By Pat Harty

IOWA CITY, Iowa – In all my years of covering the Iowa football team, I’ve mostly tried to avoid questioning or criticizing the play calling and the distribution of playing time.

My reason is simple in that Kirk Ferentz and his assistant coaches know a hell of a lot more about football than I ever will, and because hindsight is always used to question or to criticize the play calling.

But they're still topics worth discussing and worth scrutinizing, especially in the wake of this past Saturday's 28-17 loss to Wisconsin at Kinnick Stadium.

I for the most part liked Brian Ferentz’s play calling against the Badgers.

There were times when he called a passing play when running seemed more likely, and vice versa, and that hardly is being predictable or playing not to lose, which are two criticisms often used against Brian’s father, Kirk Ferentz.

It’s ironic that Brian Ferentz is being criticized for passing on a few pivotal plays against Wisconsin when some fans apparently felt that running was the best option.

The coaches can’t win the play-calling debate because hindsight is always used against them and hindsight is never wrong.

I wasn’t crazy about the decision in the first quarter to use Nate Stanley on a quarterback sneak on 4^th-and-1 at the Wisconsin five-yard line because rarely has Stanley been asked to do that, and because it wasn’t just fourth and a few inches.

But my opinion is based partly on hindsight because the decision didn’t work.

Stanley failed to get a first down despite weighing almost 250 pounds and Iowa blew an opportunity in the red zone.

It has been suggested that Iowa should’ve thrown to preseason All-America tight end Noah Fant on the play in which Stanley tried the sneak because Fant had what appeared to be single coverage against a smaller defensive back.

But instead, Iowa motioned Fant to the left as if he were a decoy.

And by doing so, Iowa supposedly blew a chance for a sure touchdown according to those who disagreed with the play call because they assume that Fant would’ve scored.

But that’s a big assumption, influenced partly again by hindsight.

And speaking of Fant, the way in which he is being used, or more specifically, not being used, has drawn criticism. Some wonder why a player of Fant’s stature wasn't on the field more in the first four games, and why he hasn't been used more as a receiver.

That argument certainly has some merit, considering Fant has scored 15 touchdowns on 45 receptions since the start of last season. That’s one touchdown for every three catches, which is incredible.

The only way I can explain it is that Brian Ferentz prefers to use fellow starting tight end T.J. Hockenson and reserve tight end Nate Wieting more than Fant on running plays simply because they’re better blockers, and that would make sense.

But in defense of the coaches, Fant has a team-leading four touchdown catches and 15 receptions in four games, so it's not that he isn't being used. It's just that he has been on the bench more than what was probably expected. 

I’d like to see more plays where Fant lines up at receiver, and with Hockenson at tight end.

The role of sophomore defensive end A.J. Epenesa is also being questioned because the former five-star recruit is only playing about one-third of the time as part of a three-man rotation at defensive end, along with senior Parker Hesse and junior Anthony Nelson.

Epenesa is mostly being used to pressure the quarterback on passing situations and it’s working, considering he leads Iowa with four sacks despite limited playing time.

Some fans are upset, though, because they feel that Epenesa deserves to play more.

In fact, somebody reached out to me on Twitter on Sunday and said that Hesse should take one for the team and tell the coaches that Epenesa should start over him and that Epenesa should play all the time.

There is no question that Epenesa is a special talent with a gift for rushing the quarterback. I wouldn’t be against him playing more, but it would be unfair to just bench Hesse all together.

Hesse isn’t starting for a third consecutive season just because the coaches like his grit, hustle and his background as a two-star recruit. He’s starting because he is effective against both the run and pass, and has shown a knack for making big plays at pivotal times.

Kirk Ferentz was asked about Epenesa’s playing time on the Big Ten teleconference.

“We think we have a good, healthy rotation,” Ferentz said. “Parker Hesse has been a captain every week and is probably one of our best football players, period. … And Anthony Nelson’s pretty good, too. It’s one of those rare situations where we have three good players.

“It’s certainly not a knock or a commentary on A.J., anything he’s doing wrong. It’s just that he’s at a position where he’s got two of the better guys on our team. We’re really pleased with what he’s doing, really pleased with his progress. We consider it kind of a luxury item to have three guys that you can play at two spots.”

Some fans probably don’t like that answer, but it’s true. All three of the defensive ends deserve playing time, but only two can play at the same time.

My guess is that Epenesa will play more as the season progresses just because he is so dynamic, but not at the cost of turning Hesse into a bench warmer because Hesse deserves better than that.

Hesse is easy to take for granted because he isn’t as athletic or dynamic as Epenesa and because he was just a two-star recruit.

But Hesse is also reliable and productive and one of the most respected players on the team or he wouldn’t be voted a captain every week.

I like the idea of playing Hesse, Epenesa and Anthony Nelson all at the same time, but that would require one of them to move inside to defensive tackle.

Hesse, a former high school quarterback, only weighs about 260 pounds, which is light for a defensive tackle, while Epenesa weighs almost 280 pounds.

Epenesa probably could handle the move inside better than Hesse could from a physical standpoint. But the problem with moving Epenesa inside is that you lose his ability to rush the quarterback from the edge where he truly is special.

Epenesa forced Wisconsin quarterback Alex Hornibrook to throw one of his five incomplete passes in the game on a play in which Epenesa nearly recorded a sack in the second quarter. But a closer look in slow motion showed that Epenesa appeared to knock the ball loose before Hornibrook's arm moved forward, and that would have been a fumble. Iowa recovered the loose ball, but it didn't matter because it was ruled an incomplete pass and because the Iowa coaches for some reason didn't ask for a review.

The play was clearly worth reviewing because the only risk was losing a timeout, while the reward would have been a turnover in a game where the Badgers won the turnover battle 3-0.

I trust that the Iowa coaches make decisions that they feel give the team its best chance to win. That doesn’t mean they always make the right decisions, or that we have to agree with them, but their intentions are good.

I also believe there wouldn’t be much of an issue with play calling or with playing time for certain players if Iowa had defeated Wisconsin this past Saturday.

With this being a bye week, Iowa will have had two weeks to prepare for its next game on Oct. 6 at Minnesota.

There is plenty of time for the coaches to make whatever changes they feel are necessary, and then we’ll use the outcome of the Minnesota game and hindsight to judge them.