First reaction

cibula11 said:
Kirk. That's who decides. MOST of playcalling is a part of the game plan. Iowa, to that point, had played VERY well on defense and didn't need to force anything. Those same 8 and 9 man fronts were giving up 10-15 yard runs as well. Why not run another minute off the clock instead of taking a chance on something bad happening.

Clearly, by me and other people having to explain this to you, you don't get it.
Click to expand...

1st down runs probably averaged around 4 yards for the game.

1st down passes averaged easily over 10 yards per pass.

We were playing the worst passing defense in the country and have a QB who has, essentially, only thrown 1 INT all season.

Clearly I'm the one who doesn't get it though. I guess we should just stick to the gameplan, regardless of what happens in the game. Good coaching staffs don't adjust to in game situations I guess.

Look, I'm very happy we got the win, but to pretend like we did a good job of putting that one away is delusional.

We have a fifth year SR QB and probably the best WR core in the history of our program. All I'm asking the coaching staff to do is trust our QB/WR's in a situation where we clearly have a schematic advantage.
 
Raziel said:
1st down runs probably averaged around 4 yards for the game.

1st down passes averaged easily over 10 yards per pass.

We were playing the worst passing defense in the country and have a QB who has, essentially, only thrown 1 INT all season.

Clearly I'm the one who doesn't get it though. I guess we should just stick to the gameplan, regardless of what happens in the game. Good coaching staffs don't adjust to in game situations I guess.

Look, I'm very happy we got the win, but to pretend like we did a good job of putting that one away is delusional.

We have a fifth year SR QB and probably the best WR core in the history of our program. All I'm asking the coaching staff to do is trust our QB/WR's in a situation where we clearly have a schematic advantage.
Click to expand...

Dude, just give it a rest. You are wrong. Go troll elsewhere.
 
CFHawk said:
I think Michigan is a better team with Forcier in the line-up, and Shoelace coming in to mix things up.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but can he play like he did for a whole game? The one pick was a terrible decision. The last one I disregard because at that point you have to make something happen but the first one was bad. I think Shoelace is the better option. I think that mostly because without Shaw 100% or any other feature back, the running game is limited with Tate in. I just think Denards ceiling is enormous though. He made the one bad decision. He's a sophomore, that happens. I don't know if this offense can be the same throughout a whole game with Tate as it could possibly be with Denard. Today certainly provides a great argument against my point though.

woodyk1 said:
Well, it will be interesting if there is a QB controversy now. Michigan has a bye week now, so there's 2 weeks for this to stew on the subject.
Click to expand...

There isn't one if Denard is healthy. In the postgame presser RR laid that idea to rest emphatically.
 
There isn't one if Denard is healthy. In the postgame presser RR laid that idea to rest emphatically.

I would have thought that was the case. But will the leash be shorter? Just curious.
 
You're a glass half empty type guy aren't ya Raziel??? I'm sorry but I agree with the rest of them. The sooner you realize the only thing Ferentz and KOK care about is W's and L's the better off you'll be. They aren't in a beauty pageant and they could care less about how it looks. It's the way they are. I know you're going to try to argue the fact that it could have been prettier or passing on first down could have helped Iowa put more pts on the board... it doesn't matter to them because they got the win. I think you would be a much more satisfied fan if you stop nitpicking everything. They were tryin to run the clock out. Could it have came back to bite them... sure it could have but history suggests there is a greater chance that won't happen and the clock will run out to end the ball game. Ferentz plays the percentages. Enjoy the win and relax. Have a beer or something.
 
hawkfarmer said:
Not a snow ball's chance in he!!. When Iowa did this at the end of the game Michigan was forced to throw. Iowa does what it does and it will work. Next up Wisconsin. Gonna need all the big guys up front to play well.
Click to expand...
I said NW, not Whisky & MSU. We have had trouble with NU & if they are going to dink dunk with the short stuff, drop more guys into coverage & get pressure with the 3. They can rotate guys in on DL.

Shake things up a bit...We were getting great pressure with 3 guys today, late in the game....

I just saw Spurrier help his team blow a game vs Kentucky...nice call late in the game 'ol ball coach!
 
woodyk1 said:
There isn't one if Denard is healthy. In the postgame presser RR laid that idea to rest emphatically.

I would have thought that was the case. But will the leash be shorter? Just curious.
Click to expand...

I think you could see Tate thrown in once in awhile, but Denard will be the guy. There is basically no running game without him. They haven't quite found their Steve Slayton yet.
 
There won't be a QB controversy for Michigan. You don't go from Heisman contender to backup for 1-2 games. Although I will say the leash on the QB got shorter as the one on RichRod did.
 
DP5555 said:
You're a glass half empty type guy aren't ya Raziel??? I'm sorry but I agree with the rest of them. The sooner you realize the only thing Ferentz and KOK care about is W's and L's the better off you'll be. They aren't in a beauty pageant and they could care less about how it looks. It's the way they are. I know you're going to try to argue the fact that it could have been prettier or passing on first down could have helped Iowa put more pts on the board... it doesn't matter to them because they got the win. I think you would be a much more satisfied fan if you stop nitpicking everything. They were tryin to run the clock out. Could it have came back to bite them... sure it could have but history suggests there is a greater chance that won't happen and the clock will run out to end the ball game. Ferentz plays the percentages. Enjoy the win and relax. Have a beer or something.
Click to expand...

I don't understand thoughts like this on a message board. What's the point of even talking about the game if we don't nitpick and discussing strengths and weaknesses. Otherwise the site would be one long thread that said "We Won!!!" and the everyone responding with people basically saying the same thing.

That's not very exciting.
 
Raziel said:
1st down runs probably averaged around 4 yards for the game.

1st down passes averaged easily over 10 yards per pass.

We were playing the worst passing defense in the country and have a QB who has, essentially, only thrown 1 INT all season.

Clearly I'm the one who doesn't get it though. I guess we should just stick to the gameplan, regardless of what happens in the game. Good coaching staffs don't adjust to in game situations I guess.

Look, I'm very happy we got the win, but to pretend like we did a good job of putting that one away is delusional.

We have a fifth year SR QB and probably the best WR core in the history of our program. All I'm asking the coaching staff to do is trust our QB/WR's in a situation where we clearly have a schematic advantage.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize we were like Oregon, and therefore have the ability to turn our nose up at 4 ypc on 1st down (I don't know if that was the average, but that's what you think it probably was.).

The close score in this one falls on the defense, not the playcalling.

You mentioned the QB change as one reason for the defensive lapse late in the game. I still don't get that.

What does Forcier entering the game mean for our defense?

1. It allows the defense to do what they usually do and really rush the passer, unlike when D-Rob is in and they have to contain (they pinned their ears back with Forcier in there, just like they should have)

2. Linebackers can focus more on pass coverage and flowing to the ball carrier rather than devoting special attention to the QB (which they did)

3. The secondary focuses on covering the receivers, just like when Robinson was in the game (They DIDN'T do that)

Seriously, the secondary's job doesn't change just because D-Rob gets hurt and Forcier comes in. The rest of the D did pretty well, and the secondary got beat.
 
tm3308 said:
I didn't realize we were like Oregon, and therefore have the ability to turn our nose up at 4 ypc on 1st down (I don't know if that was the average, but that's what you think it probably was.).

The close score in this one falls on the defense, not the playcalling.

You mentioned the QB change as one reason for the defensive lapse late in the game. I still don't get that.

What does Forcier entering the game mean for our defense?

1. It allows the defense to do what they usually do and really rush the passer, unlike when D-Rob is in and they have to contain (they pinned their ears back with Forcier in there, just like they should have)

2. Linebackers can focus more on pass coverage and flowing to the ball carrier rather than devoting special attention to the QB (which they did)

3. The secondary focuses on covering the receivers, just like when Robinson was in the game (They DIDN'T do that)

Seriously, the secondary's job doesn't change just because D-Rob gets hurt and Forcier comes in. The rest of the D did pretty well, and the secondary got beat.
Click to expand...

Interesting thought on Forcier coming in. I still don't completely buy it though as a switch like that was obviously a large change in mentality. I'm sure the CB's were told to keep an eye out for big runs from DR. Also, everybody calling out Hyde should look at the fact that the Safety screwed up on the TD on Hyde. He was supposed to cover the center short, not the deep out. (I don't have an excuse for him getting burned like 4 times by Stoner . . . I mean Stonum in the next drive)
 
HawkfaninWA said:
Interesting thought on Forcier coming in. I still don't completely buy it though as a switch like that was obviously a large change in mentality. I'm sure the CB's were told to keep an eye out for big runs from DR. Also, everybody calling out Hyde should look at the fact that the Safety screwed up on the TD on Hyde. He was supposed to cover the center short, not the deep out. (I don't have an excuse for him getting burned like 4 times by Stoner . . . I mean Stonum in the next drive)
Click to expand...

I'm not singling out Hyde by any means. Prater didn't look that good, particularly in the 4th quarter. Though on the replay, it did look like we were in cover 3 on the TD to Hemingway, where Hyde had the deep third.

And you're right, they were probably told to keep an eye out for the runs from D-Rob. But that only means that when he left the game, there was absolutely no reason to not stick to and focus completely on their coverage. I could have understood a lapse like that with Robinson in the game, but not Forcier.
 
Short Answer:
Games are pre-scripted in the first half to set up things in the second, then adjusted "in-game" for what the current situation calls for it, coupled with what was pre-planned all week.

Long Answer:
Every game has anywhere from 10-20 plays that are "scripted." Then, "in-game" adjustments are made to finish the first half. After more of what was "game-planned" has run its course you ALWAYS cater the remaining plays to what the game strategy was all prep week. If you are getting fair enough yards on running you still run. Remember the Orange Bowl last year when GaTech loaded the box? #3 busted one for 30+ yds. IF, and thats a big IF, but if A-Rob breaks that initial level of the defense he would still be running (even despite his lack of break away speed). We could argue each way, and some degree i found myself yelling for at least a screen, or a hitch route. But the one thing I am certain about is Iowa's confidence in performing the second half "In-game" adjustments to bring home the win. In those situations where 8-9 were in the box, stanzi could check out, but he also is no idiot- that being said, with the direction that the play is headed, stanzi also takes into consideration the pre-snap alignment of the Safties for the off-chance that he would audible. I like that we run, shows KOK and KF confidence and/or our belief in our O-Line's ability. Why not use an extra O-lineman like Koeppel as a tight end if they want to load the box, just like last year in the Orange Bowl.

PS, how many more wins/stats does Stanzi need to be on the distant radar of the Heisman? If never i can live with it, but if he does win out he should get a sniff.
 
Meh....scUM piling up the yards and losing is the same as getting a chick 90% naked then getting told no....it seems fun while it's going on, but in the end, while you may have come close, you just didn't score enough to win.
 
When you are up 21 points on the road, there are several reasons why you don't air the ball out and try and go vertical. The obvious one is that you have a huge lead on the road, with a great defense, and a QB who has a habit of throwing pick 6's, you don't give Michigan the opportunity to make a game changing play. Using up 3 minutes of clock and punting is a much better choice than giving UM a short field.
Now, in hindsight, with Forcier leading the offensive charge like that, it is easy to nit pick. But since KF and KOK did not have the benefit of precognition, they likely did not suspect that Michigan's offense would erupt under a back up Qb, and chose to play is safe. That was absoltuely the right call. I really don't understand how anyone can say other wise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top