about that 3rd and 1

eveningnewsteam said:
Stupid call in the situation. Weisman could have fallen over and got the first. Not only that, but you are risking sending your defense out AGAIN after another 3 and out, in that heat.
Click to expand...

10 men in the box. 10! Now the Hebrew Hammer is stud, but to assume he's a guaranteed running into a box stuffed that full (enter dirty joke of your preference here) is a bit too much koolaid for even this "koolaid drinker".
 
Didn't love the last play call, but we did need to go to the sidelines to stop clock, with only one timeout. Likely, there were "safer" ways to do it, but we were being aggressive.

At least we didn't attempt to run the clock out to play for overtime, I think that would have caused more ire on the board than the questionable playcall, unless of course either would have worked out for a win.

It's all subjective really, but we were definitely going to try to win the game, it's debatable on the quality of the play call, whether it was the play or the quality of the pass.

for the record, the more I think about it, the more I like the 3rd and 1 bomb, I just hate the fact we didn't go for it on 4th (it's the overall combination of those two things that just doesn't add up).

complete side question, how many penalties did Iowa have on Saturday and for how many yards, too lazy to look it up...
 
HawkeyeWalker said:
Didn't love the last play call, but we did need to go to the sidelines to stop clock, with only one timeout. Likely, there were "safer" ways to do it, but we were being aggressive.

At least we didn't attempt to run the clock out to play for overtime, I think that would have caused more ire on the board than the questionable playcall, unless of course either would have worked out for a win.

It's all subjective really, but we were definitely going to try to win the game, it's debatable on the quality of the play call, whether it was the play or the quality of the pass.

for the record, the more I think about it, the more I like the 3rd and 1 bomb, I just hate the fact we didn't go for it on 4th (it's the overall combination of those two things that just doesn't add up).

complete side question, how many penalties did Iowa have on Saturday and for how many yards, too lazy to look it up...
Click to expand...

I agree with some of your post; particularly the going for the win/not playing for OT. This board would be smoking right now had we decided to run Weismann a couple times and head into OT. It'd be worse than it is right now.

I don't necessarily think we needed to go for that first down after the bomb tho. We had the lead, had the all at midfield, and it was just the start of the 4th quarter. Plenty if game left to play. Pin them deep. IIRC, didn't we down the punt inside the 5? They ended up punting from the end zone.
 
FreedComanche said:
This is where you are wrong. I said last year against NI when they called the run on 3rd and 10 (and it worked) was a dumb call. Why would I say that? Because most of the time when you need 10 yards and you run for it, you won't get it. If you need ten yards, it's more probable you will get those yards if you pass rather than run for it. This year, even if the 3rd and 1 deep pass would have worked, it was still a dumb call.
Click to expand...

I'm just trolling ya Freed. I am actually 50-50 on the call. I liked it in the fact that this OC is showing that he likes to go for the juggler. This could came in handy against teams that we should beat, that we let hang around. I don't think GD is like this, and his aggressive call makes me feel this way even more.

Personally if I'm OC, I run Weisman. Yet as a fan base we have been collectively screaming about being too conservative???? Now we are too aggressive???

You can pick individual play calls to death. As you said the 3rd and 10 run last year was a dumb call.....only it worked for a TD. Sometimes gambles work, and sometimes they don't.....
 
deanvogs said:
I'm just trolling ya Freed. I am actually 50-50 on the call. I liked it in the fact that this OC is showing that he likes to go for the juggler. This could came in handy against teams that we should beat, that we let hang around. I don't think GD is like this, and his aggressive call makes me feel this way even more.

Personally if I'm OC, I run Weisman. Yet as a fan base we have been collectively screaming about being too conservative???? Now we are too aggressive???

You can pick individual play calls to death. As you said the 3rd and 10 run last year was a dumb call.....only it worked for a TD. Sometimes gambles work, and sometimes they don't.....
Click to expand...

Good stuff in your reply. I think the only thing I would add is that........well, you know what? LOL............I think I'm done talking about this play.
 
Last comment on this play. How do you run that on 3rd and 1, then turn around and run that bubble screen to KMM on 3rd and 9?? The bubble screen that hasnt produced more than 2 yards for Iowa since 02.
 
Hawks19 said:
By that rationale we should throw the bomb on every single play of every game. You know, to be AGGRESSIVE.
Click to expand...
No, the rational is: there was more a chance to have the 3rd and 1 bomb succeed than, for example, 3rd and 10. How many times will Iowa, with its average-armed QB and average-speed receivers (except for the guy they tried to pass to on the 3rd and 1), have odds in their favor for a pass down the field?
 
Last edited:
Can we get a clarification on terms?

A bubble screen is generally a play where the receiver works from inside to the outside, "bubbling" back behind the LOS from his original alignment, and then trying to get outside as quickly as possible.

A tunnel screen (aka Jailbreak screen) is a play where an outside receiver works inward towards the mess...several of the interior lineman are to be set free so as to rush up the field so we can throw the ball behind them. The WR settles inside the "tunnel" (usually there is one guy designated to kick out the #2 defender while every else pins inside) and gets upfield between the hashes.

A "smoke" or "now" screen is one where the receiver doesn't really even move...maybe just switches his feet. QB doesn't even find the laces and he slings it out there. I remember at least one of these to KMM and another to Cotton (?) that was dangerously close (if not for a last second block by the other WR to that side) to being picked.
 
Last edited:
Love the call!! Would have been a dagger had it been executed. We'd all be talking about being 3-0 and how the next 2 games would be easy going against Mo state and and ISU. We'd have threads about going undefeated until the Ohio State game.

Love the game of football because 1 play can change things just like that but I wouldn't change that call.
 
hawkfan2679 said:
Can we get a clarification on terms?

A bubble screen is generally a play where the receiver works from inside to the outside, "bubbling" back behind the LOS from his original alignment, and then trying to get outside as quickly as possible.
Oregon Bubble Screens vs. Stanford - YouTube

A tunnel screen (aka Jailbreak screen) is a play where an outside receiver works inward towards the mess...several of the interior lineman are to be set free so as to rush up the field so we can throw the ball behind them. The WR settles inside the "tunnel" (usually there is one guy designated to kick out the #2 defender while every else pins inside) and gets upfield between the hashes.
WR Drills - Jailbreak Screen - YouTube

A "smoke" or "now" screen is one where the receiver doesn't really even move...maybe just switches his feet. QB doesn't even find the laces and he slings it out there. I remember at least one of these to KMM and another to Cotton (?) that was dangerously close (if not for a last second block by the other WR to that side) to being picked.
Quick Screen - YouTube
Click to expand...

Added videos...
 
thanks for those videos. I really grew weary of people calling things that they were not.

now I ask myself, "self?" "what was the real name of that screen play that Iowa scored on up in Ann Arbor to CJ Jones. Always called that a JailBreak.
 
hawkfan2679 said:
Can we get a clarification on terms?

A bubble screen is generally a play where the receiver works from inside to the outside, "bubbling" back behind the LOS from his original alignment, and then trying to get outside as quickly as possible.

A tunnel screen (aka Jailbreak screen) is a play where an outside receiver works inward towards the mess...several of the interior lineman are to be set free so as to rush up the field so we can throw the ball behind them. The WR settles inside the "tunnel" (usually there is one guy designated to kick out the #2 defender while every else pins inside) and gets upfield between the hashes.

A "smoke" or "now" screen is one where the receiver doesn't really even move...maybe just switches his feet. QB doesn't even find the laces and he slings it out there. I remember at least one of these to KMM and another to Cotton (?) that was dangerously close (if not for a last second block by the other WR to that side) to being picked.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the clarification. I always thought the jailbreak & bubble screen were the same thing.
 
NCHawker said:
thanks for those videos. I really grew weary of people calling things that they were not.

now I ask myself, "self?" "what was the real name of that screen play that Iowa scored on up in Ann Arbor to CJ Jones. Always called that a JailBreak.
Click to expand...

tubahawk said:
I appreciate the clarification. I always thought the jailbreak & bubble screen were the same thing.
Click to expand...

Just trying to keep everyone on the same page y'all!
 
The problem with that 3rd and 1 call is that Iowa could have gotten that look/coverage and run that same play anytime it wanted. It was the equivalent of taking a 25 foot jump shot with 20 seconds still on the shot clock. NIU would have given Iowa that same defensive look if it lined up in that formation on 1st and 10. They had 8 guys in the box the entire game. Iowa could have let the quarter run down, started the 4th quarter in that formation, ran the ball to get the first down, then hurried up on the ball and ran the play fake. NIU had no one that could even come close to keeping up with Powell. This wasn't a situation where Iowa was playing a loaded defense and it needed to take a risk in order to score - maybe in that circumstance I could see taking such a big risk on 3rd and 1.
 
HomerChampless said:
No, the rational is: there was more a chance to have the 3rd and 1 bomb succeed than, for example, 3rd and 10. How many times will Iowa, with its average-armed QB and average-speed receivers (except for the guy they tried to pass to on the 3rd and 1), have odds in their favor for a pass down the field?
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter if the odds are in their favor when Iowa's receivers and QB still suck. The strength of this team, as much as their is one, is the running game. Intentionally going away from your strengths in critical situations so that you can get cute and work on other stuff so that it may impact a game in Week 10 is STUPID.
 
They just need to call the plays that get lots of yards and not call the ones that don't work. What are they thinking?
 
NickM said:
The problem with that 3rd and 1 call is that Iowa could have gotten that look/coverage and run that same play anytime it wanted. It was the equivalent of taking a 25 foot jump shot with 20 seconds still on the shot clock. NIU would have given Iowa that same defensive look if it lined up in that formation on 1st and 10. They had 8 guys in the box the entire game. Iowa could have let the quarter run down, started the 4th quarter in that formation, ran the ball to get the first down, then hurried up on the ball and ran the play fake. NIU had no one that could even come close to keeping up with Powell. This wasn't a situation where Iowa was playing a loaded defense and it needed to take a risk in order to score - maybe in that circumstance I could see taking such a big risk on 3rd and 1.
Click to expand...

This is a solid point. I would say that getting*1 yard on 4th falls in the same category. Good post.
 
Hawks19 said:
It doesn't matter if the odds are in their favor when Iowa's receivers and QB still suck. The strength of this team, as much as their is one, is the running game. Intentionally going away from your strengths in critical situations so that you can get cute and work on other stuff so that it may impact a game in Week 10 is STUPID.
Click to expand...

This isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top