Game was lost when KF kicked the 20 yd FG

Eda said:
I'll go along with your thought for a sec. You go for it on 4th, and don't get it. ISU gets the ball back. Say they go down and scores (TD or FG-doesn't matter). Now you're down 2 scores.
Nah - take the points.
Click to expand...


You think ISU was going to Drive 98 yards? That was not happening. You go for it and if you don't get it you still have the field position battle to win and the Defense was playing hard. With the way the offenses were moving the ball, that game was on the line at that moment. Conservative Kirk played just like he should, it was the wrong play. Also keep in mind that ISU had the wind in the fourth and Iowa didn't. It was a no brainer to me that you can't settle for the take the points mentality.
 
So everyone saying N Illinois was maybe the best D we'll see all year want to retract. Is ISU now the best D we'll see? Maybe our offensive talent is garbage our new Ocoord is a joke and eveyone we play will just happen to play their best defensive game of the year. I'm losing faith in KF, this backward slide is now years in the making, how much farther will we fall before changes need to be made.
 
koralakers said:
Down 9-3 in 4th qtr, you need a TD to win, right? You drive all the way down the field to get inside 5. You kick a 20-yd FG, you STILL need a TD to win.
What's worse, if you kick a FG, you give the opposing team the ball back on the 25 yd line instead of the 2. Not too mention your offense had done NOTHING right all day-safe to assume that was going to continue.

That all being said, we all KNEW KF (easily being the most gutless coach in college or pro ball) was going to kick the FG.
Click to expand...


We kicked the FG with 14:06 left in the 4th... plenty of time to get AT LEAST 2 more possesions to march it down and get a tying FG and possibly a game winning FG. Or perhaps a TD.

And what you call gutless (seems overly harsh), others may call conservative.
 
NickM said:
The game was lost when we decided to run off tackle to short side of the field on first and second and goal, and then run a play action on 3rd down (as if anyone would be fooled by it). Iowa's goalline offense is the exact same offense it runs on 2nd and 8 from the 50.

Iowa could have gone 5 wide and ran a QB draw b/c ISU completely and utterly ignored the possibility of JVB running everytime we went to that formation.
Click to expand...

That would have been a friggen' awesome play call in that situation actually.
 
NickM said:
The game was lost when we decided to run off tackle to short side of the field on first and second and goal, and then run a play action on 3rd down (as if anyone would be fooled by it). Iowa's goalline offense is the exact same offense it runs on 2nd and 8 from the 50.

Iowa could have gone 5 wide and ran a QB draw b/c ISU completely and utterly ignored the possibility of JVB running everytime we went to that formation.
Click to expand...

Your assessment that the game was lost due to this series of play calls is EXACTLY CORRECT! Maybe your alternative works but not convinced with JVB's ability to execute the draw quickly enough. I'm thinking that's a situation where you either overload 3-wide to short side and hit KMM on the slant on the wide-side or simply use CJ as the target on the rollout rather than Weisman.

Either way, the thought process that went into the simplistic series was moronic ... you are on your 4th string RB; you have no power back; you go to Scherff's side (who's been struggling with technique through both games) yet you still choose the same-ol', same-ol' on 1st and 2nd. You have a 6'7" TE that can easily do a 2-step sit down or a jump ball but choose to go to your true soph FB on 3rd? Idiocy!

I thought KF was a "percentages" guy.
 
STILLBUSTER said:
NickM said:
The game was lost when we decided to run off tackle to short side of the field on first and second and goal, and then run a play action on 3rd down (as if anyone would be fooled by it). Iowa's goalline offense is the exact same offense it runs on 2nd and 8 from the 50. Iowa could have gone 5 wide and ran a QB draw b/c ISU completely and utterly ignored the possibility of JVB running everytime we went to that formation.
Click to expand...
Your assessment that the game was lost due to this series of play calls is EXACTLY CORRECT! Maybe your alternative works but not convinced with JVB's ability to execute the draw quickly enough. I'm thinking that's a situation where you either overload 3-wide to short side and hit KMM on the slant on the wide-side or simply use CJ as the target on the rollout rather than Weisman.Either way, the thought process that went into the simplistic series was moronic ... you are on your 4th string RB; you have no power back; you go to Scherff's side (who's been struggling with technique through both games) yet you still choose the same-ol', same-ol' on 1st and 2nd. You have a 6'7" TE that can easily do a 2-step sit down or a jump ball but choose to go to your true soph FB on 3rd? Idiocy!I thought KF was a="percentages=" guy.
Click to expand...

its exactly stupid. jvb delivered a td pass on that drive.
 
Taking the points was the correct call. We were on the 3, it wasn't like it was on the 1 yd line. Nobody in their right mind would say this was a bad call if Vandy doesn't throw a pick at the end of the game. We would have had a shot to win the game with a TD and tie it with a FG. Point is moot as Vandy threw the pick, but taking the FG was the right move.
 
The game wasn't lost on that FG, it was lost on bad execution, a dropped TD pass, wide open drops and a pick on late 4th qtr drives...
 
ChosenChildren said:
Really? It sends a message to your offense that you have no confidence in them. Ferentz plays not to lose.
Click to expand...


I'm pretty sure our offense has shown beyond a reasonable doubt in the first 7 prior quarters that at this point there is absolutely no reason why we should trust them.

I'd take the points like the others are saying. The way our defense played that second half there wasn't a player, fan, or coach in Kinnick that didn't think our offense would have another chance to punch one in for six.
 
Did anyone who's saying that taking the three was a mistake actually watch the defense the entire third quarter? There was no question they had ISU figured out. That said the way our offense moved the ball the entire game, what makes you think we get into the endzone. Vandy ended up completing under 50% of his attempts and we averaged well under 3ypc for the game, but yeah let's play those odds.
 
He threw a rocket to the fullback from 7 yards away while scrambling for his life after ISU completely snuffed out the play action.

DuffMan said:
STILLBUSTER said:
NickM said:
The game was lost when we decided to run off tackle to short side of the field on first and second and goal, and then run a play action on 3rd down (as if anyone would be fooled by it). Iowa's goalline offense is the exact same offense it runs on 2nd and 8 from the 50. Iowa could have gone 5 wide and ran a QB draw b/c ISU completely and utterly ignored the possibility of JVB running everytime we went to that formation.
Click to expand...
Your assessment that the game was lost due to this series of play calls is EXACTLY CORRECT! Maybe your alternative works but not convinced with JVB's ability to execute the draw quickly enough. I'm thinking that's a situation where you either overload 3-wide to short side and hit KMM on the slant on the wide-side or simply use CJ as the target on the rollout rather than Weisman.Either way, the thought process that went into the simplistic series was moronic ... you are on your 4th string RB; you have no power back; you go to Scherff's side (who's been struggling with technique through both games) yet you still choose the same-ol', same-ol' on 1st and 2nd. You have a 6'7" TE that can easily do a 2-step sit down or a jump ball but choose to go to your true soph FB on 3rd? Idiocy!I thought KF was a="percentages=" guy.
Click to expand...
its exactly stupid. jvb delivered a td pass on that drive.
Click to expand...
=
 
DuffMan said:
he hit a fb in the hands with a perfectly catchable ball for a game winning td. period.
Click to expand...

The fullback could very easily have caught the ball, but it was a busted play that ended up with JVB rolling one way and our run blocking fullback having to switch directions and run the other way b/c ISU completely snuffed the play out. Weisman managed to get a half a step away from the defender and probably should have caught the ball. Point being the play call itself and the series of playcalls during that sequence stunk. Iowa almost scored despite the play call.
 
That was a tough call.

One the one hand, there is plenty of time left, so take the points. On the other hand, if we go for it and don't make it, we've got them backed up on the goal line and the D is playing strong.

I was hoping we'd go for it, but I was watching the game at a bar hundreds of miles away and nobody is ****** at the guy in the bar if we try it and don't make it.

That said, to call taking the field goal "gutless" is a vast overstatement. KF's strategy actually played out just fine, but the team failed to execute on relatively simple plays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top