RB by committee

All I ask is that, if Iowa uses the RB by committee for the entire season, that are become masterful at putting the correct rb in the game, at the correct time, run the correct play to utilize that rb's worth (perhaps as a decoy for play-pass) and don't call any stretch plays for MW.
 
I think Weisman will have to line up in the fullback spot a high percentage of times for the committee approach to work. The defense would be able to key on certain run plays otherwise. IMO, split backs with Weisman and Canzeri would be the most disguised running formation. I'd like to see Canzeri at tailback the majority of the time in the single back set. In the I, go with the true FB and whoever has fresh legs or is producing the best in game.
 
If MW had even just a little lateral ability and was a 1/2 step faster, he WOULD be Alstot-like. But he doesn't, so he isn't. We need the best talent on the field and not just the guy that fumbles least. The real message to send is to every recruit each off season: "talent plays at Iowa" when you know the system.
 
HawksMN said:
Not real excited about that. Need explosion bad. Not a bunch of fullbacks out there.
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about? You shouldn't worry so much. It's bad for your heart, brah.

You're not real excited about having a big stable of running backs, or what? Canzeri is definitely explosive. Bullock can be, just not out of the backfield. That's why we'll probably see him in the slot mostly. Daniels is definitely not a fullback. Weisman has the speed of a fullback, yes. But it's not his fault that the coaching staff didn't use him properly last season. He should never have the stretch play called for him. He should be used in short yardage situations and long drives to wear the opposition down.
 
Last edited:
GoHawks24 said:
What are you even talking about? You shouldn't worry so much. It's bad for your heart, brah.

You're not real excited about having a big stable or running backs, or what? Canzeri is definitely explosive. Bullock can be, just not out of the backfield. That's why we'll probably see him in the slot mostly. Daniels is definitely not a fullback. Weisman has the speed of a fullback, yes. But it's not his fault that the coaching staff didn't use him properly last season. He should never have the stretch play called for him. He should be used in short yardage situations and long drives to wear the opposition down.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you are saying. It would be nice to have 30 running plays a game with a split around 15-10-5 based off of who is running well. If a back is extremely effective, I have no problem giving him the ball 20 to 25 times, but in this day in age to do that over 12 games is begging for injury. It's nice to have some options so we don't have to run guys into the ground.
 
I love the RB by committee approach. Canzeri should of been more involved early last season. Last year when Weisman was running 30+ carries vs teams like Eastern Michigan I knew he was going to have a mid season slump from being over used. Having a fresher Weisman for the stretch run would be ideal. I know people want to see other guys like Daniels becoming the "guy" and that's fine but Weisman is still valuable. I guess I just still have memories of Husker DB's bouncing off Weisman as he rumbles to the end zone. (Yes I know the replay showed his knee was down, but you get my point)
 
HawksMN said:
Not real excited about that. Need explosion bad. Not a bunch of fullbacks out there.
Click to expand...

Have your sources already deemed Daniels a FB? Sounds like Canzeri put on a little weight in the offseason, can your sources confirm this?
 
I question Rudock's statement, “They all know that they’re all going to play." Ferentz doesn't exactly have this notion in his gameplan. Usually he will run one or two guys to death, because he just doesn't trust the younger guys to run the right way or hang onto the ball. I guess we'll see, but I'm skeptical and wouldn't be surprised to see one or two RB's leave the program.
 
HawksMN said:
Not real excited about that. Need explosion bad. Not a bunch of fullbacks out there.
Click to expand...

Christ. You realize you're talking about Iowa football right now, not Minnesota basketball, right? You can lay off some of the negativity.
 
tm3308 said:
Christ. You realize you're talking about Iowa football right now, not Minnesota basketball, right? You can lay off some of the negativity.
Click to expand...

Wait, how could there be negativity surrounding the Goophers bball program? They just won the prestigious NIT tourney.
 
big10er said:
I think Weisman will have to line up in the fullback spot a high percentage of times for the committee approach to work. The defense would be able to key on certain run plays otherwise. IMO, split backs with Weisman and Canzeri would be the most disguised running formation. I'd like to see Canzeri at tailback the majority of the time in the single back set. In the I, go with the true FB and whoever has fresh legs or is producing the best in game.
Click to expand...

The defense will key on certain run plays? We have the same backs as last year playing this year. I don't think moving the Hammer to FB is gonna produce the results you want. When you do that, and hand off to him, he has less time to recognize the blocking, less time for holes to develop, and hits the LOS too quickly. Unless your idea is to relegate him to strictly FB dives.
 
CPHAWK82 said:
I love the RB by committee approach. Canzeri should of been more involved early last season. Last year when Weisman was running 30+ carries vs teams like Eastern Michigan I knew he was going to have a mid season slump from being over used. Having a fresher Weisman for the stretch run would be ideal. I know people want to see other guys like Daniels becoming the "guy" and that's fine but Weisman is still valuable. I guess I just still have memories of Husker DB's bouncing off Weisman as he rumbles to the end zone. (Yes I know the replay showed his knee was down, but you get my point)
Click to expand...

Your right here. The article showed the numbers drop as the season wore on. And that's partly due to the decrease in carries but also very much to do with his running style (and the fatigue factor). Although you cannot deny his runs versus Michigan and Nebraska… Things of beauty!

As for Daniels... I'm excited for him to; but first he needs to become a better blocker. If he's that good, his play will move him up the charts.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
If MW had even just a little lateral ability and was a 1/2 step faster, he WOULD be Alstot-like. But he doesn't, so he isn't. We need the best talent on the field and not just the guy that fumbles least. The real message to send is to every recruit each off season: "talent plays at Iowa" when you know the system.
Click to expand...

Comparing the Hebrew Hammer to an all-time NFL great is unfair (I've even seen people say he's not Greene, which is also unfair). He is a good running back. His running style is what makes his yards. His drive will get him additional yards when other running backs would be tackled.
 
I think some people forget how effective Weisman can be when healthy... It's just difficult for him to stay healthy with his style of running.

So my hopes that we mix in Canzeri a lot. He adds the big play threat that Mark can't bring.

Throw in Daniels who seems to be in the middle of what the other 2 offer.

I like the RB by committee as long as it stops here and we cut bullock out.
 
Eda said:
The defense will key on certain run plays? We have the same backs as last year playing this year. I don't think moving the Hammer to FB is gonna produce the results you want. When you do that, and hand off to him, he has less time to recognize the blocking, less time for holes to develop, and hits the LOS too quickly. Unless your idea is to relegate him to strictly FB dives.
Click to expand...

I understand what your saying, but Weisman needs to run straight forward no matter where he lines up. Whether it's from 3 yards behind the line of scrimmage or 7. Either the hole is there or it's not. He's not going to make a defender miss, but he can continue to move forward from the point of contact.
In my defense, I stated my opinion would be use him with another back in a split back set, therefore essentially lining up at a TBs distance from the LOS.
 
It's a great problem to have for once in the past decade plus. I wish we would see Weisman in more FB slots but I am reserved to the fact it won't happen. I don't think you can cut out Bullock unless he's moved to WR.
A lot of players getting in isn't a bad thing, plus they can ride a hot hand. The days of a 1 back system are long over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page





Top