think some frustrations lie where with the players that the coaches had to work with, there was a lot that seemed to be left on the table. They fell short in many games where drives stalled out. It was likely 3 L's in 2021 that they should have won. 2019, there were possibly 3 close losses that could have had a different result. But that's just the life of a cyclone fan all these years where we are used to that kind of result.

I'm thankful for the time Manning had here and what he had to offer. Despite some results, the successes were definitely a fun time for us fans too as we still got to witness some great games. I wish him well. I just hope Campbell and company can turn this upcoming seasons offense around.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Lineup
scoring defense? because in some games we gave up yards but not a lot of points. plus, in Manning's offense, there were some games where they just went off, like 70 points, and a few conference games, but come on, you know we had a lot of games that were tight, we played good enough defense to win (which is the hard part) but we couldn't score enough points to win it. He also had some individuals that hid the sins, Montgomery and Hall made something out of nothing so many times. Most teams didn't have guys that could pull the rabbit out of the hat like those two.
There were also a couple of games (WVU and TTech) in ‘21 that the D definitely let the O down. We should’ve had those 2 for sure, but the pass D in particular didn’t make enough plays.
 
He gets way too much hate for someone who led some of the best or maybe the best offenses ISU has ever had.
His time as OC
FPI
'16- Offensive Efficiency #53 Defensive Efficiency #93
'17 - OE #26 DE #23
'19 - OE #39 DE #36
'20 - OE #15 DE # 14
'21 - OE #21 DE #18
'22 - OE # 82 DE # 8



You can look at football outsiders too and find similar results

'16 - OE #56 DE # 100
'17 - OE # 31 DE #28
'19 - OE #19 DE #36
'20 OE #16 DE #15
'21 OE # 19 DE #22
'22 OE # 85 DE #7


This idea that the defense was far superior to the offense is just false. That only applies to last year and I don't think you can say Manning is solely responsible for the offensive failures last year.
On to the new chapter.
From an observer's point of view, I think we have earned a healthy reset to the offense in 2023. I don't think there is going to be a huge change in scheme, but I'm excited to see what some new blood in that coaches' room can bring into the culture and execution of the offense.
I sincerely hope we have a healthy reset.
I think we have to realize there will be s learning curve with new staff and new systems.
We will allow 3-4 years of mediocre football before we rally against it. Ha. Just kidding, I hope.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron