5 wide
- Thread starter forty5
- Start date
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
I like it because we use 11 personnel (1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR's) which, if an opposing DC is on his game, usually means the nickel package is going to come in. Weapons like Wegher and Moeaki create mismatch problems against a nickel set. You use your additional CB to cover our 3rd WR. That leaves the defense in a quandary. Let's say you plan on rushing 4, dropping 7 in coverage.
Who's going to cover Moeaki? A LB? You are asking for it if you want a LB to try to stay with Tony. A safety? Sure, he'll stay with him, but if Stanzi is accurate with a throw to him, you might as well move the chains because his big body can shield any safety he's up against.
Who's going to cover Wegher/Robinson? A LB? Strike up the Iowa fight song because we're about to score...way too quick for LB's. A safety? This might be your best bet, but bringing a safety out of the coverage shell just put either of our outside WR's (ahem, 6'3"+ WR's) in 1-on-1 coverage. Stanzi's accuracy might puncture you with the precision of a surgeon's scalpel (see: Arkansas State).
Drop into full zone? Better hope Stanzi makes a mistake...if we're patient, we can dink and dunk our way down the field at will.
LOVE this formation!
Who's going to cover Moeaki? A LB? You are asking for it if you want a LB to try to stay with Tony. A safety? Sure, he'll stay with him, but if Stanzi is accurate with a throw to him, you might as well move the chains because his big body can shield any safety he's up against.
Who's going to cover Wegher/Robinson? A LB? Strike up the Iowa fight song because we're about to score...way too quick for LB's. A safety? This might be your best bet, but bringing a safety out of the coverage shell just put either of our outside WR's (ahem, 6'3"+ WR's) in 1-on-1 coverage. Stanzi's accuracy might puncture you with the precision of a surgeon's scalpel (see: Arkansas State).
Drop into full zone? Better hope Stanzi makes a mistake...if we're patient, we can dink and dunk our way down the field at will.
LOVE this formation!
beaverdaleguy
Well-Known Member
Don't get me wrong, I think our running backs have done a great job filling the shoes of Shaun Greene, especially Robinson. But we can't continue to be so conservative now that we are ranked up there with a shot at Roses or more (depending on what happens to the SEC and Big 12 South). I am not saying run less. But it would be nice to get a few "style points" at the ends of games. If we are up by one or two scores with more than 5 minutes left...throw it once in a while. Get the first down, run it a few more times. It gets nerve-wracking when we call running plays 13-14 times in a row just to try to run the clock down with the other team's defense creaping up with 10 or 11 guys in the box to stop it. All I am asking is not be so predictable. Toss a screen or roll a naked bootleg to Moeaki in the flats. Just every once in a while to keep the defense guessing so it will be easier to run.
Sorry, style points are meaningless at this point. If Iowa wins their next 5 games by one point, they will be #4 in everything if Texas,Bama and Florida win out. If Iowa wins by 40 pts their last 5 games ,Iowa will be #4 in every poll if Texas,Bama and Florida win out...
Just win,Hawks.
Just win,Hawks.
copperdude
Member
my thoughts exactly, there's no way we jump over the top 3 if they win out. Heck I'd take #4 in the nation.
InKurtweTrust
New Member
Florida and Bama play each other so we would probably move up to 3rd in the BCS which is the worst spot to be in, hard to swallow going undefeated and not playing in the NC.
beaverdaleguy
Well-Known Member
All we need to get into the NC is three things: 1-go 5-0 in the last half of this season 2- have Texas lose once, and 3- have Oregon beat USC. Oregon is our best shot at keeping USC from skipping over us because they are just sitting and waiting with their wins over Ohio State and Notre Dame and if Oregon can beat them and Texas loses, we are in #3 spot at the end of the season and then the SEC championship knocks either Bama or Florida out and we play the winner in the NC.
IowaFanSince82
Well-Known Member
Mark my words, Texas will lose at least 1 time this year before the Big 12 championship. They always seem to stumble down the road. Also USC will stumble as well, they are not that impressive as they used to be. Their WIN at ND was a good one, but still they have to play some big games in the PAC-10
But hey none of this matters, if Iowa doesn't take care of business this weekend, we are in trouble! East Lansing has not been kind to us in the past! We need to get things going right out of the gate and get up BIG on them!
But hey none of this matters, if Iowa doesn't take care of business this weekend, we are in trouble! East Lansing has not been kind to us in the past! We need to get things going right out of the gate and get up BIG on them!
kylepetrich
New Member
I love the 5 wide set, I just wish that Stanzi would be in the shotgun when we run it. I think it would be a lot easier for him to see the field.
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
Was he not? I seem to remember him being in the gun but I could be wrong.
Exactly. Also, Florida and Bama are in opposite sides of the SEC, which means that one of them will have to lose, either in the SEC title game, or before then.
Chodehawk1
Member
id like to see us come out running and running well....
DreamSeason
Well-Known Member
How bout Wildcat fake reverse with them biting on the run than McNutt throwing it to DJK for a TD... just a thought...
HwkFn4Life
Well-Known Member
I don't think there is anything wrong with the current gameplan, but a few more passes on first down early in the game I think would loosen up the defensive play calling. I agree that at times are play calling can become a little predictable, and its tough to argue with what gets wins, but it would be nice to have a first quarter like the arkansas st. game again. I think O'Keefe went into that game with a totally different mentality then he has any of these big ten games, and hopefully Stanzi has shown him enough to have confidence in throwing in 1st down situations early in the game. Show even SOME success in that, and he can go back to the same old boring play calls and probably have more success running the ball. Whatever playcalling can get us 20-plus points though is fine with me, cause I love our chances from here on out if we can get to that 20 point mark. (And I think KF thinks that too, so the gameplan on offense reflects that, conservative in our own end of the field and capitalize on a few mistakes)
thejumper5
Well-Known Member
If we were going to run a Wildcat set, I would think we would use McNutt, the former QB. Teams would get real comfortable stacking the box on him and then we could burn them huge.
IATrainMaster101
Well-Known Member
Good call. Besides i'm nost so sure McNutt isn't the better of the two running with the ball.
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
One other thought popped into my head on this topic, so I went with the bump.
As was already mentioned above, we use 11 personnel in this formation. Why not come out in 5 wide, then shift into a more conventional formation, with twin WR's to one side, a WR to the other side, and Moeaki next to a tackle, then put Wegher behind Stanzi? Or keep Stanzi in the gun and Wegher off to one side? Running the ball against a 6 man box plus nickel coverage could be productive...it certainly gives us an advantage personnel wise.
Another idea...use both Reisner and Moeaki in the set, but shift from a double tight balanced set to a 3x2 empty set, putting the RB out in one of the slots. Now, we've probably drawn base personnel from the defense, except now we've almost certainly got both of our TE's locked up on LB's and our RB locked up on a LB/Safety. If the defense fails to adjust and leaves an LB on Wegher, strike up the Iowa fight song! We 'bout to score!
Did I mention I love this formation? There's so many things you can do with just base personnel it's ridiculous...and I think we have the talent (TE's who can run and catch as well as be physical and block, TB's who can both run and catch) to make it happen.
As was already mentioned above, we use 11 personnel in this formation. Why not come out in 5 wide, then shift into a more conventional formation, with twin WR's to one side, a WR to the other side, and Moeaki next to a tackle, then put Wegher behind Stanzi? Or keep Stanzi in the gun and Wegher off to one side? Running the ball against a 6 man box plus nickel coverage could be productive...it certainly gives us an advantage personnel wise.
Another idea...use both Reisner and Moeaki in the set, but shift from a double tight balanced set to a 3x2 empty set, putting the RB out in one of the slots. Now, we've probably drawn base personnel from the defense, except now we've almost certainly got both of our TE's locked up on LB's and our RB locked up on a LB/Safety. If the defense fails to adjust and leaves an LB on Wegher, strike up the Iowa fight song! We 'bout to score!
Did I mention I love this formation? There's so many things you can do with just base personnel it's ridiculous...and I think we have the talent (TE's who can run and catch as well as be physical and block, TB's who can both run and catch) to make it happen.
