I don't think tempo does a lot for most teams and can be detrimental. Yeah, it helps, as long as the offense is on the same page. Cig's training and in-game skills have shown up to it. So it helps us.

So I don't care about up-tempo, but it seems we should be more aggressive in the throwing game, with the talent we have. Should be fun!

That Penn State game was wierd, we failed to find any quick outlet tosses for so long, and Mendoza had to hang on too long and was getting harassed so badly. We let them hang around by not moving the ball. Then once we had no choice, on the final drive, Fernando was finally 'one look and sling it' .

I still usually worry more about Shanahan adjustments than Haines. Even though Shanahan has dominated most of the competition too, lol .

Posted by: @middawg

↑

Looking at '25 v '24 IUFB secs per play. 

 

Indiana ended '25 at 127th of 136 FBS teams which was 2.6  secs per play slower, 8.5%, than '24 Indiana.  

 

 Have my suspicions why this occurred, all the way down to Benson limping around out there most the season, but those speculations are in the rearview mirror now.  

 

Looking at '26, I believe Cignetti and the staff will look to amp up the aggressiveness and tempo of this offense from the seasons opening kick. 

 

I believe they study the Iowa and Penn St. films and come to the conclusion that getting more successful offensive drives could have  created more/better separation on the scoreboard.  

 

I believe a great early signal, first 6 games going into Ohio St., in Cignetti's confidence in Hoover, the Offense, and the Defenses depth is when we see the team moving quicker getting snaps off on Offense while balancing that with the usual vanilla playbook we typically see in blowouts, especially the first half of the schedule last season.

 

This all leads to getting to blowout status earlier in the third quarters which  will enable further and better depth development and more starter rest through the season.   

 

@middawg They are not going to go super uptempo. The more plays a team runs, the greater the chance there are of mistakes. It's why Cig values explosive plays on offense and preventing them on defense.

IU will not change its DNA, they'll want to run the ball and help protect Hoover from having to do too much. An under-talked-about stat for Hoover is that he had a very high deep throw percentage, meaning he threw it a lot. It could be why he threw so many interceptions.

IU's offense is best when they are getting good yardage on first down, not because they run a quicker offense. That did not really happen against Iowa or Penn State. 

Guess I omitted my lean on where it goes in '26 in the OP.  

'25 Indiana was bottom 5ish percent in secs per Offensive snap. 

'24 Indiana ranked around 80th of all FBS teams.  

I contend this seasons team will return to closer to the FBS median.     Agree 100% super up tempo isn't happening.  

Opponents looking to create a low possession rock fight type gameplan, like Iowa last season, will be met by an IU team that will dictate terms as to its preferred flow and tempo of the game and will have the willingness and ability to speed things up as necessary to create more possessions and more separation. 

Cig has also said that he prefers a slower tempo to limit the number of overall snaps the team has to take. It is a very long season for these kids when they make a run in the playoffs and a lot of snaps wears them down more. Similar to the shorter practice reasoning. I think that paid off for them last year. 

I think those 2026 stats are skewed by the number of blowouts IU had.  There were a lot of games where the entire 4th quarter was spent bleeding down the play clock zero.  

I seriously doubt they will. IU is a possession type team. Much like Ohio state and Oregon. Run first. Kill clock and stay efficient. Less chances for mistakes too. For instance. In 2022 IU was averaging 90 plus plays per game. Last year? Less than 60. The running first down clock has slowed the game down too. 

@walt542 smart teams do this. Ohio state was even slower paced.

I predict we’ll see a reversion to a ‘24 like offense. Not necessarily in terms of tempo, but taking more downfield shots. Fernando’s arm was just special being able to throw quick outs to either side of the field and they did a whole lot of those. I haven’t looked at stats but it definitely felt like Rourke had more deep shots on a regular basis. Maybe I should qualify it a little bit too. At the end of the year when Charlie emerged as a true deep threat, it seemed like it became more common. 

Also, from watching the spring game, I think we’re going to see a lot of play action deep shots. There were multiple passes early where I was as sure as I’ve ever been that they were runs and then Hoover is throwing over the top. If he gets his accuracy dialed in it will be a true pick your poison with committing on defense to the run/pass. 

I don’t think it’s going to be Penix/Sheridan 2020 deep shots after deep shot, but more than last year.  At least until there’s a lead built, then he’ll just try to run until they’re ground into powder. 

@tmft I'll have to go back and look at the PFF passing depth chart, but I don't think IU wants Hoover chucking it deep a ton. A lot of this will depend on how well IU can protect him and what the opposing defense is doing as well. Deep routes take time to develop and under Cignetti IU has been surgical in taking what the defense gives them.

Posted by: @thehoosierhuddle

↑

@tmft I'll have to go back and look at the PFF passing depth chart, but I don't think IU wants Hoover chucking it deep a ton. A lot of this will depend on how well IU can protect him and what the opposing defense is doing as well. Deep routes take time to develop and under Cignetti IU has been surgical in taking what the defense gives them.

That's a great idea.  I'd love to see that!

I don't subscribe to PFF so I have VERY limited access.  All it shows me under passing depth are TDs & INTs.

Using just those, Rourke had more TDs & INTs at Medium & Deep compared to Fernando (even with fewer total TDs) whereas Fernando had significantly more Short & Screens.  But that's just TDs/INTs, so who knows what the real stats would say with regards to all attempts vs just TDs.  If you actually go look, I'd be interested too whether Fernando's numbers changed significantly starting with the Maryland game when Charlie started becoming a target.

I suppose it's also worth considering that in '24 Cig was trying to run up some scores to make sure IU was in the hunt for a CFP spot.  Especially since the opponents weren't setting the world on fire.  I still think a big part of the change was that Fernando could make all of the throws.  It's such a little thing, but I will never not be impressed when a QB throws a 7 yard out route to the wide side of the field from the opposite hash.  That's like 30+ yards that has to be on an absolute line or it's getting taken back for a pick-6.

@tmft It may take me a week or so, but I can get into how often they actually threw deep. Hoover was successful, but at quick glance it was lik 7% of drop backs. The Game to watch for Hoover's best performance was probably Colorado last year if you can find it on YouTube. I'll try and get this done in the next week or so