Early grades for last nights beat down of Clones

L

longtimer

Well-Known Member
Kicking game. To my surprise was very good
A
QB. No turnovers or sacks. Big play down field to Diaz was the difference maker. Not mobile and no threat to run. Didn’t spread ball around as he concentrates on Diaz
B-
RBs. Pretty much no factor. No where to run
C-
WRs. Diaz. A. Difference maker. Rest incomplete
Offensive line. Couldn’t open any holes. Didn’t give up a sack. Disappointing. Talent or scheme?
D-
Defense as hole. Buffington is good DBs were lucky as QB missed some receivers and couple drops. DL meh. No sacks no turnovers
C

Coaching. Iowa State had a good game plan and really had them ready. Iowa same old stuff. Couldn’t run the ball at all. This was a team with a totally new group. We will face a lot better
D-

Overall C. Not a great showing but did show resilience after getting down by 10
 
longtimer said:
Kicking game. To my surprise was very good
A
QB. No turnovers or sacks. Big play down field to Diaz was the difference maker. Not mobile and no threat to run. Didn’t spread ball around as he concentrates on Diaz
B-
RBs. Pretty much no factor. No where to run
C-
WRs. Diaz. A. Difference maker. Rest incomplete
Offensive line. Couldn’t open any holes. Didn’t give up a sack. Disappointing. Talent or scheme?
D-
Defense as hole. Buffington is good DBs were lucky as QB missed some receivers and couple drops. DL meh. No sacks no turnovers
C

Coaching. Iowa State had a good game plan and really had them ready. Iowa same old stuff. Couldn’t run the ball at all. This was a team with a totally new group. We will face a lot better
D-

Overall C. Not a great showing but did show resilience after getting down by 10
Click to expand...
QB not mobile? He's no Grono but nobody is.
 
Hank completed 70% of his passes with no turnovers. I was fairly impressed by his poise.

The o line needs to improve a lot. If a team like Iowa cannot run at all they are going to have problems.

They are young on both sides of the ball. I have hope.
 
Westernhawk said:
Hank completed 70% of his passes with no turnovers. I was fairly impressed by his poise.

The o line needs to improve a lot. If a team like Iowa cannot run at all they are going to have problems.

They are young on both sides of the ball. I have hope.
Click to expand...

Agreed. No picks. No panic. A couple of instances of seeing the play wasn't there and going to his safety valve.

Most of his runs looked designed. Maybe one was an option or he just scrambled for a few yards.

Not one bad decision. But, he had great pass protection, so...we'll see what happens when he doesn't.

Needs to target those tight ends more. When he did that, they had bit more success running the ball.

He gets the B-, mainly because it wasn't a A and he didn't have a whole offense to work with. Not entirely his fault.

Pleased, but not overjoyed.
 
This was pretty informative. Ben Bruns, former center for ISU knows ball. After his homeirstic comments are out of the way he offers some good football insight.

 
Dadman said:
C+ based on final score and comments in game thread.

I get an A+ for taking my wife out to an expensive restaurant for anniversary even though it means missing the game. I guess.
Click to expand...
I went to my wife's 50th HS reunion. Didn't know anyone.

Until...

I started streaming the game on my phone.

I had plenty of new friends by the end of the evening. ;)
 
Not a beat down. Iowa survived. I am unsure of this Iowa team.

Not convinced that the OLine is as advertised ..at least not yet

Dline is still going to be the weakness
 
A lot of negativity about the game out there on this Board and the blogesphere. I am not in that camp.

A. We won.
B. Special teams was a huge question mark coming into the season, and STs is the reason we won that game.
C. We have a QB, such that he is. He still has a lot of deficiencies, but he played well enough in a rivalry game to win. He protected the ball, ran when he needed to, and delivered some nice throws. He is ahead of where Gronowski was a year ago at this time.
D. Yes, the D bent a good deal, but it did not break. 13 points and 250 yards is nothing to sneeze at, especially given that the offense was not doing a whole lot.
E. ISU is not as bad as we thought. That team will win some Big12 games.
 
I'm curious to see how this season unfolds for ISU. If they can stay healthy, I think they'll have a nice season. And I'm impressed by Jimmy Rogers. I think Nebraska or Wisconsin would be better off had they gone a route more like Rogers. (In fact, they may have that opportunity down the road).

My hunch is that the ISU game will continue to be a pain in the ass as long as he is in Ames. Which in my opinion is awesome. Too many of these great rivalries have been destroyed in recent years.
 
NorthKCHawk said:
A lot of negativity about the game out there on this Board and the blogesphere. I am not in that camp.

A. We won.
B. Special teams was a huge question mark coming into the season, and STs is the reason we won that game.
C. We have a QB, such that he is. He still has a lot of deficiencies, but he played well enough in a rivalry game to win. He protected the ball, ran when he needed to, and delivered some nice throws. He is ahead of where Gronowski was a year ago at this time.
D. Yes, the D bent a good deal, but it did not break. 13 points and 250 yards is nothing to sneeze at, especially given that the offense was not doing a whole lot.
E. ISU is not as bad as we thought. That team will win some Big12 games.
Click to expand...
ISU is not as bad as we thought. That team will win some Big12 games. I agree with this That guy looks like a good coach and will be competitive Give kudos where deserved
 
I'm not sure what to think, but we've played ISU in a ton of tight games. We've had a number of really solid teams that lost to them at home. They are relatively unknown with very little film and hard to game plan against. So my honest opinion is its one of those performances where it's definitely not our best game, but I don't think we were as bad as we thought we were either.

We came away with a win and the CyHawk. Our defense wasn't perfect, but did what our defense is known to do, and our passing game continued to show progress with Diaz again having another great performance. Sure there's work to do and I was hoping for a bigger win, but despite trailing the majority of the game it was one of those games where I never really thought we were going to lose and would find a way to win a close one which we did.

In a rivalry I have no problem winning the close one by a field goal. Sure blowouts are fun, but they don't sting nearly as much as the close ones do. So lets let it sting for the remainder of the year.
 
I am not so glib as to just saw that "a wins a win." That is plainly not the case. If this was the score for NIU or next week, I would be pretty panicked. This was a rivalry game against a team we had no tape on that is comprised of mostly Power 5 caliber players. We lost this game last year under fluky circumstances because our QB was just not ready to run the offense yet. We avoided that trap this year.

What keeps me on the positive side of this review is that we say progress in special teams, QB play, the passing game, and team D. There is still a lot of improvements to be made, but I like the trendline.

That said, I was disappointed in the offensive play calling, run blocking, and RB. Lester called a poor game and I bet he would be the first to admit that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page



Top