Penn State 13, Iowa 3: The Song Is No Longer The Same
Apologies for the tardiness of this recap. Two weeks ago, I said that if you worked at it, you could probably wring four quarters -- or one full game -- of good play out of Iowa's first four games. Sadly, after five games, that statement still seems true. This is not yet a good football team. They have seven games left to prove otherwise.
* Who am I? Who are we? This team has no identity. Is it a spread passing team? Is it a power running team? Is it a defensive juggernaut content to scrape by with whatever it can muster on offense? Well, the latter description is obviously untrue, but we'll get to the defense more in an upcoming bullet point. It's stating the obvious, but good football teams have distinct identities. Alabama will use its defense to smother you like a boa constrictor, then pound away with a punishing ground game and an effective play-action passing game. Boise will spread you out and let Kellen Moore dissect you with uncanny accuracy. Oregon will run the same handful of plays over and over and over -- but from a dizzying array of formations and looks, and at a head-spinning pace. And so on. Good Iowa teams have also had distinct identities. The 2002 team had a high-powered, immaculately balanced offense. The 2004 team had a (mostly) airtight defense and a surprisingly (for Iowa) wide-open aerial attack. The 2008 team had another (mostly) airtight defense, this time married to a potent ground game led by the greatest running back performance in Iowa history. The 2009 team combined a playmaking, stingy defense with a schizophrenic offense with flashes of briliance (and a heaping dose of good fortune).
Through five games, the 2011 Iowa football team has no identity. It's pretty apparent that it can't be a strong defensive team -- the horses for that simply aren't there -- which means an identity is going to come from the offensive side of the ball. Unfortunately, what we have there is still a muddle. Between an offensive line returning four players with starting experience (and five if Nolan MacMillan could ever get healthy) and a bruising running back coming off a sparkling Insight Bowl performance, we entered the season thinking this Iowa offense would more closely resemble the 2008 team and that a powerful ground game would pave the way for everything else. Unfortunately, Iowa is averaging 140 rushing yards a game -- good for 70th in the country. We are, at best, an average rushing team now, between an offensive line that is surprisingly (I think?) inconsistent at run blocking and the fact that Marcus Coker has been injured and/or tentative (not to mention the fact that the coaches are deathly afraid of letting anyone but Coker tote the rock against an opponent with a pulse).
After the fourth quarter of the Pitt game and most of the ULM game, it seemed like we'd hit on a different possible identity, though: a passing team with a potent no-huddle shotgun attack. Except we wondered if that was something we saw only out of desperation and a willingness to experiment more against weaker opponents and that it would be back to "same ol', same ol'" for the Penn State game (and perhaps all of the Big Ten schedule). Survey says... still a bit inconclusive. To the coaches' credit, they did seem to try to utilize the no-huddle attack that had been so effective in the early going against Penn State -- they utilized it frequently on the game's opening drive. But they didn't stick with it consistently, either. Of course, that was due in part to a few things going on in the game itself: on offense, the receivers were having trouble making catches (and Vandenberg was having accuracy issues to exacerbate the receivers' problems) and the defense was having trouble getting off the field (meaning it was imperative that the offense stay on the field for a bit to give them a rest). Still, Iowa's ungainly shifting between offensive styles on Saturday was clearly ineffective (um, 3 points, hello); Iowa needs to find a style that works and stick with it. In order to win in the Big Ten, Iowa must score points -- and likely a lot of them (I'm thinking at least 25-35 points a game) with the state of this defense.
* The defense has been sacked. Speaking of... In many circumstances, only conceding 13 points (and only six through the first three and a half quarters) would be cause for celebration and the distribution of hearty "Attaboys" for the defensive players. In this case, it's the latest evidence that stats can lie. Yes, Iowa gave up only 13 points, but anyone who watched the game would laugh at you and call you a crazy person if you tried to argue that the Iowa defense played well. They allowed Penn State to amass almost 400 yards of offense (including 231 yards on the ground) and dominate time of possession (34:54 to 24:06). TOP can be a massively overrated statistic, but in this case it's useful because it indicates just how well Penn State was able to bludgeon our defense into submission. The only reason Penn State didn't score more points is because (a) their red zone offense is ghastly, (b) Matt McGloin is prone to fits of sheer idiocy (the end zone INT he threw to Micah Hyde was a mind-numbingly bad decision -- and an even worse throw), (c) their red zone offense is ghastly, (d) JoePa very clearly tried to stop scoring after they finally got a touchdown, and (e) their red zone offense is ghastly. (Seriously: I have no idea why they didn't simply run straight into the middle of our defense every single time they were in the red zone.)
To be fair, red zone woes aside, this was a better-looking Penn State offense than the one on display in their milk-curdling displays against Temple, Indiana, etc. Their offensive line was getting an impressive push (they certainly looked motivated to make a difference this year after getting pwned by Iowa the last few years), and Silas Redd and Curtis Dukes were quick, powerful, and decisive runners on Saturday. In the first half, they were also a rather lucky offense, as evidenced by the slightly ridiculous amount of deflected passes that wound up in the hands of Penn State players and led to solid (or even big) gains. That said, much of the blame still has to go on an Iowa defense that offered all the resistance of a paper towel for too much of the game: the gooey-soft interior of Iowa's defense was repeatedly abused, particularly on the drive where Penn State clinched the victory with a touchdown. It didn't seem to matter who was in for Iowa on the defensive line for much of the day -- they rotated liberally (at one point, all four second-team linemen were in the game), all with largely the same results. (That said, can we end the "Dominic Alvis at DT" experiment now? It doesn't work -- at all. He offers something as a DE, but very little as a DT.) Iowa's linebackers weren't really that much better -- they missed a disturbing number of tackles -- but when the defensive line is regularly getting pushed backwards 3-5 yards on every play, there's only so much they can do to stop the bleeding.
Iowa's inability to get pressure on the quarterback once again reared its ugly head, which is particularly damning with a dynamic dysfunctional duo like McGloin and Bolden, who in the past have been all too happy to give the ball away when pressured. This defensive line simply cannot get pressure on their own. This is something Norm seems to realize to an extent -- he once again blitzed more than usual in this game and brought blitzes from unusual sources (Micah Hyde and Jordan Bernstine both had effective blitzes during the game). We just need to see more of that if we want to have any prayer of getting a pass rush this year. Really, we should take a few cues from Norm's Penn State counterpart, Tom Bradley. Penn State typically runs a similar defense to Iowa's -- a lot of zone coverage and pressure from the defensive line. But that was not what we saw against Penn State on Saturday -- especially in the second half. After the game, Bradley noted that he dialed up a lot more blitzes (particularly in the second half) than normal, because he wanted to get Vandenberg out of his comfort zone. Mission accomplished. Hopefully Iowa was taking notes.
* The Schizophrenic Mister Vandenberg. And speaking of Vandy... after five quarters of Very Good Vandy, Saturday brought another reappearance of Bad Vandy. Vandenberg looked ill at ease for much of the game, even moreso when the blitzes started coming regularly. By the end of the game he just looked fried, so it was no shock that the sacks and interceptions started to pile up. He still struggles to identify and handle blitzes, which is concerning since this is 7th start. That's something Iowa needs to fix in a hurry -- whether it means calling more screens and quick slants or teaching the receivers how to run a hot route (and Vandy how to throw it to them). (Another thing he needs to fix? Staring down receivers. Part of the reason Penn State defensive backs were able to break up so many plays was because they could see where the ball was going.) This game also drove home the fact that Vandenberg is, more than any other quarterback at Iowa in recent memory, a rhythm passer. When he's in the flow, he's almost unstoppable (see: 4th quarter of the Pitt game). When he's not, he's very stoppable. In fact, he's a goddamn mess. Stanzi had a knack (at least early in his career) for flushing bad plays and pulling out sterling passes late in the game after throwing any number of horrible passes earlier; see the 2008 Penn State game or the 2009 Michigan State game. Vandenberg doesn't seem to have that gift.
* Bad offense? Good defense? The one sliver of good news coming out of this game -- and the one reason to still have a shred or two of hope for the offense -- is that the Penn State defense might very well be the best defense Iowa plays all year (depending on how much you believe in Michigan State's defense, which is currently very highly-ranked). Per Stewart Mandel:
That's not too shabby. Iowa's upcoming slate of defenses includes Northwestern, Indiana, and Minnesota. This is going to come as quite a shock, I'm sure, but they are not among the nation's leaders in defense this year. At least on paper, these matchups look like precisely what the doctor ordered for an Iowa offense that looked woeful in the extreme on Saturday.
* Punting is losing. Eric Guthrie was once again pretty good for Iowa -- four of his punts were fielded inside the 20 and he was able to pin Penn State very deep on at least one occasion -- but at least one of his punts should have never happened. I speak, of course, of the punt on Iowa's opening drive when Iowa got to the PSU 33, faced 4th and 8... and punted. That Guthrie was able to pin PSU on their own 10-yard line (a solid accomplishment) is irrelevant. Punting from the other team's 33-yard line is A FUCKING STUPID AND TERRIBLE IDEA. I don't even need statistics to back me up on that one (although they would). Even if Ferentz didn't want to try to convert on fourth down (4th and 8 isn't easy, obviously), why not give Mike Meyer a crack at a field goal? It was a beautiful day, the ball was lined up near the middle of the field, and Meyer has made 50+ yard field goals in the past (this year, in fact). But no. Ferentz gave a vote of "no confidence" to both Meyer and his offense on that play. Iowa probably deserved to lose the game for that decision alone. Of course, JoePa was determined to out-conservative -- or out-dumb -- Ferentz; he punted three times from the Iowa side of the field, including late in the game on 4th and 2 from the Iowa 36. If he really didn't think his offense could rip off a two-yard gain against a gassed and reeling Iowa defense, I... I just have no words for the level of neanderthal football thinking on display in this game.
Of course, that coaching blunder on Ferentz's part might be narrowly eclipsed by the decision to eschew running a two-minute offense upon getting the ball at the Iowa 20 with two timeouts and 1:42 to go before halftime. God forbid we try to score there. It's not like we don't have a no huddle offense that's been effective this year or a kicker with decent range. Nope.
150 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
A vote of no confidence
Was basically given to the entire offense early in the game. I think that discourages players. They want to score and they aren’t given the opportunity to. By the second half I think the morale was shot. Either that, or I was drunk. Or both.
by mikjones24 on Oct 10, 2011 10:47 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Good point on the lack of confidence.
The team looked uninspired and without energy. Maybe he’s lost the locker room?
I think Ferentz has a highlight VCR tape
of turnovers, failed fakes, failed two minute drives, and failed 4th down conversions, culled from decades of games, that he plays every night before he goes to sleep.
by Ratface McDougal on Oct 10, 2011 11:01 AM CDT reply actions 2 recs
M Vick added another one to the list on Sunday
Please don't tell me how you hate BSU or their turf...I know all too well and keep my toliet water blue for a reason.
Another benefit of Paterno retiring
would be that this sappy, bullshit father/son routine Kirk and Joe play to out to death could finally go away. Yes, we get it, you two respect each other sooooooo much. Now go try and beat the other team. Punting is losing, indeed.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Oct 10, 2011 11:07 AM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Are you suggesting that Ferentz and Paterno coach more conservative games against one another because of this "sappy, bullshit father/son routine"?
"Who do you think you are? You’re the son-of-a-bitch that sat at that desk over there and fired Johnny Cash. Let it go down in history that you’re the dumbest son-of-a-bitch I’ve ever met." - Merle Haggard
by ReadingRambler on Oct 10, 2011 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm not suggesting it,
it’s self-evident. I’m merely putting it into words.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Oct 11, 2011 1:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Didn't you see JoePa pulling a Jimmy V
sprinting around the field, looking for Kirk in order to hug him after the big win?
"TAYLOR MARTINEZ IS AIDS ON TWO FEET"
-@DanBeebe
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Oct 11, 2011 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions
Nice write-up
Your points in the final paragraph about punting from the 33 and not even trying to score before halftime are spot on.
Ferentz’s constant, repeated decisions to not to try very hard to score absolutely are infuriating. It’s his job to maximize the team’s chances of winning, and he fails to do that in his game time decisions.
I’m not saying it was the difference in the game. But it lowered Iowa’s chances of winning (and has done so in the past, and will do so in the future, etc.).
Whenever Iowa has a chance to score points at the end of the 1st half
or go for the win at the end of the game, and there is just under 2 minutes with 2 or 3 timeouts in Iowa’s possession, the MO for Kirk is to sit on the ball and be content with the score going into halftime or content going to overtime. It is mind boggling and I really don’t understand it. I wish someone would explain that to me. Doesn’t the clock stop after a 1st down is made? Do our receivers not get out of bounds after a catch? Please someone help me understand this logic.
Hail to Kirk Ferentz the First and to the "Iowa Magna Carta"
TOUCHDOWN IOWA! TOUCHDOWN IOWA! - Gary Dolphin
I LOVE IT! I LOVE IT! I LOVE IT! - Jim Zabel
by Bloodpunch's Barbasol on Oct 10, 2011 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions
I think all the explanations...
are generally bullshit. “It’s worked in the past”, “It works more often than it doesn’t for Ferentz”, “You can’t argue with Ferentz’s record of success”, etc.
The relevant question is does aggressively going for the score increase or decrease Iowa’s overall chance of winning the game. And on that count, Ferentz is consistently wrong, and it has and will cost us wins.
It also hasnt saved us from any losses
Because we always end up losing the game anyway
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
by HoyaGoon on Oct 10, 2011 9:52 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Bingo. Basically, rupert is saying that we don't know anything about anything so what's the point of talking about anything.
meh
oh fuck you, i'm not saying that at all
I’m just saying that what you consider a truth is an assumption that is proven. And some of Kirk’s choices he considers non-issues, but they are possibly debatable also
Well if that is the standard
There is almost no way anyone can prove anything. But look at this:
Iowa v. Pitt, 2008. Iowa gets the ball at its own 32 with :54 seconds left in the first half. Iowa loses by 1.
Iowa v. Northwestern, 2009. Iowa gets the ball at its own 20 with 1:22 left in the half, runs 3 times and fails to get a first down. Loses by 7.
Iowa v. Ohio State, 2010. Iowa gets ball at its own 20 with 1:06 left to play in the first half. Rushes twice to end the half. Loses by 3.
Iowa v. Northwestern 2010. Iowa gets the ball at its own 31 with 3:22 to play. Runs 3 out of first 5 plays. Clock goes down to :44 seconds before Iowa calls timeout at NW 35. Iowa throws pass to NW 15 yard line and spikes the ball on first down, costing it a down. Forced to 4th and 10. Settles for FG. Loses by 4.
Iowa v. Iowa State 2011. Iowa gets the ball at its own 20 with :41 seconds in the half. Runs 1 play for 7 yards. Loses game in overtime.
Iowa v. Penn State 2011. Iowa gets the ball at its own 20 with 1:42 to play and 2 timeouts. Runs the ball 3 straight times, fails to score. Loses by 10.
Strangely, in my research, the one time it was clear Iowa DID try hard to score was in 2007 at Wisconsin. Iowa got the ball on its own 37 with :43 seconds left in the first half. Iowa ran the ball 0 times, and JC completed 4 of 5 passes for 63 yards and a touchdown to give Iowa a 10-7 lead in a game they lost 17-13.
Great assessment.
Those two coaching decisions are beyond me. I can’t see the positive side of either. How do you explain the punt from 33 yd line? The clear answer to not allowing the 2-minute drill before the half is that he has no faith whatsoever in the offense. If your not going to let your QB try and move the ball with 2-minutes to go before half why would you ever let your QB try and throw the ball? What’s the logic here.
On another note I thought the whole team looked painfully slow. I’m wondering if the current team has the talent and athleticism to play with other BT teams this year. Coker in particular looks like he’s walking to the hole. What gives? Why burn Canzeri’s red shirt and not let him carry the ball? None of it makes sense.
Cheap seats view
Generally, I hate seeing people on the internet blame every play that doesn’t go for a touchdown on poor offensive playcalling. And I also hate it when people assume that there are better players on the bench that are kept out only because the coaches aren’t as smart as they are.
But I think Iowa was clearly out-coached Saturday by Penn State’s defense vs. Iowa’s offense, and the decision to only let Coker run the ball is frustrating. Coker is no Shonn Greene – but even Greene was relieved by Jewell Hampton.
by StevenDS on Oct 10, 2011 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
we just got out coached. It happens. It was certainly a trap game for the coaching staff. They saw a weak offense and assumed our offense would score with the same things they had used before.
Look, I knew the fate of the game when they faked the FG and we couldn’t stop it. That part of our preparation is becoming comical.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
by StoopsMyAss on Oct 10, 2011 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions
Over on Jon Miller's site
Hawkeyegamefilm has some good write-ups on this that get into detail in ways that I certainly can’t. But a few things were obvious:
1) The aforementioned decisions to punt @PSU’s 33 and the decision not to try very hard to score almost 2 minutes before halftime.
2) Having Brad Rodgers in for pass protection on the play that led to the fumble that led to PSU’s TD.
3) There seemed on replay to be plenty of plays where the corner was playing 5 or 6 yards off McNutt. Why not hit him with a 5 yard out?
4) Repeated blitzes by PSU, but no screens or draws (that I can recall)
Does Iowa not have a hot route? These late game offensive collapses, when the qb gets sacked 3 times in a row are horrendous. Why is there no outlet pass? If there is one, why aren’t the qbs picking it up better?
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
The threw two quick out pass the whole game
and Davis and McNutt dropped both. Vandenberg is not very good at play action or rolling out so I am guessing KOK feels limited. Also, Kirk thought this was going to be a who blinks first game, meaning turnovers. So he kind of clammed up. Well, he was right.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
by StoopsMyAss on Oct 10, 2011 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions
You are right about those drops on those 2 quick outs. But, aside from the drops, those plays worked. They should have been easy 5-7 yard gains, and those plays seemed to be there throughout the game.
You are right about not rolling Vandy out. It is clear that the coaches have decided that he isn’t nearly as good throwing on the run as Drew Tate and Stanzi were.
The lack of a screen play
or even something horizontal to counter those repeated blitzes is getting really old.
Hey Dolph, you look like I need a beer.
by Give Eddie a Beer on Oct 10, 2011 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Our OLine is not terribly good at blocking in place
I am guessing the coaches think asking them to run and then block is too much.
by Ratface McDougal on Oct 10, 2011 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions
+1
Multitasking is a bitch.
Maybe KF should think twice about chewing gum while on the sidelines.
"The possibility of physical and mental collapse is now very real. No sympathy for the Devil, keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride!" HST
by Dip-Shit on Oct 10, 2011 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Would crazy glue gloves helped the WRs
Not that Vandy had a great game but there were numerous times where he had the location and the receiver and they just couldnt make the catch. Our O-line in general looked uninspiring during the game so I can only imagine how much each dropped/not caught ball hurt their confidence.
BTW-I think we need to switch Coker out—at this point he basically does a better job of catching and running the ball then just running.
by notmeyersfoot on Oct 10, 2011 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Vandy threw one into a blitz but didn't complete it
by GuttedSnowBird on Oct 10, 2011 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions
wasn't the easiest catch
but Derby should have made it. Speilmann’s comment was “you have two hands, why not use them?”
"Sometimes the truth gets in the way of a good story" - KF
by The Bacon Explosion on Oct 10, 2011 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions
He was thinking Ronnie Lott blow-up.
Basically, didnt try to catch the ball.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Oct 10, 2011 12:59 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Our te and rb are blocking, not blocking and releasing.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Oct 10, 2011 12:56 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Respectfully disagree
About the TOP being indicative of the defense’s failings. I think it shows how piss poor the offense was. They were unable put together meaningful drives and give the D a breather. 169 passing yards. Coker runs like a 5’5, 150lb back (save one run where he was in beast mode). If they march more, the D can be more effective late.
Just beat jNW.
by One_ill_KevinJ on Oct 10, 2011 11:20 AM CDT reply actions
In person, I was stunned by how gingerly Coker runs the ball
I think we need to explore some other options to light a fire under his arse. It was not pretty.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
by StoopsMyAss on Oct 10, 2011 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions
I think he needs to go back to running more upright. Early in the year he was so bent over he was practically diving at the hole. I think the kid has too much going on upstairs. He needs to relax and play his game.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I do not think he can sustain
emotionally the notion of being a featured back. He runs like he is saving himself for the 4th quarter sometimes. He needs to run angry and I don’t think he is that kind of kid. I think he would benefit greatly from a consistent back-up and that we have not found one this late into the season is frustrating.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
by StoopsMyAss on Oct 10, 2011 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Fucking AIRBHG!
I don’t even want to think about it.
"The possibility of physical and mental collapse is now very real. No sympathy for the Devil, keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride!" HST
You can see...
How excited the staff was about McCall. When he went down, there was a lot of deep sighing. He was central to their strategy.
Just beat jNW.
by One_ill_KevinJ on Oct 11, 2011 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions
It's too bad Bullock fumbled at the end of the ULM game
I think that trashed any confidence KF had in him (fairly or unfairly). I would like to see Coker get a breather though.
"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe
Somebody needs to give him some Riggans tape. He could be Riggo.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Oct 10, 2011 1:05 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Nothing wrong with a good diesel.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Oct 10, 2011 1:13 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I think mostly
the coaching staff is very hesitant in playing any of the younger backs because of the pass protection. Coker, is for some reason getting slower every game, but the kid can block.
The one play where Rogers(I believe) was in #6 run right by the kid and caused VDB to fumble.
by IAinCA on Oct 10, 2011 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
One of the things that frustrates me the most about our coaching staff is its reluctance to be creative on offense...
and put players in positions to succeed. It’s obvious that guys like Canzeri and CJF have limitations that make them unsuited for heavy usage (the same limitation, actually: blocking). That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t see the field at all, though. They possess skills that the guys ahead of them at their positions don’t possess (in CJF’s case, the ability to stretch the field; in Canzeri’s case, speed and elusiveness). Can we really not throw a screen pass to Canzeri out of the shotgun? Can we not let CJF run a few deep routes to give the defense something to think about? And so on.
The coaches have, out of desperateion, embraced an “all hands on deck” approach on defense with liberal substitutions. We need to do the same thing on offense.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
by RossWB on Oct 10, 2011 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
That's what they seemed like they were going to do with Bullock in the first game, right?
Before the McCall incident, Bullock seemed like he was going to be a hybrid RB/slot type thing because Kirk said that he was doing things in practice that made them want to get him on the field.
Indeed.
But now he’s nowhere to be seen. Nor is Canzeri or a lot of other potential options on offense.
And I understand that it’s one thing to give those guys a run-out against Tn Tech and ULM and another to play them on the road against Penn State, but at some point you just can’t keep pounding away with the same limited set of options.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
If you can return kicks there's got to be a sense that you have open field ability
so, yeah, what you said. Find a way to use him during the flow of the game.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
And it'snot like they haven't done it before.
Was it 2002? 2003? One of those years.
Fred Russell in = run
Edgar Cervantes in = pass
That was shockingly accurate about 90% of the time.
meh
Completely agree with you
How can Norm’s “4.3.Cover.Two.” defense bend but not break when the offense can’t string together a nice drive and keep them off the field? Kind of indicative to the strategy of bend but don’t break.
Also i miss being able to wear my six seconds of hell shirt and not be embarrassed
by NorseHawk17 on Oct 10, 2011 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions
The Defense has improved.
But the offense is going in the other direction. If we can either 1) score points or 2) stay on the field longer, I think they can be an above-average unit.
Just beat jNW.
by One_ill_KevinJ on Oct 11, 2011 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree it's on the offense as well. They couldn't sustain drives well at all after the early part of the game.
The point I was trying to make (not as clearly as I should, probably) was that the defense just couldn’t get off the field for most of the game. PSU had four drives of 11+ plays, I think. That’s absurd.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
I don’t think they put enough pressure on PSU’s qbs to win the game. Also, why do Iowa’s veteran cb’s seem to be out of position so much?
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
PSU's TD drive
10 plays, 9 runs right up the gut basically and we had no answer. The announcers had called the TD play prior. If they can see what is going to happen I would hope someone on Iowa’s staff could as well.
"Sometimes the truth gets in the way of a good story" - KF
by The Bacon Explosion on Oct 10, 2011 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions
I think corner is our best position. They had another great game.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Oct 10, 2011 1:02 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
They do some good things
but they also get caught out of position too much. They also give way to much of a cushion, which is especially galling when they are playing a weak passing team. They just don’t contest completions very often and when you couple that with poor tackling you end with giving up too many passing yards.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
This is annoying.
We play A LOT of quarters/cover 4. It is our base D. We do not play cover 2/man under. By design we are soft on the edge. Corners in quarters have 1/4 of the field. I ve been reading for years that iowa corners ( eg shada) are bad because they are playing the assigned scheme. If someone plying corner was ‘out of position’ when was that?
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Oct 10, 2011 5:04 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I saw both Hyde and Prater get spun around and lose the receiver on Saturday. At one point I saw them run into each other on a completion near the sideline. They do good things, but they aren’t shutting anything down.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Did Penn State beat us with a passing game on Saturday?
am I missing something? They were shut down on the pass. Prater went for the run on the first and goal, but come on, the D-line was getting gashed and something had to be done. He took a risk and got burned, but they were destined to score that TD.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
No, they didn't beat us with the pass.
I am saying that there still isn’t a lot of position discipline on the defense. Even Iowa’s most senior guys find themselves out of position too much.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I'd argue we lack a strong D-line and depth at LB
I’m fine with the DBs.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
Maybe the cb’s are out of position, because of the weakness up front. Still, Iowa doesn’t contest many passes this year.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
It is cool
The cbs are not bad by any means. Each part of the defense has had some issues this year, some more than others.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
No QB Pressure
Makes every unit behind the DL look worse than they really are. Clayborn/Klug/Ballard/Binns were able to force QBs to hot reads and keep RBs bottled up. This unit will get better (it has already), but the DL will probably not become pressure creators. Especially when Michigan, Minnesota, jNW all use mobile QBs-the KF/Parker mortal enemy
Just beat jNW.
by One_ill_KevinJ on Oct 11, 2011 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions
Point on Punting: Yes and Yes.
Could I see and almost justify Ferentz’s decision to punt in both those situations? Sure. Back when we didn’t have a shotgun/no huddle because “thats not the style of football we play”. Also the past two seasons when Murray and Mossbrucker had a fight over who could be more inconsistent at kicking.
But seriously. If Ferentz decided to actually embrace our ability to run the no huddle then why not be a little more aggressive with it too? After all being aggressive is the peanut butter to the no huddle’s jelly. Carry the offense we had on the first drive over to the rest of the game in our offensive game plan and give Meyer a chance.
Side note: I guess we have abandoned the idea of using tight ends
Re: the tight ends
I had a thought last night after I read Bradley’s comments about blitzing more that maybe he noticed that our TE and FB positions are not up to snuff and thus we are totally weak at blitz pickup and protection on blitzes. We usually have great TE and FB units, but not this year. At least not consistent.
by Captain n Diet Coker on Oct 10, 2011 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
TE is the mystery Unit.
I know all fans are itching for the Statute CJF on the field. Having a 6’7" target running the middle seam in a cover 2 is just deadly. At least he could come in on obvious passing downs?
Derby is a reliable guy, and I don’t want to knock him. He is just not a serious weapon. The thought of KMM, MMc, KD and CJF is too good to be true.
Just beat jNW.
by One_ill_KevinJ on Oct 11, 2011 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions
Game sucked but I'm posting this without context

I got 99 donuts cuz a bitch ate one.
Twitter: gregory_forbes
by Pain in the Sash on Oct 10, 2011 11:36 AM CDT reply actions 8 recs
Someone should check that kid for walleye vision.
They need to get back that kid who tweaked his ankle
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
That is incorrect.
He only completed 1 pass.
"You're going to go out there with a dick full of confidence. Then, you're going to go out there and shoot that confidence all over the stadium." -Blue Mountain State
by Hawkaloogie on Oct 10, 2011 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
The greens are just the ones that actually hit the playing surface
I got 99 donuts cuz a bitch ate one.
Twitter: gregory_forbes
by Pain in the Sash on Oct 10, 2011 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Our defense
Unfortunately, we as fans have to get used to the fact that we just don’t have the horses up front. We aren’t going to be able to stop a good or even average ground game. A
It would be nice if the coaches started recognizing this and adjusted the game plan accordingly.
And since our D-line features 4 seniors in the top 5, the adjustment from the coaching staff is going to have to last longer than just this year.
I think the staff realizes this
and the fact is we started substituting like crazy on the D-line in this game. How they will act going forward it limited by bodies. We’re using everyone we have on the defensive side of the ball. The offense is a different matter (as in Polish Hat as slot receiver, Canzeri, etc.).
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
by StoopsMyAss on Oct 10, 2011 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
True
And also disturbing. The linebacker depth in particular is likely to get very ugly as we move though the conference. I’m guessing Cooper isn’t ready as a true frosh to play on the line either, so there’s no help there.
by GuttedSnowBird on Oct 10, 2011 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
I was mostly referring to overall game strategy, rather than personnell
What I have in mind is a different approach to game decisions. We don’t have a defense that we can expect to win us any games, only to most of the time give the offense a a chance to go and win the game.
Generally, the coaching staff sends the same signals it sent in 2009 and 2010 – that they trust the defense to get stops, so there is no need to take risks on the offense.
We have a different team now. With this team, when you get the ball at your own 20 with 2 timeouts and 1:47 to play in the half, you don’t run up the gut for 3 yard gains and run the play clock all the way down before snapping the ball, etc.
I don't think we have a choice except to take chances.
This defense is, by Iowa standards, a sieve. (I would agree that it’s a not a full-on dumpster fire disaster like, say, Minnesota’s defense, but it’s still not good enough to allow us to rely on it much.)
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
You know what else puts pressure on the defense?
Not scoring!
You have to factor in the possibility of PSU getting the ball back quickly
They had the type of high-octane, quick-strike passing attack that we needed to keep the ball from at all costs.
Oh wait…
PSU is 3/9 when attempting a 30+ yard FG
They would have needed to get to the 13ish yard line to make it a <30 yard attempt.
Even if JoePa would have let them try to open it up, they still would have needed a solid passing game to drive into FG range from mid-field.
It wasn’t happening. Yet we try to squash all possibilities of a PSU score before we try to move the ball.
That's not quite accurate,
Our new kicker is 1 for 2 from beyond 30 (and he just missed a 50+) and has been very solid. Most of those stats were from our walk-on wide receiver turned kicker because our current kicker was in the doghouse for being on #Teamdrunj
WE'RE DANCIN!!!
Didn't know it was a discipline thing
Just looking at the stats, I see 3 kickers combining for 6 misses and I assumed you have to choose something from the poo-poo platter each time you run the FG team out there.
Fact is, however, that you only get so many possessions a game, and squandering a viable one because you fear what the other team may do if you fail is a losing strategy.
And it’s especially losing if your fears are irrational since we know PSU’s offense is as explosive as a glacier. (Mind you, Friendly Lion, a glacier is a powerful thing capable of changing an entire landscape, but only under the proper, quite liberal time constraint.)
One thing Kirk does need to see
Is Vandy winning a road game. 0-3 so far. I’m not in panic mode. This team looks average, unless Vandy can grow up some. Receivers have to help. It was fugly on offense.
by txhawkeye on Oct 10, 2011 12:04 PM CDT via iPhone app reply actions
Vandy was a typical first year starter
but the PSU DC thinks he sharp. I think he might be too. But we are beginning to see his physical limitations. He doesn’t look ready to throw on the run. He is not comfortable turning his back to the defense, thus play action is not prime time ready.
He’s learning.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
by StoopsMyAss on Oct 10, 2011 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think it's physical at all
I think it is largely mental. The kid is mobile enough, has a strong enough arm, and can be deadly accurate. But as was mentioned, he’s very streaky, and still hasn’t learned to identify a blitz or stop locking on to receivers. I don’t doubt that it will come with time, but we will also have to live with the growing pains.
"There are few things graven in stone, except that you have to squat or you're a pussy." -Mark Rippetoe
If he was so able physically then once that rush started to get to him they would have rolled him out
but he just cannot throw on the run. Not yet. They no longer run play action as we have for the past five years either. We now do an NFL type play action where Vandy does not turn his back fully to the defense. But he’ll get there.
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
You know, and I'm not calling for Vandy to be benched or anything
But AJ pulling that stupid boner and getting himself suspended… I’m wondering if his athleticism could’ve made a difference on a series on Saturday…
Vandy was totally fried and confused at the end… having a guy that’s got much better wheels out there (shrug).
OTOH, the problems that led to Vandy being fried are not his fault. As has already been said, being more creative on offense would help, but, the thing that keeps striking me are the damn drops by the WRs. They catch a few of those balls – COMPLETELY different game.
Never *question* Bruce Dickinson!
by The Bird Cult on Oct 11, 2011 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
It's moot; AJ never would have seen the field anyway.
"Pursue happiness... with diligence."
by Bucketochicken on Oct 11, 2011 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions
We have seen bad and good Vandy
hopefully he uses this as a learning experience and improve his game. PSU fans are loud but respectful, hopefully this is the loudest stadium he will be in this year. We only have to go to Purdue, MN and Lincoln, two of which are not intimidating in any stretch of the imagination which is good news.
"Sometimes the truth gets in the way of a good story" - KF
by The Bacon Explosion on Oct 10, 2011 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't you think a lot of the "good Vandy" though feeds off the WRs?
Our trio had a bad day catching the ball. They catch even half of those drops – as I posted above – different game.
And that goes back to the point – bring the bubble screen back big-time, get a hot route or two in there. James could be the most accurate QB ever but if they drop the ball its going to get into his head eventually.
Never *question* Bruce Dickinson!
by The Bird Cult on Oct 11, 2011 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions
Even as a PSU fan...
I told my wife on that opening drive punt that Iowa was making a really stupid decision. Nothing like conceding. Even with a good punt it was only a 23 yard change in field position.
Monday Morning Quarterbacking...
Completely agree with this team having no identity. This has been bothering me through all five games so far. I couldn’t come up with one thing I could pin on this team and decided that the reasoning is the coaching staff is still trying to figure it out themselves. Let’s be honest, we can argue about “its the offense’s fault” or “its the weak defense”, but eventually we have to come to the realization that is a very mediocre to subpar team. Is seems to me that there is no one on either side of the ball who is stepping up and leading this team. We don’t have a Angerer type guy on the defense or a Stanzi guy on the offense. We may have to wait til next year or the following until we see some of these younger guys step up.
Mcnutt is our offense, but obviously he is not the outspoken leader type. Prater should be our defense guy, but his inconsistent play isn’t rallying his teammates.
the WRs and TEs are the ones who failed Vandy
for the first 3 quarters Vandy was doing pretty well. hitting them in the hands and chest with his throws, and they just refused to catch anything. KMM dropped a TD pass that he should have caught for sure, and i cant tell you how many times Derby dropped passes, and Davis had quite a few drops as well. even McNutt had a drop, and the three top WRs were just not getting open at all during the game either. when Coker is your best catcher of the day you know your in trouble.
by the 4th quarter you could tell it was starting to get to the kid. he had a defeated look and suddenly he was throwing INTs all over the place. If the WRs had lived up to the billing of being the best WR unit Iowa has ever had and actually gotten open and caught passes we would have won that game.
im less inclined to blame Vandy, Coker (who was doing great all game) or the OL (who was doing pretty well until the 4th quarter protecting on the pass). this one is on the Defense and the catching unit in my mind.
"Your spelling and grammar errors belie a seriously skilled thought process"- therealCatnuts
by justsomehawkeyefan on Oct 10, 2011 12:41 PM CDT reply actions
or was it Davis who dropped the TD pass?
i dont know, it was just a whole bunch of fail from anyone catching the ball not named Coker all day.
"Your spelling and grammar errors belie a seriously skilled thought process"- therealCatnuts
by justsomehawkeyefan on Oct 10, 2011 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Nothing but love for Iowa and their fans...
Best of luck for the remainder of the season!
And F tO$U
I blame HITS
Not many more gracious fanbases out there than yours
Thank you and good luck to you as well
I got 99 donuts cuz a bitch ate one.
Twitter: gregory_forbes
by Pain in the Sash on Oct 10, 2011 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions
The Numbers on Punting
This topic has been tackled to death at mGoblog. The conclusion: You should be going for it from the 33 (and many points further back) every time.
Before you respond, let me remind you: Brian Cook called me smug, which makes me the Obama of smugness. I'm basically Smugbama.
I'll agree with this analysis
But KF never will. It’s a truth that I just can’t get too worked up about, thinking he’ll change that is an exercise in frustration and futility. And besides, every coach has their flaws. I bet there are a couple things that drive their respective fans crazy about Urban Meyer, Nick Saban, Les Miles, Pete Carroll, Bob Stoops, etc.
What I will get worked up about: The inability to tackle, getting slaughtered by a power-running game, and the inability to run-block. Those are supposed to be the strengths of a KF/Norm/KOK team. If we can’t get those figured out and soon, I’m not sure what strengths a KF coaching stable is bringing to the table this year. Here’s to hoping we get some of it figured out in the next three games against relatively easier opponents.
I spent half my life's earnings on wine, women & song. The other half I wasted.
by therealCatnuts on Oct 10, 2011 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree, but I also know what KF was probably thinking
He was thinking that in the 2009 game at PSU, it all turned inthe 2nd quarter (?) when Donahue pinned PSU back inside the 10, followed by Binns making a huge play or two.
Similarly in the 2010 game, Iowa killed PSU with field position and pinned their inept offense deep several times.
It’s even true that in the 2000 upset, Baker’s punting and the resulting field position may have been the story of the game.
So KF has had repeated success often using that strategy against Penn State, and won 8 out of 9. The difference this year was that pinning PSU deep did no good. Guthrie punted very well, but the defense immediately let PSU move the ball easily each time they had been pinned back deep in their own territory.
Because of this, I can’t blame KF all that much for taking that approach in this game (though I think that punt from the 33 was a big mistake). However, Iowa has now proven it does not have the kind of defense this year to play this way, and we cannot continue to approach games in that manner going forward.
by H I McDonnough on Oct 10, 2011 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions
In other words, KF is not coaching THIS team
he’s coaching off a card he created in 2007. Yeah, I’d buy that.
/frustrated snarkiness
"I wish you luck with a capital 'F'" - The Real Elvis.
I agree that that's probably what he was thinking...
However, Iowa has now proven it does not have the kind of defense this year to play this way, and we cannot continue to approach games in that manner going forward.
The frustrating thing is that we knew this before Saturday. Iowa State moved the ball on us. Pitt moved the ball on us. ULM moved the ball on us (at times). Trusting the defense this year is a fool’s errand. Sometimes there will be no choice (like the end of the Pitt game), but if there is in ANY way a choice (and there was here, just like there was before OT in the ISU game or on 4th down in 3OT against ISU)… choosing the defense is wrong.
The second punt from the PSU side of the field didn’t bother me as much (it was closer to the 50), but the first one did, even though 4th and 8 is obviously a tricky situation. Punting from the other team’s 33 simply makes no sense.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
BUT
this is a coaching staff as interested in TEACHING as they are COACHING.
The fanbase wants to see coaching, but I think the coaches see a team that needs to learn a lot if we are going to be competitive next year (preemptive argument: I don’t think it’s okay to cash in this year’s chips, but I also don’t think that’s exactly an accurate assessment, but first and foremost, I think the coaches are teaching right now).
We are who we thought we were. We’re a young, inexperienced team. It’s the rebuilding year.
"TAYLOR MARTINEZ IS AIDS ON TWO FEET"
-@DanBeebe
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Oct 11, 2011 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions
FUN FACT TIME
Did you know Iowa starts SIX seniors on defense (Binns, Daniels, Nardo/Daniel, Nielsen, Prater, Bernstine) as well as a draft-eligible junior (Hyde) who may be the most NFL-desirable of the entire lot? It’s entirely possible that all of those guys will be gone next year, which means we’ll return a whopping four starters on defense. Five if Hyde decides to return for a senior season.
Meanwhile, the offense starts three seniors (Zusevics, Gettis, McNutt’ and it’s four if Herman regains his starting job) and and four draft-eligible juniors (Vandy, Davis, Reiff, Ferentz). Vandy, Davis, and Ferentz ought to be back next year; Reiff may or may not be.
In other words, next year looks like it could be every bit as much of a rebuilding year as this one, particularly given the extensive work that will need to be done on the lines (the bread and butter of Iowa football under KF).
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Seriously
I’m sick of people calling this a “rebuilding year” when almost half of our starters are seniors. Iowa isn’t rebuilding so much as dealing with a relatively bare cupboard.
I'm reaching a point where if it's a rebuilding year, fine...
BUT let’s make sure it’s rebuilding in a way that will pay off in the next few years. Playing Binns, Daniels, Nardo/Daniel, etc. isn’t going to help next year’s defensive line one goddamn bit. Playing Gettis isn’t going to help next year’s offensive line one whit. I understand the desire not to totally dump on this season and it’s not fair to this year’s seniors (particularly guys like McNutt, who have had great careers at Iowa and contributed enormously to the program)… but at some point it’s worth wondering if those guys need to be playing less for the sake of the future. Scherff, not Gettis (or Tobin, for that matter, although since he’s just a junior he could contibute next year), is the future of the Iowa offensive line, but he isn’t going to progress much from the bench.
And I think the coaches HAVE tried to work in more non-seniors on the defensive line at times. Alvis has played a ton, Davis would have played sooner if not for injury, and they were rotating like crazy on Saturday.
But for all the lumps we took in 2007, playing guys like Ballard, Clayborn, Edds, Greenwood, Bulaga, DJK, etc. DID pay off in 2008 and 2009.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
this is a very interesting thought
I’m not ready to throw in the towel and say that we can’t compete for a B10 title since the West division looks pretty open with us getting both top contenders at home in November, but if we lose to jNW next week I think I may start leaning toward this camp.
I spent half my life's earnings on wine, women & song. The other half I wasted.
by therealCatnuts on Oct 11, 2011 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd like to see someone run the numbers on....
What are the results of drives at the end of the half, with between 1:15 and 2:30 on the clock and a team having the ball in their own territory.
Because I’m sure the numbers would make Ferentz wrong on this count too.
What is perhaps most galling
is that they run over a minute off of the clock and then suddenly decide to start throwing the ball down field. Why do they do that? What is the point of trying to move the ball once you have less than 30 seconds on the clock, when you just wasted 1 minute dinking around?
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I think it's just because he wants to be in control of the ball
He doesn’t want to give the ball to the other team with any time left.
However, I recall in another game I was watching two weeks ago that in a similar situation, I heard one of the commentators say that he would run on the first play to see what what the defense was doing/what you could get. This is pretty much what Kirk indicated previously as his thought process. It makes me wonder if that happens more than we realize.
Sorry if this was said above, but I didn't see it.
The punting on the opening drive not only demoralizes the offense and kicker, but it also is a fuck you to the defense. “Sure, we could a field goal and have a decent chance of making it. We could also go for it and have a not-great-but-not-end-of-the-world chance. But either one, if we don’t get it, will mean that you’ll have to stop this horrible Penn State offense from moving 35-40 yards to stay out of field goal range, and we just don’t think that’s likely.”
Please.
meh
Part of the reason you go for it isn't just because you have a chance to do something "positive"...
…but it’s also because the chances of the other team doing something “negative” to you are pretty slim. At least as far as the increased odds from something negative happening compared to if you take the “safe route”.
meh
When you are an underdog on the road
you need to do things to win ball games. Sitting back and waiting for the other team to make mistakes is a dangerous philosophy. You can’t count on breaks.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I disagree that it's a fuck you to the defense
I think it’s more of telling them, “okay, we’re going to put them deep, go make a play and give us points/TO/field position”
You might as well ask for blood from a stone
Because that is as likely from our defense as what you’re suggesting.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
by HoyaGoon on Oct 10, 2011 10:07 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Against the two headed QB it wasn't THAT far fetched
but they got away from the endzone quickly and it turned into a long day.
If we play tighter D on one pass play and get the INT, then the move looks brilliant.
"TAYLOR MARTINEZ IS AIDS ON TWO FEET"
-@DanBeebe
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Oct 11, 2011 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes
and if it hadn’t been such a brutal winter, than Napolean’s invasion of Russia would have looked brilliant too. We can play the “Well, IF X had happened…” until we’re blue in the face. The fact is, it was a poor decision at the time that looks even worse in retrospect.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
I don't see how you can see it as that.
I mean, I do see how you can see it as that, but it doesn’t make sense to me. In your case, you’re suggesting that Ferentz’s motivational technique is to put the team as a whole in a worse position because he’s going to tell the lesser unit (the defense) to do something extraordinary (getting points, a turnover or keeping them from moving at all) than asking either of the two better units from doing something difficult but not extraordinary (making a long FG, getting 8 yards on one play).
One, that’s way too complicated of an explanation for me to just believe.
Two, that’s just losing thinking.
Three, I don’t think you really believe that.
meh
Punting from inside the 40 is stupid, but it's not asking the defense to do something extraordinary.
If the ball is downed inside the 20, it is to be expected that the defense will force PSU to punt. No offense can be expected to consistently drive the ball 80+ yards.
by The Mexican't on Oct 11, 2011 8:57 AM CDT up reply actions
We should have faked a fieldgoal.
I bet it would have worked.
"TAYLOR MARTINEZ IS AIDS ON TWO FEET"
-@DanBeebe
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Oct 15, 2011 8:41 AM CDT up reply actions
I think he thought PSU's offense was worse than Iowa's defense
It wasn’t, which is scary.
Drive Chart
Iowa Drive Summaries
START QTR POSS. YARD PLAYS YARDS RESULT
15:00 1 05:08 IOWA 19 11 47 Punt
01:36 1 05:45 IOWA 23 12 72 Field Goal Good
04:59 2 00:27 IOWA 20 3 0 Punt
01:42 2 01:42 IOWA 20 5 15 End of Half
12:39 3 00:54 IOWA 20 3 5 Punt
10:12 3 03:27 IOWA 16 9 43 Punt
01:42 3 02:30 IOWA 20 6 29 Fumble
08:08 4 01:15 IOWA 20 6 21 Interception
04:32 4 00:50 IOWA 15 5 14 Interception
03:18 4 02:08 IOWA 20 5 7 Turnover on Downs
Penn State Drive Summaries
START QTR POSS. YARD PLAYS YARDS RESULT
09:52 1 08:16 PSU 10 18 88 Field Goal Good
10:51 2 05:52 PSU 16 11 81 Field Goal Good
04:32 2 02:50 PSU 31 5 21 Punt
15:00 3 02:21 PSU 24 5 18 Punt
11:45 3 01:33 PSU 26 3 4 Fumble
06:45 3 05:03 PSU 4 12 90 Interception
14:12 4 06:04 PSU 48 11 49 Passing Touchdown
06:53 4 02:21 PSU 47 3 4 Punt
03:42 4 00:24 PSU 44 3 8 Punt
01:10 4 01:10 PSU 27 2 -3 End of Half
Penn State demonstrated that punting is winning in the 4th quarter. Aside from running it down the D’s neck at the start of Q4 for the winning touchdown, PSU did what Iowa has been able to do to them over the years.
I was waiting for PSU to “SHOOT THE HOSTAGE” late in the game. That would have been the ultimate “EFF YOU” moment…
Punting is winning when you have a good defense.
Which Penn State has in 2011 and Iowa had in 2009 and 2008 (and to varying extents in 2010).
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
I miss Punting Is Winning....
Those were the good ol days…..
by Ordinary Joe on Oct 10, 2011 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Ryan Donahue
was dominating the Bears last night. 3 punts inside the twenty. Go hawks. Go moving Marcus Coker to a position that does not require a lot of contact or running very fast. Is he to smart or nice to play football?
They allowed Penn State to amass almost 400 yards of offense (including 231 yards on the ground) and dominate time of possession (34:54 to 24:06).
Are you telling me this game’s not over yet?
fuck.
Don't worry
With a minute or les we will just sit on the ball and be content.
Hail to Kirk Ferentz the First and to the "Iowa Magna Carta"
TOUCHDOWN IOWA! TOUCHDOWN IOWA! - Gary Dolphin
I LOVE IT! I LOVE IT! I LOVE IT! - Jim Zabel
by Bloodpunch's Barbasol on Oct 11, 2011 9:13 AM CDT up reply actions
Playing not to lose
When you play not to lose, you lose anyway……every time.
Iowa’s last possession of the first half illustrates this point perfectly. 1:47 on the clock when the Hawks got the ball: 3 straight runs and a 1st. Then a pass on 1st down with little time left on the clock. Duh. What’s wrong with this picture? Why did KF wait until there was under 20 seconds left to pass on 1st down? My gut instinct tells me that the little voice in the back of the players’ heads is telling them that the emperor (KF) has no clothes. Their play was a tacit vote of no confidence in KF, et. al.
bye week
Perhaps this was discussed to death in the venting thread, but what really bothers me is that kirk and company had 2 weeks to prepare for this game and to my untrained eye it appeared they weren’t ready. 2 weeks of game prep should equal more than 3 points.
The loss alone isn’t that frustrating but as mentioned by others the lack of a team identity certainly is.
impossible is nothing
by RGates on Oct 10, 2011 4:34 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
I think this is overwrought.
there have been plenty of statistical analyses (one here) to show that bye weeks don’t really help or hurt much, certainly nothing close to what most people expect them to do.
I spent half my life's earnings on wine, women & song. The other half I wasted.
by therealCatnuts on Oct 10, 2011 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions
First link was for NFL, so I thought maybe a college link showing the same thing would be relevant
Here’s one for SEC football (from Team Speed Kills at SBN). Same conclusions. I’m not going to dig too much to find one that’s B10 or Iowa-specific, you get the gist.
I spent half my life's earnings on wine, women & song. The other half I wasted.
by therealCatnuts on Oct 10, 2011 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions
and also
by all accounts Tom Bradley (and, with the runs to the outside, Galen Hall) were showing something that we hadn’t shown yet this season, so it came as a bit of a surprise. Granted, adjustments probably should have been made throughout the game, but we gave you guys something you might not have been prepared for.
Fire Dan Snyder
I got an idea
Doesn’t help our offense out, but is it too late to take one of our huge OL off the bench and move them to DT. This team is severly missing a big body in the middle. Even if they’re not a DT at heart.
Putting Ponder in isn't the question, it's the answer.
SKOL!!!
Wasn't able to watch the game closely enough Saturday
but was NO ONE on the d-line any good? Because that’s incredibly troubling. I had high hopes for Carl Davis this year, those are obviously forlorn. And at this point I think the coaches have decided that Cooper isn’t quite as game-ready as we believed, or hoped, and it isn’t worth burning his redshirt.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Not really.
Daniels is an above average Big Ten starter.
Binns is an average Big Ten starter.
The others are all way below average Big Ten Starters and are going to get beat most of the time by average Big Ten linemen, and almost all the time by above average linemen (see LeBron Daniel vs. Iowa State).
Remember, Iowa’s MANY great defensive linemen of the last decade were almost only great their junior and senior years, after 3 or 4 years of Chris Doyel plus Aiken or Kaz.
The only exceptions I can think of were the 4 star recruits like Roth, Ballard and Clayborn, who were very good sophomores. But even those guys weren’t really great until they were juniors. We don’t have any 4 star recruits on our entire team playing defensive line.
The bottom line is you shouldn’t have any high hopes any time soon when it comes to the defensive line.
I agree with your conclusion but not your predicate.
King, Klug and Kroul were no-stars.
We may have convinced ourselves that we can turn any willing 230 lb. fullback into King or Klug. Or perhaps we are a victim of the success we enjoyed with Clayborn, Ballard and Klug, in that no one else got to play.
We play tackle football.
I'm confused
What don’t you agree with?
My only point is that the D-linemen that become great at Iowa aren’t great until their 4th fall on campus unless they are 4 star recruits or above.
There are no 4 star D-linemen in the 2010 or 2011 recruiting classes. So don’t expect anyone to emerge as some sort of freshman or sophomore savior next year on the D-line.
Also, I suspect the play of Ballard, Clayborn, and Klug may have caused people to transfer, more than I kept them from developing. I mean, when you have the athletic ability of Lebron Daniel, you can only do so much.
I hope that the DL gets going quickly on being "Doyleized"
We have 5 Sr. DL’s and all of them are playing or have played this year (Binns, Daniel, Daniels, Nardo, and Forgy). Then we have 2 Jr. DL’s and both of them have seen playing time (Bigach and Gaglione). We have a So. DL and he has seen playing time (Alvis). Finally we have 8 Fr and RS Fr on the squad with only one seeing playing time (Davis).
I bring this up because we are going to lose 5 DL who have been in the system and through Doyle’s S&C and they are not at the standard we are used to seeing from an Iowa D line. The good news, I guess, is that next year we will have 4 DL with significant playing experience and 7 others who hopefuly will get better and playing time.
I hope that the coaching staff can work their magic and turn these players into the next King, Klug, Ballard, and Clayborn.
Hail to Kirk Ferentz the First and to the "Iowa Magna Carta"
TOUCHDOWN IOWA! TOUCHDOWN IOWA! - Gary Dolphin
I LOVE IT! I LOVE IT! I LOVE IT! - Jim Zabel
by Bloodpunch's Barbasol on Oct 11, 2011 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions























