With proper fundamentals and technique, a smaller quicker guy can overpower the big road graders who don't get off the ball as quick. It's called firing off the ball low and getting underneath the other guys pads to get leverage on him. If you push a guy's pads up into his chin. You own him because he can't fight back as well. We don't do this consistently enough on either side of the ball.
Strength and Conditioning
- Thread starter InCyder
- Start date
Yeah, but a silk purse would get ripped to hell in a football game and the ball is made of pigskin, so....
Usually with those kinds of athletes, you have football players who also run track. You don't really have track sprinters who also play football. If that makes any sense?
Maybe this is a better example:
Billy is an awesome football player, who is incredibly fast. He would be a good sprinter because he is already fast and doesn't require any extra training.
Jimmy is an awesome sprinter, but not a good football player. He would not necessarily make a good football player just because he is fast. Jimmy might not like contact, probably can't catch, can't tackle, or run in any way besides a straight line. Jimmy might also be 150 lbs soaking wet, and if he gained 20-30 pounds, he wouldn't be so fast anymore.
Hahaha great example actually! And I agree - you can't coach a track star to be a football player unless he already played it in HS. That being said- maybe we should look out dual-sport kids (AFTER of course we addres the OL/DL/LB situation). So not a priority by any stretch of the imagination, but something maybe we can do IF we are going to stick w/ the 'speed style' of FB.
It's all about technique, mostly. Sorry to do this but KF is a master technician..might be best in country last 15 years. Look at how many lineman he puts into nfl. More than Tex, ou, Lsu etc.. Second, it is about the S&C coaches. Doyle pounds out super men year in and year out by years end. Iowa takes a HS TE and turns him into a 280lb NFL DE by the time he's a jr or sr. If and when we get a coach that is highly skilled at developing interior lineman then this program will be where we all want it to be. Having great lines solves a lot of problems, a lot. And it's not like Iowa is signing 4-5 star kids that much. I truly believe when healthy this team has enough talent at the skill positions to beat a lot of teams. It is and has always been the lines at ISU.
wts, CPR is going all in on juco help next year. Next years Oline will have a ton of depth and the dline might have 9-10 football ready players. Bodies on the dline won't be an issue next year.
wts, CPR is going all in on juco help next year. Next years Oline will have a ton of depth and the dline might have 9-10 football ready players. Bodies on the dline won't be an issue next year.
Based on recruiting the last couple of seasons I think the smaller and quicker OL plan was benched a couple years ago. Problem is the guys that were recruited with that mindset are the ones that are the upper classmen.
Most young OL on the team are bigger.
Smaller quicker OL works with guys that can maintain athleticism while weight is added to them. A good percentage of guys will have athleticism drop as weight is added especially the minimum weight needed to play OL.
I think technique probably comes into play, but there are many coaches who believe you cannot run both Power blocking and Zone blocking schemes together. This line of thought comes from the basic tools needed to do both styles of blocking. Power blocking requires burst, strength, and continued leg drive. Zone requires foot speed, agility, and endurance to keep that d-lineman back peddling towards the sidelines. I am not convinced that you CANNOT train someone to do both, but there are many who believe only a very special athlete can get it done, ala Alabama, Oklahoma.
We recruited small quick backs, and were going to rely on the zone blocking schemes. Now that we have had little success and several coaching changes it seems power blocking is coming back with a vengeance. I may be all wet, but this coupled with attrition are a big reason we are having running problems. Also throw in the fact that our running backs are undersized to be trying to slash up the middle.
I have little ground to stand on as far as blaming S&C for the injuries. Most of which are ligament injuries and I very much doubt they are allowed to use poor form in the weight rooms. These are things you find in High Schools not D1 football programs. Not to forget we are as strong as we ever have been.
We recruited small quick backs, and were going to rely on the zone blocking schemes. Now that we have had little success and several coaching changes it seems power blocking is coming back with a vengeance. I may be all wet, but this coupled with attrition are a big reason we are having running problems. Also throw in the fact that our running backs are undersized to be trying to slash up the middle.
I have little ground to stand on as far as blaming S&C for the injuries. Most of which are ligament injuries and I very much doubt they are allowed to use poor form in the weight rooms. These are things you find in High Schools not D1 football programs. Not to forget we are as strong as we ever have been.
I'm going to disagree with your assessment of the different blocking schemes. Zone actually is "power" blocking and can greatly negate the need for athletic lineman. The base concept of zone blocking is you have your "zone" and you make reads based upon what is in front of you. It's not a scheme that is meant to man up and drive someone to the sidelines. It's a scheme that if you need to pass someone off you can for the sake of maintaining your zone. Zone blocking is the equivalent creating an area that allows the back to make a read as based upon where the DL is lined up that read can be different. Zone blocking fits in perfectly with larger lineman as you don't need to be an athletic freak that can win one on one every play. It allows you to double, pull, hand down, go one on one, etc and maintain your assignment.
I played 5 years in college in a zone blocking scheme at a D2 school where my last 2 years our offensive line was bigger than ISU's current offensive line. We were not small overly athletic lineman and we ran a zone scheme to perfection with smaller backs that were allowed to make reads and adjust.
A zone blocking scheme is what ISU needs to run and should stick with as you don't need 5 star OL to be good at it. The problem at ISU is not the scheme it is the fact that opposing DL's have been able to disrupt the zone scheme due to being physically larger and stronger than ISU's OL. The bigger younger OL that are currently on the team will due great in a zone system.
As FarminCy said - bigger OL are already being added.
2014 4 OL: 6'4" 325 lbs, 6'6" 315 lbs, 6'4" 275 lbs, & JC player 6'6" 350 lbs
so far for 2015: 6'5" 270 lbs, 6'5" 295 lbs, & 6'7" 305 lbs
Most are much closer or surpass 300 lbs than in the past.
Strength & Conditioning is another matter. Let's look at the 2 FCS schools that have beaten us over the past few seasons: UNI & North Dakota State. There is a link in coaching, as the new HC for NDSU this year was a UNI-alum if I remember correctly. However there may be a more important link. UNI's S&C Coach is Jed Smith - been part of the program since 2005 I believe. Up until 2002, UNI had Jim Kramer (who left to go the US Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs. Jim Kramer went to NDSU in 2003 & has been there ever since. This is far from coincidental.
It is more difficult to get sub-250 lb guys up to or surpassing 300 lbs consistently. Plus, someone may be able to make those gains but can they do so & not sustain injuries. Someone who is naturally around 300 lbs may have an advantage to change how their body weight is composed, but it would seem to me their bodies could handle the weight more naturally? That's just my initial thought with no science or anything to back up.
Recruiting classes show we are adding larger-framed athletes to our program. So far for the 2015 class, we have 2 5'11" recruits (1 RB & 1 DB), then the rest are 6'0" or larger regardless of position. Numbers show our team has become 'stronger' - but are they becoming stronger properly to apply to football. Those that have went on to the NFL seem to believe the S&C is very good. They have said as much & some have come back to train. That would leave me to believe we need OL who are naturally bigger & stronger from the get go.
2014 4 OL: 6'4" 325 lbs, 6'6" 315 lbs, 6'4" 275 lbs, & JC player 6'6" 350 lbs
so far for 2015: 6'5" 270 lbs, 6'5" 295 lbs, & 6'7" 305 lbs
Most are much closer or surpass 300 lbs than in the past.
Strength & Conditioning is another matter. Let's look at the 2 FCS schools that have beaten us over the past few seasons: UNI & North Dakota State. There is a link in coaching, as the new HC for NDSU this year was a UNI-alum if I remember correctly. However there may be a more important link. UNI's S&C Coach is Jed Smith - been part of the program since 2005 I believe. Up until 2002, UNI had Jim Kramer (who left to go the US Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs. Jim Kramer went to NDSU in 2003 & has been there ever since. This is far from coincidental.
It is more difficult to get sub-250 lb guys up to or surpassing 300 lbs consistently. Plus, someone may be able to make those gains but can they do so & not sustain injuries. Someone who is naturally around 300 lbs may have an advantage to change how their body weight is composed, but it would seem to me their bodies could handle the weight more naturally? That's just my initial thought with no science or anything to back up.
Recruiting classes show we are adding larger-framed athletes to our program. So far for the 2015 class, we have 2 5'11" recruits (1 RB & 1 DB), then the rest are 6'0" or larger regardless of position. Numbers show our team has become 'stronger' - but are they becoming stronger properly to apply to football. Those that have went on to the NFL seem to believe the S&C is very good. They have said as much & some have come back to train. That would leave me to believe we need OL who are naturally bigger & stronger from the get go.
The strength and conditioning in my opnion is pretty good. You don't see our players gassed or giving up at the end of games. For the OU game it was a matter of them just being much larger on the line.
I was impressed with some of the catches that their WR's made too. The backs are big physical guys, but had huge holes to run through.
I was impressed with some of the catches that their WR's made too. The backs are big physical guys, but had huge holes to run through.
This is very true and I think the main reason there was a run of injuries on the OL.
I played around 300-310 in college and that was a weight I had to work at to maintain. At the end of my junior year I was getting attention from NFL scouts but their main concern was that for my height I should be playing at around 325-330. That off season my strength coach worked with me to bulk me up to 325. I also spent a portion of the off season recovering from injuries to my knees and ankles during plyometric workouts. During spring ball at that weight I had multiple injuries and didn't finish as I tweaked my MCL pretty bad. All my testing times dropped as well at that weight. It was obvious my body just wasn't meant to play at that weight. I dropped some weight and had a great senior year. But after the season was over and I participated in a pro day and a number of individual workouts with NFL teams the weight issue kept getting brought up and I knew my body couldn't play at the weight they would like to see.
I wasn't assigning blame just stating facts, but since you brought I up yes, it is Rhoads' fault. Yes, he hired Mess which was an interesting (dumb!) move, but don't pretend that had it worked out and we were dominating of offense we wouldn't be saying how brilliant of a hire it was. It turned out bad so we hired a new OC who prior to the OU game was doing much better than his predecessor.
Our O-line has had 3(?) different coaches in 4 years? Are players supposed to just magically be good in a new system? I think we have the pieces to be better on offense finally, but it may require some changes on the defensive side of the ball before everything comes together.
The attrition on defense has been horrible, and I believe that to be a combination of bad luck, missing on a few recruits, and players just being stupid and getting kicked off the team. What do you propose we do about that? With the young talent we have hopefully the experience they get this year will be beneficial going forward.
This sounds as I'm a Rhoads apologist since that's been thrown around the board lately, but I'm not happy with how this season has gone either. I don't think a new coach solves the problems we have but I do believe that if we don't get it done on defense the rest of the year changes to the coaching staff will be made, which is easier to adapt to on defense than offense.
If you truly believe Rhoads isn't doing everything in his power to win games I don't know what to tell you.
Last edited:
You can't make chicken salad out of chicken s***. A lot of these guys couldn't play in the Big 12 if they were on steroids.
