What the Sam Hill does blitzing have to do with the Stanford game???? The first play of the game they should've ran the raider pkg? They should have blitzed on the punt return? A blitz would have negated the fake fumble pass to King's man? Should we have blitzed 'ourselves' when CJ threw the pick 6??? You're pretty amazing....I can't believe your not involved in football in some way with your wisdom and insight.........Maybe you missed the little ole game in Pasadena last year
In case you missed it:
Downfall of the Bend but don't Break Defense??
- Thread starter MelroseHawkins
- Start date
No. Look at the 'aggressive' teams and conferences and the points they give up. Alabama is not an 'aggressive' defense. The top defenses in the country are not 'risk' taking defenses....Once again, I can't believe you waste your time on these message boards with your incredible knowledge of football and scheming defenses.... You need to get a hold of Phil Parker ASAP and straighten him out... here's his email address....
phil-parker@hawkeyefootball.com
It will depend on how teams try to spread you out, and the offensive packages they put on the field. In the NFL, the Refs hold the ball to allow the D's to sub package anytime the O sub packages. They don't do that in college, so you have to really be on top of their personnel and down and distance situations before you start bringing in Nickel and Dime packages, etc....And they need to hire PChawk to clarify this for them........
Yeah, they really need your advice, lol. They are one of the top 20-25 teams in the country in one of the smallest markets because of their coaching and ESPECIALLY their defense which is almost always in the top 20...http://ncaa-football-teams.pointaft...-football-programs-since-2000#4-Iowa-HawkeyesMaybe you missed the little ole game in Pasadena last year
In case you missed it:
So your agrument is if you're aggressive on defense you will suck? You better let all those aggressive coaches know. Alabama is a great example for you. It's not like they couldn't run any defense they wanted and still be great or anything.
I would tell you how our defense is always ranked so high but you would just respond with something that's all over twitter and pass it off as inside info.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
The NFL clearly has shifted to a WR and QB league. QB's routinely put up 300+ yard games now so the defense had to adjust. Chuck Long made a great point on BTN yesterday to watch how Lovey Smith adjusts to managing his defense in games. He pointed out that Lovey is used to the NFL huddling up giving him time to substitute D players to get into nickel or dime packages if needed. Often times in college there is no time to substitute and have to go with who is on the field. This will be interesting to watch when they play North Carolina tomorrow night.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
This thread was never intended to criticize the Iowa staff for running the BBDB defense, it was merely to point out what the downside of running this D scheme could be, to any team. Iowa typically has one of the better sound defenses in college football.
I think much of how aggressive a team is should depend a lot on who they are playing. I think at times, running the BBDB defense is a good idea, maybe to see if can force a turnover or control the clock and/or not allow O players to get behind you for a big play. But, you better have well conditioned players or great depth and have time to substitute them. I also think a team should be more aggressive playing against a lesser opponent or one where can identify a mismatch. Exploit that with aggressiveness and take control of the game. Iowa shouldn't have to play down to lesser teams levels, as they have done that often in the past. I think in the past, Iowa has had many close games that really didn't have to be that close. Put those teams away which will allow two things to happen: 1) Give your starters rest. 2) Allow underclassman to get playing time which will help with depth over time.
So, in the end, it's knowing when to be aggressive on offense or defense, and knowing when not to be I guess.
I think much of how aggressive a team is should depend a lot on who they are playing. I think at times, running the BBDB defense is a good idea, maybe to see if can force a turnover or control the clock and/or not allow O players to get behind you for a big play. But, you better have well conditioned players or great depth and have time to substitute them. I also think a team should be more aggressive playing against a lesser opponent or one where can identify a mismatch. Exploit that with aggressiveness and take control of the game. Iowa shouldn't have to play down to lesser teams levels, as they have done that often in the past. I think in the past, Iowa has had many close games that really didn't have to be that close. Put those teams away which will allow two things to happen: 1) Give your starters rest. 2) Allow underclassman to get playing time which will help with depth over time.
So, in the end, it's knowing when to be aggressive on offense or defense, and knowing when not to be I guess.
Didn't they change this rule recently so they do give the D time to substitute? Perhaps I am only thinking of people who have argued for it.
No they don't. Just the pros like I said.....
College football
The substitution rule: Offenses can substitute whenever they want. Defenses can substitute whenever they have time.
The tempo rule: Fire when ready.
Exploitable? An offense that sets quickly can lock in the defense's lineup, thereby killing the same matchups over and over again all the way down the field until someone suffers a suspicious, dramatic injury or remembers what a time out is for.
Other concerns: Some claim to have injury concerns with fast-snapping offenses. But any safety argument against hurry-up football is an argument against football, so.
Pro football
The substitution rule: Yes, there is one.
The tempo rule: An official stands over the ball like Colossus of Rhodes until the defense is good and ready. This is not done for safety reasons. Chip Kelly doesn't like it, as Mark Richt didn't like the SEC's similar rule when he arrived at Georgia after running the hurry-up at Florida State. And now look at Auburn! But, anyway, the NFL is slow.
Exploitable? Not especially.
Other concerns: Pro football is not extremely fun, but its players are well-compensated.
Except that it wasn't a down and distance that you would normally blitz on and they only sent one receiver out, so they would have never got to him anyway.
Did you contact Phil yet, like I told you to? He would love to hear from a 'special' person like yourself. You have a hard time of 'ever' figuring out what the 'argument' is, or if there even is one...........
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Why do you always go that route? Stay civil.
Because it's fun and easy to pick on PC.
And you can't 'reason' with the guy (I'm assuming it's a guy?). I should probably just ignore him......I'll think about it......Because it's fun and easy to pick on PC.
No YOU can't reason with me because you argue just to argue instead of picking your battles. Other people can reason with me just fine. In fact, CP87 just changed my mind in another thread. You just argued that aggressive defenses are bad and conservative defenses are good, then you complain that you can't reason with me? You should just stick to googling x and o terms and trying to sound smart. You actually had some people going for a bit.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
I couldn't follow what he had to say. Guess I can't read VISTA. That said, I'd rather go down swinging.
He sure has an interesting mix of sounding intelligent one post and sounding like he's never watched a Hawkeye game in his life in the next.
You and Hawkgold should watch a game with me sometime. I 'watch' a game entirely different than 'fans'...you would learn a lot. My friends and family get a kick out of how I point things out and then the announcers will repeat what I say in the next couple minutes or sometimes they don't 'see' it until the end of the quarter, half, or game!!! I'm serious....Every time someone questions me with some idiotic remark like "he's never watched a hawk game", I have to laugh, because I go back and break it down for them and they 'disappear', like with what I did with the Stanford game, etc.... You and gold really need to just drink beer and enjoy the games because you just embarrass yourselves on here with your 'opinions..........
So when you agree with my post, it's intelligent, but if you disagree, I've never watched a Hawk game in my life? Lol...You're a tool. I've watched more Hawkeye practices than you have total football games.....And I would bet I've watched twice as many Hawk games as you have........You're like Cool Hand Luke, just keep getting back up when your beat...with a whole lotta nothin. And we know how it turns out for Luke in the end
