General reaction to criticism

[JonDMiller]

We got burned on two deep throws (one of them was completed) also. You don't have to put together a drive to score. And PSU was very close a couple times.

I think the thing you are missing here is that THEY DIDN"T SCORE. If they had scored a touchdown, Iowa's philosophy probably would have shifted gears, to where they might have thrown on first down. But Penn State did not, and Iowa therefore felt NO NEED to increase the risks, stop the clock, etc, with it's offense.

 

[Hawke]

Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it couldn't have. And there was one return that they just needed another block or two to bust a big one.

It didn't happen and that falls into the category of reality.
If PSU had done anything that didn't happen last night then the Iowa coaching staff would've reacted to it. No need to make adjustments to figments of fans imaginations. That would be a recipe for disaster.

 

[tm3308]

We should worry about a stray asteroid slamming into Kinnick Stadium each week Iowa plays. Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it couldn't.

I'd be willing to bet that the odds of THAT happening are quite a bit longer than our coverage units giving up a big return at this point.

 

[JonDMiller]

I'd be willing to bet that the odds of THAT happening are quite a bit longer than our coverage units giving up a big return at this point.

Yes, but it COULD happen. You cannot deny it. It's possible, so we must account for it.

Sarcasm of course.

Iowa has run about 7345 plays since the start of the 2001 season. No joke. 65 plays a game on average times the total number of games played. They have probably had no more than ten combined KOR/PR for TD's and blocked punts.

So the chances of that happening last night are .001 percent. I realize that football is not a controlled environment, and the changes of personnel from year to year will cause statistical deviations. But I hope you can understand the main point I am getting at. Then again, add into the factors that both a KOR for 6 and a blocked punt have happened this year, one can also say the probabilities of those things happening again, unless the personnel is totally inept (which it is not) the odds are longer that they would happen again.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

Here is my disagreement with Kirk's philosophy. Pollsters are impressed with running up the score. We did move up three spots, but there are games were winning like we did does not move us up in the polls. In fact, sometimes we have dropped in the polls for winning ugly/boring.

If we ever have aspirations for playing in the NT game someday, we need our offense to step on our better competition's throats. It would be nice to be consistently dominant on both offense and defense against a good opponent when we have the talent we do on both sides of the ball.

We could have took more chances in the game to score points. If Kirk trusted his defense to stop PSU from scoring (like he was doing) he could have opened things up more without worrying about PSU scoring more points.

 

[tm3308]

I think the thing you are missing here is that THEY DIDN"T SCORE. If they had scored a touchdown, Iowa's philosophy probably would have shifted gears, to where they might have thrown on first down. But Penn State did not, and Iowa therefore felt NO NEED to increase the risks, stop the clock, etc, with it's offense.

Like I said, I just prefer that the Hawks proactively make that kind of play irrelevant by making it a 3-possession game. Even VERY safe dumps to Morse or Reisner on PA moves the ball. We can still play to punt I suppose, but it'd be great to maybe make a couple first downs before doing it. Our average starting field position in the 2nd half was right about at the 10-yard line. That doesn't sound like a typical Iowa half of football.

 

[JonDMiller]

If we ever have aspirations for playing in the NT game someday, we need our offense to step on our better competition's throats. .

It's more simple than that. Just go 12-0

 

[HaydenHawk56]

The only thing is Jon remember last year when we started out 9-0. Everyone in the media was down on Iowa for winning ugly. Not only do you have to go 12-0, but you have to win impressively as well. If your name is Alabama or USC, then it might be different, but if your name is Iowa or Boise St, you got to be impressive. It sucks, but that is reality. OSU 2002 might be the exception to the rule. But, then again, it is OSU.

 

[olivecourt]

The game was over in less than 3 hours last night (and I think that includes a longer-than-normal halftime for homecoming). Hard to imagine any other prime time nationally televised game wrapping up that quickly, which is a testament to the game plan Kirk executed last night. What's tougher than trying to come back from 14 down against Iowa's defense? How about trying to come back when the clock never stops? It was like a high school game when one teams up 50 and they go to the rolling clock.

The other complicating factor is that Iowa did have at least one aggressive drive, with that long pass play to DJK. They got to the Penn State 36 and passed on first down (incomplete to DJK). Then a reverse to Sandeman (how's that for being aggressive!) and an incompletion to A-Rob. Not exactly playing close to the vest there, were they? They did elect to punt on 3rd and 7, taking an intentional delay of game, and I think in other game situations they might have gone for it on 4th from that part of the field. But how can you argue with the result? Penn State gets the ball on their own 7, and their next three drives go for 4 yards, 4 yards, and an INT returned for a touchdown. Game over.

 

[ThunderHawk]

While I agree with the sentiments of 1 & 2, I really think it's a lot more simple than that. He felt his defense was good enough to keep a 14 point lead, and they wanted to run the ball on first down to keep the clock moving.

Yep.

Having said that...the quick out pass to McNutt was there for the taking all night if they had desired to exploit it.

And there were some good play calls that failed due to lack of execution which could have kept drives going.

But you're right, after that goal line stand I turned to my buddy and told him he could count the number of passes we'd throw the rest of the game on one hand.

 

[olivecourt]

The only thing is Jon remember last year when we started out 9-0. Everyone in the media was down on Iowa for winning ugly. Not only do you have to go 12-0, but you have to win impressively as well. If your name is Alabama or USC, then it might be different, but if your name is Iowa or Boise St, you got to be impressive. It sucks, but that is reality. OSU 2002 might be the exception to the rule. But, then again, it is OSU.

Iowa is the fourth highest ranked 1-loss team in the AP poll. The three teams ahead of us (Arkansas, Miami, and Florida) lost to either Alabama or Ohio State. Hard to say Iowa hasn't impressed the voters.

Some of you may have missed this, but Iowa won 24-3. That is not winning ugly by any stretch of the imagination.

If you wanted the margin to be bigger, then maybe you should criticize the o-line for not blocking better or Stanzi for not converting more of the passes he did attempt in the second half. Folks are acting like Ferentz told the offense not to score. We tried to run the ball, they stopped us, and we refused to let that change our game plan. On a day when Les Miles tried and failed to give away a game and Tim Brewster succeeded in doing just that, you'd think we could appreciate Ferentz AND O'Keefe for being pretty good at what they do.

 

[ThunderHawk]

The game was over in less than 3 hours last night (and I think that includes a longer-than-normal halftime for homecoming). Hard to imagine any other prime time nationally televised game wrapping up that quickly, which is a testament to the game plan Kirk executed last night. What's tougher than trying to come back from 14 down against Iowa's defense? How about trying to come back when the clock never stops? It was like a high school game when one teams up 50 and they go to the rolling clock.

The other complicating factor is that Iowa did have at least one aggressive drive, with that long pass play to DJK. They got to the Penn State 36 and passed on first down (incomplete to DJK). Then a reverse to Sandeman (how's that for being aggressive!) and an incompletion to A-Rob. Not exactly playing close to the vest there, were they? They did elect to punt on 3rd and 7, taking an intentional delay of game, and I think in other game situations they might have gone for it on 4th from that part of the field. But how can you argue with the result? Penn State gets the ball on their own 7, and their next three drives go for 4 yards, 4 yards, and an INT returned for a touchdown. Game over.

I've gotta say...running a reverse to Sandeman when he's the slowest receiver on the team, by a mile, might be one of the top ten boneheaded calls on the Ken O'Keefe wall of shame.

Really, Ken? Really? #22?

 

[Hawke]

Iowa is the fourth highest ranked 1-loss team in the AP poll. The three teams ahead of us (Arkansas, Miami, and Florida) lost to either Alabama or Ohio State. Hard to say Iowa hasn't impressed the voters.

Some of you may have missed this, but Iowa won 24-3. That is not winning ugly by any stretch of the imagination.

If you wanted the margin to be bigger, then maybe you should criticize the o-line for not blocking better or Stanzi for not converting more of the passes he did attempt in the second half. Folks are acting like Ferentz told the offense not to score. We tried to run the ball, they stopped us, and we refused to let that change our game plan. On a day when Les Miles tried and failed to give away a game and Tim Brewster succeeded in doing just that, you'd think we could appreciate Ferentz AND O'Keefe for being pretty good at what they do.

These type of threads serve as a reminder why Lute left for Arizona, where he eventually won a national championship.

 

[tm3308]

These type of threads serve as a reminder why Lute left for Arizona, where he eventually won a national championship.

Right, because we all should not have our own thoughts, we should blindly accept what is given to us? I'm entitled to an opinion, I'm entitled to speak it. I'm NOT calling for anyone's head in this, and I never have wanted KOK to get the axe. I just don't always agree with the way we do things. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing on some things.

 

[silvanthalas]

Seriously think about it, how many TD's of over 20 yards has Iowa given up in the last 3 years? I'd be willing to bet it's fewer than the number of pick 6's given up by Stanzi last year.

Arizona returned a kickoff for a TD. Does that count? They had another long pass play that set up their game-winning TD. PSU should've had a TD after that blown coverage last night.

But since you asked about actual touchdowns, here's last year: PSU had that 80-yard TD pass right off the bat on a blown coverage. MSU had the 30-yard TD pass on their last possession that gave them the lead. OSU last year had TD runs of 22 and 49 yards. That's 4. Hmm. Do you really want me to go over the 2007 and 2008 seasons, too?

In the end, my opinion is much the same as the OP: I look for a 3-score lead. Also, the play calling also doesn't have to be so simple as to look like it's JV football being played on the field.

We should worry about a stray asteroid slamming into Kinnick Stadium each week Iowa plays. Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it couldn't.

Wow, this was SUCH a helpful comment. You want people to make good arguments rather than resort to silliness, and the OP does that, yet you throw this out there anyways. Go figure.

Jon, you also seem to assume that Iowa can score whenever they want if necessary. Which is a bit ludicrous considering some of our games last year, like Arkansas St, where we got up early but then never truly got going again, making a game far closer than it needed to be.

I don't want Iowa to have to find a way to beat a team at the end of a game when they could've had the outcome decided in our favor in the first half, but simply chose not to at the time. Nobody should want that, and thus a 3-score lead, regardless of how the opponent is playing, is NOT asking too much.

If we ever have aspirations for playing in the NT game someday

You're not allowed to have such aspirations; you're supposed to be content with winning the Big Ten. Or so we've been told around here.

 

[SDK46]

Worked for me.

I had bet a parlay...#1--Iowa wins by more than 8.5, and, I took the under for combined score (40.5)...$100 turned into $360.

Thank you KOK.

 

[SDK46]

Seriously, Iowa went up big on BSU (21-0 at half) and chose to continue pouring it on in the 2nd half with the 1st team playing deep into the 3rd quarter.

3:36 remaining third quarter: Ricky Stanzi passed to Derrell Johnson-Koulianos down the middle for 45 yard gain (Michael Meyer made PAT) 0 - 35

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/boxscore?gid=201009250028


So, I don't understand why the difference between how we "acted" versus BSU and PSU.

Either shut it down everytime we're up and in no danger or losing, or, continue to run our usual offense in an actual game so we're that much more prepared when we play our next tough opponent.

Given how we're not supermen and all that, I'd prefer the latter over the former every time. Every time.

 

[Hawke]

Right, because we all should not have our own thoughts, we should blindly accept what is given to us? I'm entitled to an opinion, I'm entitled to speak it. I'm NOT calling for anyone's head in this, and I never have wanted KOK to get the axe. I just don't always agree with the way we do things. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing on some things.

Some people complain about everything. Hand them a million dollars and the whine about how it was handed to them. Lute spoke of the fishbowl effect when he left. This is what I was referring to.

I didn't imply that people aren't entitled to their opinions. Constructive criticism is fine. Airing opinions on things that didn't even happen, but rather speculating on things that could've happened is not constructive criticism.

In the final analysis the only opinion that matters is that of Kirk Ferentz. He feels he won by enough points. Disagree with that if you will but your opinion on the subject won't change the 24-3 that was on the scoreboard after 60 minutes of football were played.

 

[tm3308]

Some people complain about everything. Hand them a million dollars and the whine about how it was handed to them. Lute spoke of the fishbowl effect when he left. This is what I was referring to.

I didn't imply that people aren't entitled to their opinions. Constructive criticism is fine. Airing opinions on things that didn't even happen, but rather speculating on things that could've happened is not constructive criticism.

In the final analysis the only opinion that matters is that of Kirk Ferentz. He feels he won by enough points. Disagree with that if you will but your opinion on the subject won't change the 24-3 that was on the scoreboard after 60 minutes of football were played.

I just feel like sometime that is going to bite us in the a** is all. We're very rarely a team that can "turn it on" offensively at will. Defensively, sure, but not usually on offense.

And I never claimed that my opinion actually matters. But neither do those of anyone else here, so there's no room for anyone to judge one another because of how they feel about the balance between sitting on their hands and running up the score.

 

[Herkyalert]

I've been critical in the past of KOK and even Ferentz. However they have proven they know what they are doing and get it right more times than not. I think Iowa has tremendous confidence in their defense and that showed last night. Iowa was playing conservative after the 1st half because they felt Penn State couldn't move the ball. Had it not been for a blown coverage (Prater) and some sloppy tackles, Iowa totally dominates this game on defense. I don't have a problem with what the coaches did last night not just because they won, but because they really had Penn State on it's heels all night. Frankly I never felt Penn State was going to win once it got to 17-0. It got a tad interesting before half and a time or two after, but the Hawks shut the door.

Stanzi throwing a pick 6 would have made people livid. Playing it safe worked last night.