After watching the film. (Steve Deace observation)

[homerHAWKeye777]

Another thing that folks shouldn't ignore is that there's now much better tape out there now on Iowa's DL. Thus, it makes it that much easier for teams to figure out "what works" against Iowa's DL. Back in '09, we had 3 guys as first year starters at their respective spots on the DL ... so then opposing teams had less good info to go off of with respect to prepping for Iowa. That is no longer the case.

Of course, as I said before, the '09 Iowa DL had the added benefit of having some all-time greats in coverage last year ... and that helped us to tighten up our coverage more ... which then put a little less pressure on our DL.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

If that is the thought process, and if people find the micro hard to endure, take solace in the repeated macro results...and wait until the game ends. It's worked far more often than it has not. Since 2002 through 2009, Iowa has the 15th best winning percentage in all of FBS, and 12th if you count just the BCS conference schools. Scoreboard.

Iowa does change its scheme a bit against teams that get rid of it quick...that's when they use the 3-4 or have gone nickel through the years, though they don't do it much. This year, they are down on the number of healthy and capable backers.

You could not be more correct. Iowa under KF plays 'high %' football. With percentages that does not always equal 100% but it's in our favor over the long haul.

The interesting tidbit that the fan base should recall is what happened in the late 3rd/early 4th quarter that put Michigan right back in the game after trailing 35-14? Hyde made a mistake and left his deep zone. Bingo 50+ yd TD pass with little time coming off the clock. Then another long 40-50 yd pass on Prater's side a possession later. The lone effect of 2 quick score TD's turned that into a ball game despite our domination on the scoreboard up to that point. That sequence should demonstrate the effect of giving up big plays in a game.

 

[iowahawkeyes89]

Iowa's refusal to adjust for teams that get rid of the ball quickly is why I wont be surprised if we lose to NW Saturday.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

Iowa's refusal to adjust for teams that get rid of the ball quickly is why I wont be surprised if we lose to NW Saturday.

What adjustments do you see?

What if we make those adjustments, generate more pressure and get more sacks but give up 3-5 big plays that directly score or lead to 3-4 TD's ? Does the offense get us 4 TD's + to offset that ?

 

[SeattleHawkeye]

You could not be more correct. Iowa under KF plays 'high %' football. With percentages that does not always equal 100% but it's in our favor over the long haul.

The interesting tidbit that the fan base should recall is what happened in the late 3rd/early 4th quarter that put Michigan right back in the game after trailing 35-14? Hyde made a mistake and left his deep zone. Bingo 50+ yd TD pass with little time coming off the clock. Then another long 40-50 yd pass on Prater's side a possession later. The lone effect of 2 quick score TD's turned that into a ball game despite our domination on the scoreboard up to that point. That sequence should demonstrate the effect of giving up big plays in a game.

You do understand the 2 plays you're referencing IA was actually in a more conservative defense than what they normally run, right? Both those plays you're referencing IA was in cover 3, whereas they normally play cover 2. If you want to support Jon, cite an example of IA blitzing and getting beat, or the back 7 gambling or playing man and getting beat - not playing an even more conservative defense than what they normally do and still getting beat.

And Homer, great point. More tape to study definitely allows for better gameplanning.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

You do understand the 2 plays you're referencing IA was actually in a more conservative defense than what they normally run, right? Both those plays you're referencing IA was in cover 3, whereas they normally play cover 2. If you want to support Jon, cite an example of IA blitzing and getting beat, or the back 7 gambling or playing man and getting beat - not playing an even more conservative defense than what they normally do and still getting beat.

And Homer, great point. More tape to study definitely allows for better gameplanning.

It was a cover three but where did Hyde end up? The point was not debating the conservativeness of the defensive alignment. The point was playing %'s by not GIVING UP BIG PLAYS. BIG PLAYS GET YOU BEAT.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

You do understand the 2 plays you're referencing IA was actually in a more conservative defense than what they normally run, right? Both those plays you're referencing IA was in cover 3, whereas they normally play cover 2. If you want to support Jon, cite an example of IA blitzing and getting beat, or the back 7 gambling or playing man and getting beat - not playing an even more conservative defense than what they normally do and still getting beat.

I don't think that SpecialK's point was that bad. It still supported Jon's contention ... because the very few big plays that we have given up have largely been the result of execution errors by less experienced guys in coverage.

Heck, one of the few other areas we've gotten burned on is that opposing Os had really been picking on our LBs in coverage ... even more than usual. And, a big reason why we were more exploitable is because of all our injuries at LB.

As for iowahawkeyes89 complaining about adjustments ... I think that the adjustments made in coverage against MSU counter his point completely. We tweaked our underneath coverage there.

I think that Iowa was willing to give up what they were against Indiana because it was still a defensive gameplan that SHOULD have easily still led to an Iowa victory. And, quite frankly, had Iowa's execution in the redzone been better ... the defensive gameplan would have more than taken care of business. Given how effective we had been previously in the redzone ... even against better Ds ... who would have guessed that we would have gotten within the opponents 30 yard line 5 times in the game ... and yet settled for 12 points!

Needless to say, the stats on O against IU were definitely outliers.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Iowa's refusal to adjust for teams that get rid of the ball quickly is why I wont be surprised if we lose to NW Saturday.

We've flashed adjustments against quick release Os plenty of times. However, you also have to have the personnel and packages to pull it off.

Against Indiana's WRs ... I don't think that playing press coverage against them would have been the best idea.

In contrast, I think that Iowa's DBs match up better against Northwestern's WRs.

Of course, Iowa will have to worry about Persa's mobility too. However, if he decides to remain upright in the open field ... the Iowa D will make sure to get some good honest hits on him.

 

[silveradohawk]

The defense was not the problem, they did their job. The offense did their job to a degree. The only one that did not do their job was KOK. I mean Ricky had almost 300 yards passing, yet he may have had a slightly off day. Coker ran for 130 yds, he carried his load and deserved to get the call in the red zone. KOK screwed the pooch. Indiana showed they could not stop Coker and yet KOK ran pass plays once they got inside the red zone. Why go away from what is working to something that obviously was not after the first failed drive? KOK is an enigma and will keep Iowa from ever winning a NC or Big Ten Championship. Sometimes the best defense is a great offense. A great offense isn't affraid to put up big numbers in a game they should have one easily. The defense should not have to bail out the offense week in and week out. It is really disppointing because this was a complete team that should be in the mix for the NC hunt, not sitting here with two losses. These kids have worked hard, we've seen what they can do against a top 5 team, total domination. It was clear KOK did not have his head in the game considering the two delay of game penalties and having to take a time out back to back to back in sequence. We deserve more from KOK.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

The defense was not the problem, they did their job. The offense did their job to a degree. The only one that did not do their job was KOK. I mean Ricky had almost 300 yards passing, yet he may have had a slightly off day. Coker ran for 130 yds, he carried his load and deserved to get the call in the red zone. KOK screwed the pooch. Indiana showed they could not stop Coker and yet KOK ran pass plays once they got inside the red zone. Why go away from what is working to something that obviously was not after the first failed drive? KOK is an enigma and will keep Iowa from ever winning a NC or Big Ten Championship. Sometimes the best defense is a great offense. A great offense isn't affraid to put up big numbers in a game they should have one easily. The defense should not have to bail out the offense week in and week out. It is really disppointing because this was a complete team that should be in the mix for the NC hunt, not sitting here with two losses. These kids have worked hard, we've seen what they can do against a top 5 team, total domination. It was clear KOK did not have his head in the game considering the two delay of game penalties and having to take a time out back to back to back in sequence. We deserve more from KOK.

zzzzzzz ....

Wake me up when you realize that our red-zone woes against IU had A LOT more to do with execution issues. KOK can be scolded for a delay of game call ... but that was pretty much it.

And, FYI, while execution issues had plenty to do with it .... Indiana's D deserves plenty of credit too. Of course, I suppose that it isn't necessarily "cool" for fans to give credit to the opponent ....

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

FWIW ... look at the strides that the Indiana D had been making through the past several weeks. They held an improving Illinois O to under 300 yards, they held Northwestern to under their average (and to only 20 points), and they did a great job against Iowa in the redzone.

My point being ... as uncool as it may sound ... IU's D was playing good ball. Those of us who are good football fans shouldn't be "stealing" that accomplishment away from the IU D.

 

[SeattleHawkeye]

The point was playing %'s by not GIVING UP BIG PLAYS. BIG PLAYS GET YOU BEAT.

Homer, you really think the above statement added anything to this discussion? B/c that was SpecialK's point. (Now proceed to spin how SpecialK's point supported Jon's, when it really just regurgitated it and added nothing that people didn't already know. I understand you won't want to admit this, but anyone else reading this thread will recognize that.)

As for IA's D, everyone knows what IA's goal on is - keep everything in front of you while playing very sound fundamentally, thus limiting big plays. The question is how to go about doing so, and the discussion seems relatively simple - some prefer the vanilla bend but don't break, which has led to very solid success b/c teams often just can't have 10-15 play drives...but also has its drawbacks, namely getting dinked and dunked. Some would like to see a more aggressive defense, which leads to more risk/reward situations. And you're correct, the current personnel situation definitely can impact defensive packages. I'd like it if they moved the CB's up and shortened the cushions - not necessarily bump and run, but more how Spievey played, more of a 3-5 yard cushion instead of a 5-8 yard cushion. And if we're not getting pressure w/ 3, don't only rush 3. Beyond those, I have very limited complaints, in particular when these 2 things have were done last year.

 

[kuhntz]

Everyone knows we play to eliminate the big play, which I have no problem with. Would I like to see tighter coverage at times to at least deter the 10 yard out or hook? Yes.

However, the real issue that should be talked about is the final play of the game. How did the Indiana receiver get wide open on a 25 yard pattern to win the game? I thought we played to take away this exact type of route...and on 4th and 10 from our 19 we allow a guy to be wide open...no one within 5 yards....in the middle of the endzone? That is where the breakdown occurred and with 7 years starting experience from our safeties, I can't believe it happened...yet it did.

 

[SeattleHawkeye]

Everyone knows we play to eliminate the big play, which I have no problem with. Would I like to see tighter coverage at times to at least deter the 10 yard out or hook? Yes.

However, the real issue that should be talked about is the final play of the game. How did the Indiana receiver get wide open on a 25 yard pattern to win the game? I thought we played to take away this exact type of route...and on 4th and 10 from our 19 we allow a guy to be wide open...no one within 5 yards....in the middle of the endzone? That is where the breakdown occurred and with 7 years starting experience from our safeties, I can't believe it happened...yet it did.

This is a question I have, also. I haven't rewatched the play, but I think we were in cover 2, not 3. If we're in cover 3 Greenwood is down the middle, whereas b/c I think we were in 2, IU ran a great route combo - 1 WR deep on Prater's side up the sideline and another down the middle. Greenwood has to split them and try to read Chappell's eyes and jump whichever the ball is thrown to. This is attacking a cover 2 101, and Chappell makes a fantastic throw under pressure. I think he also looked Greenwood over to Prater's side, which is why Greenwood didn't get to Belcher in time. I'm less concerned about Greenwood making this play, and more concerned about the defensive call and IU knowing exactly how to beat the cover 2 successfully (or it should've been successfully).

 

[JHHawk]

Against Persa, Iowa needs to stay in their lanes, keep him in the pocket and make him throw over our outstretched hands. He is short,and in the pocket is his worst place to make a play. On the run, he is a deadly passer and a great runner. Do not let him escape the pocket...forget about sacks,just keep him in the box.

One thing about the Big Ten this year...great QB's. 5-6 are in the top 15 in passing.
Persa and Pryor are next,both highly rated statistically. Chappelle,Tolzien,DRob,Forcier,Cousins, and out of conference Foles,all very good passers. Better than last years crop. Iowa's defense is doing ok considering the loss of Spievey,Edds and Angerer.

 

[CAARHawk]

This is a question I have, also. I haven't rewatched the play, but I think we were in cover 2, not 3. If we're in cover 3 Greenwood is down the middle, whereas b/c I think we were in 2, IU ran a great route combo - 1 WR deep on Prater's side up the sideline and another down the middle. Greenwood has to split them and try to read Chappell's eyes and jump whichever the ball is thrown to. This is attacking a cover 2 101, and Chappell makes a fantastic throw under pressure. I think he also looked Greenwood over to Prater's side, which is why Greenwood didn't get to Belcher in time. I'm less concerned about Greenwood making this play, and more concerned about the defensive call and IU knowing exactly how to beat the cover 2 successfully (or it should've been successfully).

Good points. This is the difference with not having Norm. Iowa keeps playing base situations on key plays and other teams know what is coming and how it can be beat. On that last play it should have been obvious where they were going. That guy should not have been left uncovered. Norm has had a tendency to know this and has adjusted the defense accordingly. But with too many cooks in the kitchen you end up with the most bland and predictable fare.

 

[DTF]

You know what really grinds my gears? Is saturday, when IU would have short yardages to go (say 1-4ish yards) and our CB's were giving them easily 3-5 yards BEYOND the first down marker and they would pick up EASY first downs. I understand it the rest of the time, but if it's 3rd down shouldn't they be playing just a LITTLE closer? And that's what grinded my gears on Saturday

 

[twinhawkfans]

Yeah, I disagree with him in some ways and did so on the phone with him around midnight Saturday. When you know going in that a team has a quick release offense, and your head coach tells the media on Tuesday and then again on pregame radio show not to expect many sacks, you shouldnt be surprised. they got some pressure on him at times real quick, mostly from the inside. They also did some inside twists to confuse the center a bit, as Clauss pointed out.

The guys were doing their work. Clayborn was getting blocked by the T, chipped by the TE at times, and they were sending a third blocker at him with the RB who was cutting at his legs.

The guy ain't freaking superman.

Something that keeps getting lost is that Chappell had his second worst passing day of the season from a rating standpoint, with the game AT ohio state being the worst..that Iowa held him nearly 100 yards below his average...that they got their hands on six passes..that they held Indiana under their rushing yards per game average of 97...that they held Indiana to one touchdown and 18 points below their season scoring average.

Somehow, and I don't really know how, all of that is getting lost. To focus on the last play of the game where someone got open and dropped a ball is hardly an accurate way to analyze a 60 minute performance. To not factor in a team's offensive philosophy and how quickly they get rid of the ball and criticize the defense for not getting a consistent pass rush is hardly an accurate way to break down this game.

You can't teach them if they don't want to learn, Jon. Keep up the good work. Great, ACCURATE post.

 

[nationalchamps]

I re watched the game yesterday morning, and I wasn't going to post this, but I just heard Deace on 1460 observe basically the same thing as I did.

Clayborn, Binns, Klug, Ballard and Daniel were almost non existent that last drive and most of the game.

Daniels > Klug

If were going to go 3-0 this last stretch were going to need AC to play like an All American.

First time all year I've been disappointed in the DL.

And Jon, before you say it, I realize that Indiana get rid of the ball quickly.

You're going to be disappointed again this weekend then because NW does the same thing.

 

[Hawkize1]

Iowa coaches need to look at the Penn State -Northwestern game, especially the second half.
Penn State gave up 21 in the first half, made adjustments then allowed 0 points in the second half.