Definition of insanity

[1hawkifan]

On the game-winning touchdown pass from Alex Hornibrook to AJ Taylor, linebacker Nick Niemann was covering the receiver.

“We do that frequently. That’s part of our defense,” Kirk Ferentz said. “Yeah, the guy made a good throw and the receiver did a good job of getting open and it’s just part of what we do.”

Anyone know why Kirk believes in linebackers covering receivers?

 

[99topdawg]

I saw them doing the slant/bubble (and other combos) with the two stacked receivers on run plays with a CB and LB covering them, but the LB was splitting the difference. They didn't throw any passes out of it, but you knew it was coming. They did it and got a huge gain on their last drive. Also knew we went cover 0 on run plays and had a LB 1-on-1 with a receiver, usually Ferguson the TE. The 4 verts was going to kill us and they knew it. They saved it for when they needed it, looked off the safety, and threw at NN.

 

[HuckFinn]

On the game-winning touchdown pass from Alex Hornibrook to AJ Taylor, linebacker Nick Niemann was covering the receiver.

“We do that frequently. That’s part of our defense,” Kirk Ferentz said. “Yeah, the guy made a good throw and the receiver did a good job of getting open and it’s just part of what we do.”

Anyone know why Kirk believes in linebackers covering receivers?

Yup. I do.

Will you and TK stop preaching this sermon, please. LB's cover receivers in every single college game, as well as in the pros. Spread offenses and multiple receiver sets require this coverage assignment. Can you even count?In addition, As we try to create mismatches and isolate receivers on LB's (and safety's, for that matter), so do other teams. Why in the hell do you think Fant and Hockenson are so effective? If you don't understand this part of current football strategy, you are not worth listening to.

 

[tksirius]

Yup. I do.

Will you and TK stop preaching this sermon, please. LB's cover receivers in every single college game, as well as in the pros. Spread offenses and multiple receiver sets require this coverage assignment. Can you even count?In addition, As we try to create mismatches and isolate receivers on LB's (and safety's, for that matter), so do other teams. Why in the hell do you think Fant and Hockenson are so effective? If you don't understand this part of current football strategy, you are not worth listening to.

You need to decide on one username.

 

[1hawkifan]

Yup. I do.

Will you and TK stop preaching this sermon, please. LB's cover receivers in every single college game, as well as in the pros. Spread offenses and multiple receiver sets require this coverage assignment. Can you even count?In addition, As we try to create mismatches and isolate receivers on LB's (and safety's, for that matter), so do other teams. Why in the hell do you think Fant and Hockenson are so effective? If you don't understand this part of current football strategy, you are not worth listening to.

My issue is linebackers covering receivers at that point on the field and at that juncture of the game. AJ was a second away from sacking Hornibrook. I’ll take my chances running nickel or dime at that time during the game. They were in field goal range, don’t give up the game winning touchdown.

 

[dahlhawk]

Nick fell down or was helped I havent seen the replay. It happens. That running back demanded extra help that leaves mismatches at coverage.

 

[BVHawk95]

Nick fell down or was helped I havent seen the replay. It happens. That running back demanded extra help that leaves mismatches at coverage.

This. Nick was making those plays in games 1-3, and his brother made them for 3 years. He just happened to lose his footing on a play that cost us dearly.

 

[uihawk82]

Yup. I do.

Will you and TK stop preaching this sermon, please. LB's cover receivers in every single college game, as well as in the pros. Spread offenses and multiple receiver sets require this coverage assignment. Can you even count?In addition, As we try to create mismatches and isolate receivers on LB's (and safety's, for that matter), so do other teams. Why in the hell do you think Fant and Hockenson are so effective? If you don't understand this part of current football strategy, you are not worth listening to.

But maybe not a good time to do it at this time and juncture of the game.

Not greatest coaching there. as matchups were problematic. It wasnt NN on a TE he was on a really fast receiver.

1 minute to go, wisky has 22 yards or so to go, so take out a lbkr or two and put in your backup safeties for better pass coverage.

I dont think wisky was going to be able to run the ball 3 or 4 times and get a td with that little time left and one maybe two timeouts.

 

[pythagoras]

Anyone know why Kirk believes in linebackers covering receivers?

You do realize LBs cover wide outs right at all levels of the game. I honestly don't know if you do or don't with this comment.

 

[uihawk82]

I saw them doing the slant/bubble (and other combos) with the two stacked receivers on run plays with a CB and LB covering them, but the LB was splitting the difference. They didn't throw any passes out of it, but you knew it was coming. They did it and got a huge gain on their last drive. Also knew we went cover 0 on run plays and had a LB 1-on-1 with a receiver, usually Ferguson the TE. The 4 verts was going to kill us and they knew it. They saved it for when they needed it, looked off the safety, and threw at NN.

Exactly, this is scheming and this is what really good offensive coaches do.

It was right in front of us and wisky sent another receiver deep into the endzone to occupy Hooker. They negotiated the safety as they used to say and they went with their best matchup of many matchups.

I think with a minute left you need at least one extra Dback in there when they showed that package

OR Why didnt Iowa call timeout when they saw the mismatches.

Insanity is right

 

[AreWeThereYet]

My issue is linebackers covering receivers at that point on the field and at that juncture of the game. AJ was a second away from sacking Hornibrook. I’ll take my chances running nickel or dime at that time during the game. They were in field goal range, don’t give up the game winning touchdown.

My problem with running nickel or dime at a critical juncture is they don't do it often enough to be really good at it. They need to consistently use either a nickle or dime package enough to be reasonably proficient at it. My thought would be to use it situationally and to spell the linebacker at opportune points of the game. Do it often enough that you have it in your back pocket when you need it.

 

[Xerxes]

On the game-winning touchdown pass from Alex Hornibrook to AJ Taylor, linebacker Nick Niemann was covering the receiver.

“We do that frequently. That’s part of our defense,” Kirk Ferentz said. “Yeah, the guy made a good throw and the receiver did a good job of getting open and it’s just part of what we do.”

Anyone know why Kirk believes in linebackers covering receivers?

He's just not a fan of nickel defense. Particularly when he doesn't feel he can trust that 5th DB to replace a starting LB.

Many other college teams moved toward 5 DBs as their "base" D to combat spread offenses 10 years or so ago. I still remember it being a big deal during the Tebow/Young era when even great defenses just couldn't handle 4/5 WR sets.

Most NFL teams have adjusted to this. Basic 3-4-3 or 4-3-3 alignments are used now less than 50% of the time and 5 or 6 DBs have become the norm.

 

[homes]

This. Nick was making those plays in games 1-3, and his brother made them for 3 years. He just happened to lose his footing on a play that cost us dearly.

Man, loss of "footing" was costly to Iowa on Saturday.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

On the game-winning touchdown pass from Alex Hornibrook to AJ Taylor, linebacker Nick Niemann was covering the receiver.

“We do that frequently. That’s part of our defense,” Kirk Ferentz said. “Yeah, the guy made a good throw and the receiver did a good job of getting open and it’s just part of what we do.”

Anyone know why Kirk believes in linebackers covering receivers?

The definition of insanity saying you're referring to is "doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result". KFz is completely fine with the results...that's why he does the same thing.

 

[HuckFinn]

So, the argument is that Iowa should have employed a different defensive scheme on that particular play. I guess you could say that about 100 times a game during about any contest. News Flash: Other teams have good coaches, too. Sometimes, they are successful, just like Iowa was numerous times as their stats on O matched up with W's throughout the game. Maybe that is why football has always been referred to as a game of inches...

You need to decide on one username.

Just trying to spread the wealth, TK.

 

[dirtwrap]

You can’t, in hindsight, pick apart an alignment and criticize anyone for that. On that particular play, what happened was that NN fell down and Hornibrook made a good read and good throw. End of story. But at that particular spot in the game, Wisconsin had everything at their disposal. They could have run it. They could have ran a misdirection of some kind like a jet sweep or a screen and pulled the lineman to take out the extra safety, at which time we wish we had a linebacker in. Watch last years game and you will see how they executed there.

I feel we had our best players in the game and we rolled with that. If you want to pinpoint why we lost, besides turnovers changing the flow of the game, it put more mileage on our DLine. I know we are supposedly deep there, but we aren’t deep enough to give them so many more plays with the size they have on the line. So their 5-7 yard runs on first down were the killer in the end, and allowed them to do everything they wanted.

On the flip side, we did the same to them and were in great position to wear them down. But the turnovers, to me cost us atleast 21 points, 14 at the least, any of which would have put them where they didn’t want to be, and that was throwing. The story of the game is they executed and we didn’t. Can’t blame anyone for that.

 

[BVHawk95]

You can’t, in hindsight, pick apart an alignment and criticize anyone for that. On that particular play, what happened was that NN fell down and Hornibrook made a good read and good throw. End of story. But at that particular spot in the game, Wisconsin had everything at their disposal. They could have run it. They could have ran a misdirection of some kind like a jet sweep or a screen and pulled the lineman to take out the extra safety, at which time we wish we had a linebacker in. Watch last years game and you will see how they executed there.

I feel we had our best players in the game and we rolled with that. If you want to pinpoint why we lost, besides turnovers changing the flow of the game, it put more mileage on our DLine. I know we are supposedly deep there, but we aren’t deep enough to give them so many more plays with the size they have on the line. So their 5-7 yard runs on first down were the killer in the end, and allowed them to do everything they wanted.

On the flip side, we did the same to them and were in great position to wear them down. But the turnovers, to me cost us atleast 21 points, 14 at the least, any of which would have put them where they didn’t want to be, and that was throwing. The story of the game is they executed and we didn’t. Can’t blame anyone for that.

One thing I noticed is that Wisconsin ran what seemed like a ridiculous amount of 13 and 22 personnel sets. They were banking on needing to run the ball, and until late, we made them rely on that by limiting the pass, especially out of lighter personnel sets.

 

[HawkeyeDenis]

On the game-winning touchdown pass from Alex Hornibrook to AJ Taylor, linebacker Nick Niemann was covering the receiver.

“We do that frequently. That’s part of our defense,” Kirk Ferentz said. “Yeah, the guy made a good throw and the receiver did a good job of getting open and it’s just part of what we do.”

Anyone know why Kirk believes in linebackers covering receivers?

Line backers in todays game cover receivers. The days of the 250 pound middle line backer who stuffed runs up the middle are gone.

 

[smhawk]

Yup. I do.

Will you and TK stop preaching this sermon, please. LB's cover receivers in every single college game, as well as in the pros. Spread offenses and multiple receiver sets require this coverage assignment. Can you even count?In addition, As we try to create mismatches and isolate receivers on LB's (and safety's, for that matter), so do other teams. Why in the hell do you think Fant and Hockenson are so effective? If you don't understand this part of current football strategy, you are not worth listening to.

The problem isn't exactly solved just because it's a Nickle instead of base defense. Mismatches will still happen against bigger defenses, or simply not having enough depth at at CB/FS.

I know they ended up with over 400 yards, but to me, it seems crazy to shovel the blame on the defense in this game. It was the turnovers to me - and giving up good field position too often. Iowa had this game for a win if they don't fall apart on some key special team plays. Against a team they have been owned by in recent years...

 

[Motigerhawk]

Wait, wait , wait. Reading this thread, Im seeing that offensive play callers actually adapt and game plan to their opponents weaknesses?

You guys are making that stuff up.