I like the hire and I like that he will be the QB coach. I know a lot of you guys like to jump all over the WRs for the offensive output, and they did drop a lot of passes, but there were also a lot of times when a receiver was running wide open and the QB didn't see them or throw a horrible pass. Mess has done a great job at every postion he has coached for ISU, and I hope he can raise the level of QB play.
What we don't know is if he he can call a good game. Can he read and react and push all the right buttons in the heat of the battle? Rhoads undoubtedly knows Mess' offensive philosophies and is confident that he can.
There aren't a lot of unknown variables with this hire, but from a fan's perspective, this is a big one that will make the wait until next season even harder to bear.
I'm sorry but did anyone on here recognize how young our offense was this year? I mean really, our QB was a FRESHMAN...our center and line general was a FRESHMAN...we lost our #1 running back in game 4...all our backs are underclassman...our 2 deeps are filled to the brim with FRESHMAN and sophmores..our most talented/athletic WR's were FRESHMAN or first year players (Horne/West)...our best OL (KO) played hurt for a majority of the year. By all acounts the best QB in the program, Sam Richardson, redshirted and will make a very good QB when given the chance.
I mean are you people for real? People are on here complaining about our offense like it was full of a bunch of RS Seniors...
ISU's offense is poised to do great things in the next 2-3 years and coach Mess is stepping into a great sitiuation. A situation that Tom Herman created...a good one. CPR see's this even though it's obvious many on this board do not. Our offense is in very good shape for the future and saying otherwise is foolish.
I kept trying to deny what I have been seeing during the last couple years with our fan base, but I can no longer deny what my eyes see so clearly.
We have become what I have hated so much. We have become like hawkeye fans. Not true you say how could you profane Cy in such a way?
- Forget the success at the first sign of a loss and jump on the coach before the game is even over. - hmmm sounds like a CF game day thread.
- Think they are better play callers and better personnel managers than every coach they have - check read CF threads after Rutgers game, CF threads during losing streak on Wally, yeah and all the MBB threads.
- Are smarter than their head coach and know which assistant coaches should be kept, fired, promoted. - check - see this thread.
- Go on other teams message boards and talk down to opposing fans - yep more than a few are polluting our opponents sites.
- Rave about a recruit, complain the coaches aren't playing him, then jump off the band wagon the first game that he struggles in only to jump back on then off, then on, then off, then why the hell did we recruit him...Wait didn't you talk smack about him as part of your recruiting class. Yep see Austin Arnaud, Jared Barnett, Chris Allen, Royce White, etc. etc. etc.
It pains me to say it, but if I was color blind I could no longer tell the difference between a Hawkeye fan and a Cyclone fan.
Just a hunch: in the 3 years since arriving here Rhoads probably formed some new opinions on what kind of offense it will take for us to be successfull here. He and Mess must be on the same page on how to make that happen.
I read lots of folks saying things about our game plan and play calling. However, I don't hear specifics. I think we mostly struggled executing on offense with a game plan that was pretty good, but there was only so much we could do against their linemen and LB speed, particularly with all their double blitzing.
So, give me some specifics:
1. What do you think our game plan was and what do you think it should have been? I'm assuming that you are concerned about offense, because we seemed pretty good on defense and special teams.
2. What plays should we have not called? Or what plays should we have called instead?
3. What adjustments would you have made? For instance, do you think that putting Jantz in was part of the game plan if Barnett struggled?
While there may be issues at the game plan level and I have thought about my own answers to these questions, I have also concluded that our gameplan was good enough to win if we executed better on the big plays.
For instance, if Reynolds turns out instead of in on the second pass to him in the endzone, it is a TD. If he makes the easy catch across the middle and breaks a tackle for a few yards, we don't go 3-and-out when we were within 7 and had the momentum in the middle of the 4th quarter. If Reeves had timed his jump a little better (or if Rutgers had thrown more of a straight ball rather than one that arced so high), that could have been an interception or a knock down rather than a TD. Coleman didn't outjump or outreach him, but caught it almost flat-footed just above his waist (and it should be noted that we broke up this same play twice, including once near the endzone). If we didn't hold on West's kickoff return (as if he needs a hold to pop free), we might have had the lead at halftime.
When you combine what we did against a well-designed defensive game plan by Rutgers with what we didn't do in terms of offensive execution, I think you can see the margin of defeat. I left the game feeling like we didn't play our best and guys like Woody said so in interviews. However, we were still in the game at the midpoint of the 4th quarter and we were just a few big plays away from the win, regardless of what you think of the game plan and play calling.
So, armchair coaches, don't just complain, tell us what you would have done differently.