Big Positives from Last Night

[ChosenChildren]

I know NW does not have a great defense, but I saw a lot of positives last night:

1. It was great to see Coker run so hard.
2. Johnson looked good.
3. Wow, we have a different offense with Rogers. Hope he gets more time.
4. Vandenberg looked poised and confident, leading us back from 17-17 tie.
5. The coaching staff took some risks late in the game, and they paid off.
6. The defense played hard up front. NW is hard to defend, but we made several big plays.
7. BJ Lowry is a great player; need to get him in there, even with the cast

This win will give this team a much-needed boost of confidence as we play these last 6 conference games. If we can stay healthy, we might cause some problems for Mich, MSU and the Cornhuskers

 

[ICHawk24]

Great points. Lets continue this for the next two weeks in two very winnable games.

 

[DesMoinesHawki]

Agree ... Was nice to see Rogers out there. Nice win for the Hawks ...

 

[NewMexHawk]

What risks did Iowa take in the 4th quarter? Why always wait until the opposition ties the game before opening up the offense a little (not a lot)?

I wonder how many on this board, had Iowa made four turnovers and numerous key offensive errors had said that NW played a great game or would you have blamed the coaches and poor play for the loss?

Iowa was very very lucky to win that game and was lucky that NW shot itself in the foot so much. If you go by statistics like many of you like to do, NW should have kicked Iowa's a$$ and put up more than 40 points. This was a terrible game by the defense...they gave up almost 500 yards of offense and NW completed 16 of 22 3rd down conversions. That by any stretch of the imagination is a terrible defense and means Iowa has one of the poorest defenses in the B1G.

When Iowa plays a team that does not shoot itself in the foot and they give up those kind of stats, Iowa is going to get its head handed to them. They almost did with Pitt but the coaches took a chance. Why? Because they had nothing to lose at that point. I guess that is when Iowa changes...when they have nothing to lose?

Iowa had better hope that Michigan (and every team we play) makes tons of turnovers and critical errors because with this defense, Michigan could put more than 50 on the board if they don't make errors.

 

[olddude]

What risks did Iowa take in the 4th quarter? Why always wait until the opposition ties the game before opening up the offense a little (not a lot)?

I wonder how many on this board, had Iowa made four turnovers and numerous key offensive errors had said that NW played a great game or would you have blamed the coaches and poor play for the loss?

Iowa was very very lucky to win that game and was lucky that NW shot itself in the foot so much. If you go by statistics like many of you like to do, NW should have kicked Iowa's a$$ and put up more than 40 points. This was a terrible game by the defense...they gave up almost 500 yards of offense and NW completed 16 of 22 3rd down conversions. That by any stretch of the imagination is a terrible defense and means Iowa has one of the poorest defenses in the B1G.

When Iowa plays a team that does not shoot itself in the foot and they give up those kind of stats, Iowa is going to get its head handed to them. They almost did with Pitt but the coaches took a chance. Why? Because they had nothing to lose at that point. I guess that is when Iowa changes...when they have nothing to lose?

Iowa had better hope that Michigan (and every team we play) makes tons of turnovers and critical errors because with this defense, Michigan could put more than 50 on the board if they don't make errors.

Boy Mex I dont know what your deal is today. You do know we give up between the 20's fairly easy right? You do know we tend to bow up inside the 20's right? You do know keeping them out of the endzone is #1 job right? You do know they just didnt walk up to our D and just hand them the ball right (almost on that one thou), we had to take it from them?
I agree the 3rd downs kept our D out there longer than anyone would like, but they were not stopping us, so had our D got off earlier our O would have had the chance to hang a 50+ on them.
Are you a kitty fan???

 

[HawkeyeShane]

What risks did Iowa take in the 4th quarter? Why always wait until the opposition ties the game before opening up the offense a little (not a lot)?

I wonder how many on this board, had Iowa made four turnovers and numerous key offensive errors had said that NW played a great game or would you have blamed the coaches and poor play for the loss?

Iowa was very very lucky to win that game and was lucky that NW shot itself in the foot so much. If you go by statistics like many of you like to do, NW should have kicked Iowa's a$$ and put up more than 40 points. This was a terrible game by the defense...they gave up almost 500 yards of offense and NW completed 16 of 22 3rd down conversions. That by any stretch of the imagination is a terrible defense and means Iowa has one of the poorest defenses in the B1G.

When Iowa plays a team that does not shoot itself in the foot and they give up those kind of stats, Iowa is going to get its head handed to them. They almost did with Pitt but the coaches took a chance. Why? Because they had nothing to lose at that point. I guess that is when Iowa changes...when they have nothing to lose?

Iowa had better hope that Michigan (and every team we play) makes tons of turnovers and critical errors because with this defense, Michigan could put more than 50 on the board if they don't make errors.

Actually, it wasn't a terrible game by the defense...that's how Iowa plays defense! In saturday's game you saw why Iowa likes to force teams into driving the length of the field, dink and dunk and take small chunks of yardage while not giving up the big play (Miller's pick 6) and conversely, for the rest of the game, you saw why it doesn't play well against Northwestern...because that's what their offense is built to do...

It wasn't a terrible game by the defense, it was a typical Iowa defensive philosophy vs Northwestern offensive philosophy problem. Iowa made them work for every inch and they took every inch the Hawks gave them.

 

[deanvogs]

What risks did Iowa take in the 4th quarter? Why always wait until the opposition ties the game before opening up the offense a little (not a lot)?

I wonder how many on this board, had Iowa made four turnovers and numerous key offensive errors had said that NW played a great game or would you have blamed the coaches and poor play for the loss?

Iowa was very very lucky to win that game and was lucky that NW shot itself in the foot so much. If you go by statistics like many of you like to do, NW should have kicked Iowa's a$$ and put up more than 40 points. This was a terrible game by the defense...they gave up almost 500 yards of offense and NW completed 16 of 22 3rd down conversions. That by any stretch of the imagination is a terrible defense and means Iowa has one of the poorest defenses in the B1G.

When Iowa plays a team that does not shoot itself in the foot and they give up those kind of stats, Iowa is going to get its head handed to them. They almost did with Pitt but the coaches took a chance. Why? Because they had nothing to lose at that point. I guess that is when Iowa changes...when they have nothing to lose?

Iowa had better hope that Michigan (and every team we play) makes tons of turnovers and critical errors because with this defense, Michigan could put more than 50 on the board if they don't make errors.

Jesus NewMex, for HN you are that bitter old uncle that every family has.......

 

[tweeterhawk]

Jesus NewMex, for HN you are that bitter old uncle that every family has.......

Hardly. I think NewMex was spot-on with his analysis of this game. There are a lot of things the team needs to shore up if it expects to be competitive against Wishagain, Sparty and the Bugeaters.

 

[deanvogs]

Hardly. I think NewMex was spot-on with his analysis of this game. There are a lot of things the team needs to shore up if it expects to be competitive against Wishagain, Sparty and the Bugeaters.

The thread is big positives from last night.......Go to the complaining section if you want b!tch constantly, there are plenty of those threads out there.

It is like your bitter old Uncle showing up at a wedding, and b!tching about his 3 failed marriages all night long..... And yes NewMex is the HN bitter old uncle, it isn't like this is his first post filled with p!ss and vinegar.

 

[tweeterhawk]

The thread is big positives from last night.......Go to the complaining section if you want b!tch constantly, there are plenty of those threads out there.

It is like your bitter old Uncle showing up at a wedding, and b!tching about his 3 failed marriages all night long..... And yes NewMex is the HN bitter old uncle, it isn't like this is his first post filled with p!ss and vinegar.

The Kool-Aid taste pretty good, does it?

 

[hawkfarmer]

What risks did Iowa take in the 4th quarter? Why always wait until the opposition ties the game before opening up the offense a little (not a lot)?

I wonder how many on this board, had Iowa made four turnovers and numerous key offensive errors had said that NW played a great game or would you have blamed the coaches and poor play for the loss?

Iowa was very very lucky to win that game and was lucky that NW shot itself in the foot so much. If you go by statistics like many of you like to do, NW should have kicked Iowa's a$$ and put up more than 40 points. This was a terrible game by the defense...they gave up almost 500 yards of offense and NW completed 16 of 22 3rd down conversions. That by any stretch of the imagination is a terrible defense and means Iowa has one of the poorest defenses in the B1G.

When Iowa plays a team that does not shoot itself in the foot and they give up those kind of stats, Iowa is going to get its head handed to them. They almost did with Pitt but the coaches took a chance. Why? Because they had nothing to lose at that point. I guess that is when Iowa changes...when they have nothing to lose?

Iowa had better hope that Michigan (and every team we play) makes tons of turnovers and critical errors because with this defense, Michigan could put more than 50 on the board if they don't make errors.

Well, well.... DUH. If anyone plays a perfect game against any team they are likely to win. We know this is not a great Iowa team or a good NW team, but that's what it takes to win sometimes. If Iowa never makes a mistake they win every game, so what's your point? Teams make mistakes and you have to capitalize on them. Iowa did not against ISU but did this weekend. Hence they won.

You are probably one of those guys who says well if he didn't throw the interception or this or that. Well they did, so forget about it. Be happy the Hawks won.

 

[olivecourt]

What risks did Iowa take in the 4th quarter? Why always wait until the opposition ties the game before opening up the offense a little (not a lot)?

I wonder how many on this board, had Iowa made four turnovers and numerous key offensive errors had said that NW played a great game or would you have blamed the coaches and poor play for the loss?

...

Iowa had better hope that Michigan (and every team we play) makes tons of turnovers and critical errors because with this defense, Michigan could put more than 50 on the board if they don't make errors.

I'm at the point where I don't even understand what you're saying.

1. If you're looking for Iowa to "take risks" and "open it up," we were 2:1 in favor of the pass midway through the third quarter. It was only when we starting feeding the ball to Coker that we dominated them. The drive that put momentum back in our favor after NW tied the game 17-17 was 9 runs and 2 passes. All of the risks that happened later in the 4th quarter (play action deep pass, bootleg) were set up by that dominance in the running game.

2. I don't understand your example about "if Iowa had made four turnovers..." Northwestern had two turnovers-- a fumble and an interception. That's pretty standard, especially considering that they ran 92 plays. I don't think that had any huge dropped balls. The had five penalties, but they were only for 31 yards. How did they shoot themselves in the foot exactly, other than the fact that, while the game was still in doubt, they couldn't score touchdowns and we could?

3. If you think Michigan is going to come out on the road and not make some pretty big mistakes you haven't watched many Michigan games.

 

[deanvogs]

The Kool-Aid taste pretty good, does it?

Where am I drinking any Kool-Aid? I just said that NewMex is a bitter old dude, and he is.....

Jeesh, those that want to bash the team all the time are really sensitive when others don't just join in with them....

 

[ICHawk24]

The defense was very thin due to injuries. Two of our top four LBs were out, resulting in #5 (would be #6 if Bruce Davis stuck around) Tom Donatell starting at one LB. At times in the 2nd half, Donatell sat so that true frosh Alston could get some snaps. We were also without one of our starting DTs in Nardo.

Despite all this, NW averaged 6.7 per pass and 3.7 per run. Both are respectable. Iowa averaged 10.2 and 5.5, respectively. The defense spent all night staying home and focusing on contain. NW tried a number of crazy double pass kind of plays, and Iowa ate them up. We allowed lots of yards rather than be burned, and after being burned twice for long TDs by Pitt, I'll take the lots of yards.

The defense is improving and getting better. All good Iowa teams of the last decade surprised the fans, and were much better in November than September. Win these next two games, get healthy, and some very interesting things could happen this year.

 

[hawkfan340]

We outperformed them overall. It wasn't luck. More yards per play. Fewer turnovers. Better special teams.

Offensive/defensive stats are skewed big time by the fact that we lost a possession with the pick-six and worked with a 25 yard field after the onside kick.

 

[hawkfan340]

Not to say we can't improve alot or shore things up. But this game wasn't luck. We earned it. I think we had our largest ypp since the 2002 team.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

I know NW does not have a great defense, but I saw a lot of positives last night:

1. It was great to see Coker run so hard.
2. Johnson looked good.
3. Wow, we have a different offense with Rogers. Hope he gets more time.
4. Vandenberg looked poised and confident, leading us back from 17-17 tie.
5. The coaching staff took some risks late in the game, and they paid off.
6. The defense played hard up front. NW is hard to defend, but we made several big plays.
7. BJ Lowry is a great player; need to get him in there, even with the cast

This win will give this team a much-needed boost of confidence as we play these last 6 conference games. If we can stay healthy, we might cause some problems for Mich, MSU and the Cornhuskers

You left out, "Quality of tackling improved immensely from PSU game"

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

The good news is that we were pretty good at getting Northwestern behind schedule in terms of down and distance. The problem is that we just weren't stopping them on 3rd down.

Also, had Iowa's pass-catchers not had those obvious drops ... then Iowa would have sustained more drives and scored even more points. Fortunately the WRs at least caught the ball pretty well through stretches in the game. We just need them to do it throughout the ENTIRE game!

 

[sergeanthulka]

What risks did Iowa take in the 4th quarter? Why always wait until the opposition ties the game before opening up the offense a little (not a lot)?

I wonder how many on this board, had Iowa made four turnovers and numerous key offensive errors had said that NW played a great game or would you have blamed the coaches and poor play for the loss?

Iowa was very very lucky to win that game and was lucky that NW shot itself in the foot so much. If you go by statistics like many of you like to do, NW should have kicked Iowa's a$$ and put up more than 40 points. This was a terrible game by the defense...they gave up almost 500 yards of offense and NW completed 16 of 22 3rd down conversions. That by any stretch of the imagination is a terrible defense and means Iowa has one of the poorest defenses in the B1G.

When Iowa plays a team that does not shoot itself in the foot and they give up those kind of stats, Iowa is going to get its head handed to them. They almost did with Pitt but the coaches took a chance. Why? Because they had nothing to lose at that point. I guess that is when Iowa changes...when they have nothing to lose?

Iowa had better hope that Michigan (and every team we play) makes tons of turnovers and critical errors because with this defense, Michigan could put more than 50 on the board if they don't make errors.

Ouch.

Hawks have their deficiencies - and Northwestern's scheme is the best we will see for exposing them...But Good Lord, man...when you have an offense that throws & pitches, the ball all over the field...along with a QB that is left to improvise (and 92 offensive snaps)...mistakes are going to happen..

The last 2 NU TD's (while frustrating) were against a defense playing with a 17-pt lead that had lost a bit of it's intensity.

You need to lighten up a bit.

 

[LemonWedge]

NewMex, I recommend Metamusil.

I think the biggest positives were the answers in the second half:

NW tied and the offense asserted itself with the run. Answer 1.

After the bad kick NW starts at the 40, but with two great plays by Hyde they end up missing the field goal. (Micah went a few yards off the LOS and spied on the QB on the 3rd down option, hit him on the pitch). Answer 2.

Set up for the run, 35 yards to Marvin. Answer 3.

Binns dials up one of his best edge rushes ever, fumble. Answer 4.

I think a lot more than statistics it is things like these that matter in a game, and Iowa had answers when it mattered.