NOPE, IOWA SHOULDN'T HAVE EVEN BEEN IN THE GAME
(Note: Mild ranting, minimal editing)
With all apologies to the right honorable gentleman from Wonderland, Iowa didn't give that game away. Hell, it never should have been that close.
Let's recap.
- Iowa outgained Northwestern by 17 yards, but was 50 yards behind the Cats until the final drive against a relatively soft NU zone defense.
- Iowa was -4 in turnover margin. Not only did the Hawks give the ball away five times (yes, five fucking times), but three of the five were completely unforced errors, and two turnovers led to Northwestern scores or took sure scores off the board for Iowa.
- Iowa's average starting field position: Their own 24. Northwestern's average starting field position: Their own 38.
- Twice, Northwestern had first and goal and came away with nothing. A strange mix of inopportune penalties and flat-out atrocious kicking led to this much more than anything Iowa did defensively. Aside from the final four-and-out and the Stanzi fumble, Iowa made something of their opportunities.
Add it all up, and this game was closer to 38-17 than it was to 24-22. Sorry, but Northwestern kicked our fat steak-fed asses in this one. I'm not saying the Wildcats are really good (they're not) or, as some of their commenters are saying here, that they're anywhere near "the class of the conference" (they're absolutely not), but they're certainly better than Iowa right now, and they proved that yesterday.
There was a 6 year old kid sitting in the aisle next to our seats throughout the game (he kept obstructing the view of a douchebag Northwestern fan in a Bear Bryant hat, which would cause the douchebag Northwestern fan to yell and scream and curse at the kid...classiest fans in the Big Ten my ass). On first and goal at the 8, with 1:30 to go and down by 5, the kid turned to me and said, "We should run it here." Given our success on the ground and FAIL FAIL EPIC FAIL in obvious passing situations throughout the day, he was probably right. I know Greene was injured (though I didn't know it at the time) and I know we'd be complaining today if we ran twice, then missed two shots at the end zone, but it was so completely obvious to everyone in attendance that a 6 year old who surely hadn't played a down of football in his life knew it.
I'm not pinning most of this loss on the coaching staff (though, Kenny, meet me at camera two: we know the roll-Stanzi-one-way, set-up-tight-end-screen-to-the-opposite-side screen pass worked against Maine, but you can't run that play six times in a game and expect it to work after the second attempt). However, the speculation here and on lesser message boards has been that Parker and KOK were more creative with previous programs, and it's Ferentz whose emphasis on execution over variety and steadfast dedication to boring-as-fuck football is keeping things so bleh. If that truly is the philosophy, there's a problem. We were piss poor in execution yesterday. Northwestern missed a field goal, had another one blocked, imploded near the goal line twice on offense, gave up a deep post to a team that hasn't completed a long pass since last year's Northwestern game, and still clearly executed its gameplan better than we did.

ASS
In other news, I can report that Pat Fitzgerald demands all assistant coaches and sideline hangers-on wear bad golf shirts and shitty sunglasses. They were everywhere. Coaches would take the sunglasses off only to calculate the tangent of C.J. Bacher's throws toward the sideline on their wristwatches.
Also, after watching Fitzgerald and his staff, I can report Pat Fitzgerald (a product of Gary Barnett's Northwestern teams) is completely obsessed with beating Iowa in ways non-ISU people simply don't understand. It's really quite something to watch, and - more importantly - it's created yet another Iowa opponent who has a massive edge in motivation (never more evident than the opening series of the second half). When you lose the playcalling battle, the execution battle, and the motivational battle, you simply aren't going to win too many games.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The beauty of KOK is always doing the unexpected...
….with expected results.
Any idiot knows that when you’ve had a back run for 160 yds, you’re on the 8 yd line, you’ve got a QB playing HIS FIRST FULL GAME, and you’ve got a timeout and 1:30 on the clock….
….that you throw FOUR straight times on pretty low percentage passes in the college game!
This is GENIUS stuff that the rest of us cannot understand, because we are not GENIUSES like KOK and KF.
Total dumbasses like myself would have rolled out Stanzi on a pass/run option on first down, ran on second down with Hampton, then thrown on roll-outs on third and fourth down, if needed.
I suppose that’s why I’m not a FB coach, because my way is the moronic one, as evidenced by the fact that we did, indeed, pull a victory out in the en….
Oh, wait, you mean we lost? Those four straight passes didn’t work??
Wow. Shows just what I know! Nothing, compared to The Mad Genius.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
Background on Fitzgerald's Iowa obsession
It dates back to Gary Barnett’s days. Apparently after Iowa clobbered NU one time back in the early 90s, at the postgame handshake Hayden Fry said something to the effect of “Hope we didn’t hurt any of your boys too bad”. Barnett thought it was condescending and made it a personal goal to beat Iowa, especially since NU hadn’t beaten Iowa in like 20 years at the time.
So Barnett labeled Iowa as NU’s target. And of course this was during the time that Fitzgerald was a player.
Also, it was in the Iowa game in 1995 that Fitzgerald broke his leg; an injury that ended his season. I don’t know if he thought it was on a cheap shot or whatever, but I guarantee you he hasn’t forgotten that he missed the Rose Bowl because of it.
Not intended as a jibe at Iowa, but this is the history that leads up to Fitzgerald circling the Iowa game on his calendar
Strange concept: motivation.
You mean, it’s not enough to prize efficiency and execution?
Fitzgerald’s team played with urgency and passion, so good for them. I doubt, also, we’ll see a better half-time adjustment and opening script all year (four-play touchdown two elapsed minutes after we were up 17-3).
I looked up once in this game and our QB was 15-18 and our back getting 7 ypc. We shut down their money back, and their QB would be 3rd string at Iowa. And we floundered and lost against the better focused, more creatively coached, more inspired team.
It’s really pretty amazing what NW is doing given their non-factory academic and financial limitations. Basically, we lost to Penn or Cornell Saturday.
Mr. Boh Knows ...
I miss Tyler Sash
Even though I was doing a lot of drinking during the game, I only saw Harold Dalton in on 1 play. Hope Sash makes it back soon.
Y so serious?
I think a lot of this frustration results from the fact that we actually have more talent on offense this year and a vastly improved offensive line – yet we’re still seeing the same crippling results. There is no solution. There are no answers. Our team is not good and it’s not going to get better since we all know we’re not making any changes. Stay passionate about winning but don’t let this losing get to you so much.
I mean, at least the players on the field are trying, which is more than I can say for a lot of the last 2 seasons.
wooooo???
From an NU fan
thank you for your reasoned analysis. Unlike OPS, who can’t seem to get it through his thick skull that NU has been at least as good as Iowa since we left the Dark Ages in 1995, you give the Wildcats the credit they deserve.
I think Iowa fans miss the point when they call the fumbles “unforced” errors. I don’t think that hit by Brad Phillips on Shonn Greene was bereft of force…
I'm sorry, but...
When Brodell dropped the punt, it wasn’t forced. When Stanzi dropped the snap, it wasn’t forced. When the ball was thrown into the chest of your team, it wasn’t forced. And when the ball was dropped on a kick return, it wasn’t forced.
So while I hear what you’re saying, don’t pretend like you “caused” those turnovers. Iowa lost the game way more than Northwestern “won” it.
by imadirtyoldman on Sep 29, 2008 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, be gracious.
In a season where we have a better run game and a better pure thrower than OSU, a great D-line and 6-7 linebackers in the rotation, we’re losing. The team with the most points at the end? They’re the winners. That would be NU.
Football is a game, not a laboratory experiment. We aren’t playing enough, and we are executing procedures too much, and if NU has an excitable coach, well, good for them, give them credit. What ever he said at halftime seems to have torched their butts into scoring in 75 seconds or so after intermission.
I could stand to watch a little over-excited action out there: like Tate having his helmet ripped off and continuing with the play, like Sanders, like Clark beating Purdue by outrunning their secondary, like coming back from 25 down or so against PSU, away. NU was just a better team Saturday because they played harder, played with more spirit, and played more creatively. They’re better right now. They are a better team.
Could we have dominated them? I think so, actually. I think this personnel group and a 2005 attitude and — I don’t know, ONE? adjustment at half — we win 30-3. But the fire is out, and it’s like going to the opera and hearing someone play chopsticks, and no matter it’s the most precise rendition of opera every delivered. Who the fuck cares about chopsticks if you want to see heads roll and women swoon? We have a very strange approach to football at Iowa these days, wouldn’t you say?
Mr. Boh Knows ...
They are not a better team
A team that “forces” 5 turnovers and almost loses is not a better team. No, sir.
by storminspank on Sep 29, 2008 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes they are
But when you are gifted 5 of them and still almost lose (and should have, except NW was able to get two H2H hits on Greene and take him out of the game).
I'm just saying...
Iowa lost. Iowa didn’t “give away” the game any more than every closely-losing team does every single week.
I think the final four-down sequence with Iowa on offense is a perfect microcosm of the whole game.
First down: Stanzi under pressure from Wootton, incompletion
Second down: Stanzi facing a blitz, throws into double coverage, incompletion
Third down: Stanzi has time, has a receiver, overthrows
Fourth down: Stanzi pass batted down by Gill
Iowa missed its share of opportunities, sure. But don’t discount the fact that NU also took some opportunities away when it counted.
That's not the argument
The argument is that without those 4 gifts (and don’t give me this hogwash about TO’s being a part of the game — dropping 3 balls without being hit is NOT a typical part of a game, nor is throwing the ball right to a guy on the other squad), Northwestern would not have won. Hell, had Brodell not dropped that punt to end the first half, I don’t think NW would have won. But to say that NW earned those TO’s…that’s just silly.
by imadirtyoldman on Sep 30, 2008 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow.
You guys are seriously twisted on this one. They beat us. We lost. Game over. An “L”. Bwah-bwah-bwah. Any freak negative play can be offset with a positive one, in any game. They start the clock, count up the points, stop the clock. Game fucking over. We lost. That makes them better. Give them a hand for doing more with less, because they did.
Pitt needed a miracle rally to beat Syracuse. They beat us. They’re better too. This is the purpose of a scoreboard.
If you don’t think so, you are buying into the Ferentz BS about it not being a game of violence, yards, and points — but instead an “execution” dynamic. Actually, in football as in other forms of conflict, “Victory” is a useful concept. Victory here belongs to NU. Execution is meant to deliver “Victory” — not careful discussions as to how we lost but we really won.
And by the way, I don’t think it was a random act of god that caused three balls to be dropped on the ground. Iowa is one of the tightest, most joyless, most passionless football teams out there, and I have said this for a few years. They are over-coached, over-tuned, and terrified of making mistakes. Players who are afraid of dropping the ball because it’s been drilled into their skulls not to drop the ball by coaches who are themselves wound so tight they can’t get a play into the huddle in less than 30 seconds? Those are the players who drop the ball. I mean these coaches are wound so tight that they run their “constraint” plays before the other team stops the bread-and-butter. That means that they are seeing failure when none is occuring. Iowa needs to get a whole lot meaner, a whole lot greedier, and a whole lot more relaxed, to win games like the last two debacles.
What does that look like? Well, I think that looks a little like Michigan State. If we don’t stop fucking around they are seriously a-gonna stomp our butts. Will they? Dunno. I never bet against Ferentz. He’s too fascinating, too sincere. Sure his team has been seriously fucked up in the head now for 2.5 years, but if he gets focused and hungry again, with these ballplayers, it could be fun. If that doesn’t happen, then all you need to ask yourself about this week is,
Who’s better? Western Michigan or Michigan State?
I don’t know, but …
Mr. Boh Knows ...
Yes, the "Legal" Hit by Phillips
Helmet to Helmet is the way to do it.
by storminspank on Sep 29, 2008 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions


















