Indiana Hires Kalen DeBoer as new offensive coordinator

[Brass Cannon 24,801]

3 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

One of the big reasons that offense was so successful was the tempo. Take away the tempo and you take away a lot of the effectiveness, so essentially you’re going to score less points and give up just as many. 

How would that mean you would give up just as many. There’s no reason to think the defense would get worse with more rest. 

[ThompsonHoosier 3,414]

First time I can ever remember 1) us going out and getting a young up and comer like this in football 2) us shelling out serious dough 

I really believe coordinators can make all the difference. Allen can be the lowest paid coach in the BIG but if you have great minds around you that can make up for your deficiencies (offense of side of ball) it's game on. Also, with an 800k salary this guy likely isnt leaving after one season which I am sure had to factor in and makes me excited about the next few years of football. I can't wait to see what this guy does with Tuttle/Penix and with talented WR's like Westbrook/Taylor/Hale

Also hope there is a big buyout written into his contract in case a blueblood football program comes knocking...

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[KzooHoosier82 972]

27 minutes ago, Iugradman said:

Plenty of ADs could have done a better job than Glass, who had ZERO athletics experience before coming to IU. This is not a position for on the job training. The AD at the school to the north came in and kicked @$$ in under two years. There is no excuse to be consistently worse than Purdue in both football and basketball. 

Lol! Who? Name one? and Bobinski? The guy who got turned down 3 times until the 11th hour and Brohm fell in his lap?? Nevermind PJ Fleck rejected him to go to the powerhouse that is Minnesota. 

Bobinski accomplised literally nothing at his last stop and thus far only has lucking into Brohm as his claim to fame at Purdue...who has only beat IU by a single TD each time out and has one winning season (but his recruiting class). Bobinski is throwing obsene amounts of money at him to keep him and is literally all in. If Brohm doesn’t pan out they are stuck with no outs.

Is Glass the best AD in the country? I donno but he fits in at IU, had connections all over the midwest and he gets things accomplished. Name me an AD in IU history who has a better record against Purdue than Glass...I’ll wait

[Hovadipo 56,210]

35 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

How would that mean you would give up just as many. There’s no reason to think the defense would get worse with more rest. 

That defense was awful. And my whole point is the offense would be worse without tempo, meaning the defense would be doing just as much work as they already were. I don’t think the tempo of the offense matters as much as you think. 

[Brass Cannon 24,801]

3 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

That defense was awful. And my whole point is the offense would be worse without tempo, meaning the defense would be doing just as much work as they already were. I don’t think the tempo of the offense matters as much as you think. 

You don’t think the opposing offense having more possessions leads to them scoring more points?  

[Hovadipo 56,210]

Just now, Brass Cannon said:

You don’t think the opposing offense having more possessions leads to them scoring more points?  

You’re still missing the point. 

If we slow down, what’s to say we won’t just produce more or a similar amount of 3 and outs, meaning the opposing team gets the same amount of possessions? I think that particular offense would actually be less efficient if it was slowed down. 

[LIHoosier 26,204]

5 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

You’re still missing the point. 

If we slow down, what’s to say we won’t just produce more or a similar amount of 3 and outs, meaning the opposing team gets the same amount of possessions? I think that particular offense would actually be less efficient if it was slowed down. 

Its more about reducing the amount of time/plays. Vs. O$U, Michigan, and Penn St; running a play at 5-8 sec. left in the play clock instead of 15-18 sec. can take several minutes from a team making a comeback in the close but no cigar games we've had the last 5-6 years. 

[Brass Cannon 24,801]

4 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

You’re still missing the point. 

If we slow down, what’s to say we won’t just produce more or a similar amount of 3 and outs, meaning the opposing team gets the same amount of possessions? I think that particular offense would actually be less efficient if it was slowed down. 

Which wasnt my point. I never said that particular offense needed slowing down. My point was That Wilson’s high flying offense was a poor choice for a school like IU that couldn’t go 2 deep in defense. Wilson’s offense was mid 40s in yards per play hardly good enough to sell out the defense every game. 

[Alford Bailey 12,384]

I dont care if we play fast as long as we score touchdowns.

[Hovadipo 56,210]

19 minutes ago, LIHoosier said:

Its more about reducing the amount of time/plays. Vs. O$U, Michigan, and Penn St; running a play at 5-8 sec. left in the play clock instead of 15-18 sec. can take several minutes from a team making a comeback in the close but no cigar games we've had the last 5-6 years. 

If we aren’t scoring points, holding the ball doesn’t really help us. I don’t think Wilson’s scheme was capable of transforming into a slow it down, ball control style that produced any points, so in that regard we were never going to beat the big boys with Wilson by slowing it down. He was never a fit here. (Which I think Brass and I would agree on, though I was fine with just trying to outrun the big boys because it’s as close as we’ve ever consistently been to beating all of them)

[Alford Bailey 12,384]

This might work. High octane offense is probably our best chance against the big boys. Defense was non existent under Wilson so it didnt work well. Should be much better under a defensive minded HC.

[Brass Cannon 24,801]

34 minutes ago, Alford Bailey said:

This might work. High octane offense is probably our best chance against the big boys. Defense was non existent under Wilson so it didnt work well. Should be much better under a defensive minded HC.

A high octane offense will work as soon as we can start rolling 2 or 3 deep at defensive positions like our opponents 

[Brass Cannon 24,801]

44 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

If we aren’t scoring points, holding the ball doesn’t really help us. I don’t think Wilson’s scheme was capable of transforming into a slow it down, ball control style that produced any points, so in that regard we were never going to beat the big boys with Wilson by slowing it down. He was never a fit here. (Which I think Brass and I would agree on, though I was fine with just trying to outrun the big boys because it’s as close as we’ve ever consistently been to beating all of them)

There is most certainly value in holding the ball. It’s called giving your defense time to breathe

[Hovadipo 56,210]

1 minute ago, Brass Cannon said:

There is most certainly value in holding the ball. It’s called giving your defense time to breathe

Okay, so let’s run the play clock down to 5 for 3 straight plays, punt because we don’t gain any yards without the tempo the entire offense is based on, then give it to the other team. They get to score, but at least we’ll be fresh to chase them down the sideline when they do!

I’m fine with a grind-it-out offense, but Wilson’s offense was never going to do that successfully. 

We’ve said the same **** back and forth like 5 times now, so if we aren’t going to make any progress here I’ll agree to disagree.

[Brass Cannon 24,801]

1 minute ago, Hovadipo said:

Okay, so let’s run the play clock down to 5 for 3 straight plays, punt because we don’t gain any yards without the tempo the entire offense is based on, then give it to the other team. They get to score, but at least we’ll be fresh to chase them down the sideline when they do!

I’m fine with a grind-it-out offense, but Wilson’s offense was never going to do that successfully. 

We’ve said the same **** back and forth like 5 times now, so if we aren’t going to make any progress here I’ll agree to disagree.

You are literally making crap up then disagreeing with me. I literally never said that Wilson’s offense should have been slowed slowed. 

But to say there is no benefit to running a slow tempo offense is just foolish 

[Hovadipo 56,210]

4 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

You are literally making crap up then disagreeing with me. I literally never said that Wilson’s offense should have been slowed slowed. 

But to say there is no benefit to running a slow tempo offense is just foolish 

“You are literally making crap up”

*then makes crap up*

 

I *literally* said in the post you quoted I’m fine with a grind-it-out offense. Go look. It’s there. I’m bowing out now. 

[Naturalhoosier 15,434]

So....yea for a new OC!?!? 

[Alford Bailey 12,384]

Looks like we hired a guy on an upward trajectory with his career. Better than another washed up has been IMO.

[HoosierAloha 30,068]

I’d like to see two posters disagree to agree.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners

[Alford Bailey 12,384]

39 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

I’d like to see two posters disagree to agree.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners

No I wont agree with this