“Obviously, I was banking on us being able to keep them out of the end zoneâ€￾

bws258

bws258

Well-Known Member
The 13th-year Iowa coach did express some regret over his other criticized call. With a fourth-and-one at Iowa State’s 16-yard line in the third overtime, Ferentz elected for Mike Meyer to kick a field goal. The Cyclones had scored touchdowns on their first two overtime possessions, as well as on two of their final three drives in regulation.

They did it again after Meyer’s field goal to claim the 44-41 victory.

“Obviously, I was banking on us being able to keep them out of the end zone,â€￾ Ferentz said.

:eek:
 
Another factor in not stopping an offensive scheme like the spread is that when you rarely bring extra rushers, they will often be 3rd and 4th and manageable. That offense is good at getting 3-4 yards at a time.
 
troy said:
Another factor in not stopping an offensive scheme like the spread is that when you rarely bring extra rushers, they will often be 3rd and 4th and manageable. That offense is good at getting 3-4 yards at a time.
Click to expand...
Iowa brought extra rushers A LOT in the second half, and in OT. Iowa State saw that, and that is why they checked to the option on the right side to win the game.
 
The way ISU had moved the ball against you in the 4th qtr and OT, you should assume that they're going to score a touchdown and be pleasantly surprised if they don't. Not to mention that the two ISU kickers had both missed fieldgoals and it was far froma lock that they'd make one even if you did manage to get stuffed.
 
bwsmoney said:
“Obviously, I was banking on us being able to keep them out of the end zone,â€￾ Ferentz said.

:eek:
Click to expand...

The sad part? He says he'd do things differently in hindsight. But in reality he'd just do the same things all over again.

How do we know this? Look at all of last season, because we saw the same results game after game. :(
 
silvanthalas said:
The sad part? He says he'd do things differently in hindsight. But in reality he'd just do the same things all over again.

How do we know this? Look at all of last season, because we saw the same results game after game. :(
Click to expand...


Are you referring to specific games situations from last year where we had 4th and 1 and did not go?

I honestly do not remember that many instances where KF has not gambled when I wanted him to do it. He is pretty by the book,clearly,and if we are in the no-mans land area of the field he usually goes for it.

I really have 3 complaints...OSU in 2009,not going in the last drive in regulation, and the same situation vs ISU last week in regulation,and the 4th and 1 vs ISU. While KF has been conservative,those are the ones that really cost us a possible win. Last year I do not blame his offensive decision-making for the Az,Wis,NW,OSU, or Minny. He did not have situations in those games where gambling on offense would have made the difference.

I just want to make sure that fans do not blow this out of proportion and start blaming KF's conservative offensive play decision-making for every single loss over the last 12 years.

He makes a lot of good decisions also,gang.
 
troy said:
Another factor in not stopping an offensive scheme like the spread is that when you rarely bring extra rushers, they will often be 3rd and 4th and manageable. That offense is good at getting 3-4 yards at a time.
Click to expand...

Good point. It seems it's much more difficult to get negative yardage plays against the spread, which our defense feasted on in some of our better years. Also, it seems like in year's past when teams would get 3rd and 3 or less even the spread teams would line up 2 tight ends and try to run for the first down. There was one year I recall my friends and I always joking, "we have them right where we want them, 3rd and 2", because we can stuff 3rd and two. Now teams just keep spreading the field out on these short yardage situations and are easily able to convert.
 
JHHawk said:
Are you referring to specific games situations from last year where we had 4th and 1 and did not go?
Click to expand...

I'm referring to the general coaching philosophy, but the almost utter lack of risk-taking is certainly a part of it.

Game after game last season was kept close by never letting the offense loose and simply expecting the defense to win the game. And yet, game after game was lost - more galling in that we had late leads - because the defense simply couldn't do it. Another game, Indiana, was won on luck alone.

Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, Ferentz refused to change what he was doing. Which is why his falling back on hindsight is complete BS.
 
He is not being paid $3.8 million to think about his decisions 2 days after the game. He is being paid to coach the game to win. His ONLY decisions are ALWAYS play it safe. Does anyone really think he would ever do anything different. In hindsight, he might do things differently but during Iowa's games he NEVER does anything differently so to say something like that is just KF trying to appease the media and fans. He has NO intention of EVER doing anything different, never has never will. These hindsight answers are just to appease the media and fans into THINKING that he might do things differently in the future. We all know that won't happen...even HE knows that won't happen. Iowa plays one way and one way only, even if it means losing. Anything else would be too risky for this staff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top