Attacking the mesh point or sitting back on defense

[uihawk82]

I have always thought one downfall of Norm and Phil Parker's defense is giving up big third and fourth downs many times in a game. When you sit back in that cover two style zone coverage you give up big yards but sometimes can keep down the opponents score. Keeping the score low is the main objective of the defense but also you need to get off the field and get better field position.

But I saw PParker also attack the mesh point where McSorley and Barkley do their zone read type handoff or fake and this caused some problems for PSU. The DEnds almost forces some big losses and turnovers against the run and did make them have some small losses and gains, some of their worst plays by attacking the mesh point.

I saw our DEnds struggle when they just tried to read the play, stay at the line and yet they would give up the edge or get faked out.

And why oh why our DEnds on the backside would try to chase down Barkley instead of playing their assignment to contain McSorley was beyond me. All the hawks on defense played their hearts out but I thought sitting back and reading and not containing the edge hurt them on many occasions.

Would you like to see a more attacking, penetrating defense over most plays or do you like the fact we play base defense/bend but dont break? And why?

 

[DDThompson]

I don't mind the cover 2 except on 3rd and long. That's when a change is needed. Some more blitzes or rush 3/drop 8. The 4-3 allows too much success on crossing patterns. LBs and S can't keep up.

Buuut, That being said, Iowa is doing things differently on defense. Seems like the CBS are tighter. Seems like there is more blitzing. It's not soft all the time.

 

[uihawk82]

I don't mind the cover 2 except on 3rd and long. That's when a change is needed. Some more blitzes or rush 3/drop 8. The 4-3 allows too much success on crossing patterns. LBs and S can't keep up.

Buuut, That being said, Iowa is doing things differently on defense. Seems like the CBS are tighter. Seems like there is more blitzing. It's not soft all the time.

Yes, there are some blitzes especially late in the game. I was hoping we would try to blitz straight up the middle last nite on the final play and make Mcsorley get out of synch.

Maybe I would like to see some different schemes like a raider with faster pass rushers coming from various angles.

I saw one zone blitz where one of the nelson's helped in a pass breakup about 5 yards downfield.

AJ Eppy made a couple of great twist/spin moves to get pressure on

 

[Bigtenchamp]

The hawks defensive strategy at the end of the game is that you will see 95% of the time in football...

Overall the defensive strategy was the the reason we even had a chance to be even in the game.


The offense the first half was the reason we lost the game...

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

I don't mind the cover 2 except on 3rd and long. That's when a change is needed. Some more blitzes or rush 3/drop 8. The 4-3 allows too much success on crossing patterns. LBs and S can't keep up.

Buuut, That being said, Iowa is doing things differently on defense. Seems like the CBS are tighter. Seems like there is more blitzing. It's not soft all the time.

I think, maybe, we have the corners on both sides to cover tight. The line stunts later in the game were effective when they were in longer yardage passing downs, they were "wider" than in the past, as we have the dline speed to do it.

If we find some LB depth, we may see some pretty good defense (scoring defense, not yardage defense) in the next couple years. LB is a question next year, would like to see what the 2's have. Losing 3 extremely seasoned Lbs. One being an AS.

 

[DDThompson]

The hawks defensive strategy at the end of the game is that you will see 95% of the time in football...

Overall the defensive strategy was the the reason we even had a chance to be even in the game.


The offense the first half was the reason we lost the game...

This exactly.