theboat
Well-Known Member
Actually I predicted 8-4, but it is nice to see we have the talent for 9 or 10 and the coaching for 7 or 8.
Anyone that didn't think GD looked clueless going into halftime has no clue what they are talking about.
Greg Davis can't be playing with a full deck.
- Thread starter theboat
- Start date
Actually I predicted 8-4, but it is nice to see we have the talent for 9 or 10 and the coaching for 7 or 8.
Anyone that didn't think GD looked clueless going into halftime has no clue what they are talking about.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
I disagree, and I just don't see what you are seeing. We lost to one team that we could say we have more talent than (NIU). Being the first game of the year, and Rudock first start, we lost because of a mistake or 2.
We have beat every other team we have more talent than. If you think we have more talent than Wisky, Mich. St. or Ohio St., I'm not sure what to tell ya.
Plus a HUGE part of coaching is DEVELOPING players. Look at the progress that was made with the DL. Look at how much better the QB, and RB positions are. The TE are better, the OL is better, the LB are better. I mean that is coaching and development, and this staff excels at it.
While I am with you on some head scratching stuff with our coaches, lets not pretend that this staff isn't excellent and coaching up players and player development.
I hear ya on the bolded part. I thought the Bullock run at the end of the 1st half was very questionable. Regarding the bootleg, I'm not sure it's even sound as a play. The QB has his back to the area the blitz is likely to come from. It might be too high risk for medium/low reward. That would have been a TD for the defense from any field position. It's the same play Stanzi got hurt on and GD wasn't even around then.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
I'm GD's most outspoken critic. That said, everyone bashing GD for yesterday's game is an idiot. And anyone sitting on the twitter during the game bashing play calling obviously wasn't sitting out in the cold that engulfed the stadium yesterday. Call me a homer here, but I think maybe at best 10 or 15 teams in the country would have beaten us in Kinnick yesterday. That stadium was darn cold and that cold limited the playbook in a way you proles who couldn't swing the $42 for a ticket will never understand.
That first pick 6 was honestly a blind squirrel finding a nut - Michigan lucked into calling the perfect D on that play. Give them credit. The INT that set up the short field and Michigan TD was just an awful pass and wasn't Davis' fault at all.
Davis knew that Michigan was fixin' to load the box and they sure did. He put together a game based on high percentage pass plays and we had guys wide open down the field all day. Davis also took full advantage of the dominance of our o-line over Michigan's line.
I still have one beef with Davis and that is that it seems like 80%+ of the audibles are stretch right. He's gotta change the dang audibles. But at the end of the day, Iowa needs an offense that can win games in November. It isn't sexy in the least, but it is effective. We won ToP, kept the D fresh and they were ready to make a play when we needed it. That was a beautiful game yesterday and Ferentz once again demonstrated that the boys in the trenches win games. Kudos to the entire staff on that game.
That first pick 6 was honestly a blind squirrel finding a nut - Michigan lucked into calling the perfect D on that play. Give them credit. The INT that set up the short field and Michigan TD was just an awful pass and wasn't Davis' fault at all.
Davis knew that Michigan was fixin' to load the box and they sure did. He put together a game based on high percentage pass plays and we had guys wide open down the field all day. Davis also took full advantage of the dominance of our o-line over Michigan's line.
I still have one beef with Davis and that is that it seems like 80%+ of the audibles are stretch right. He's gotta change the dang audibles. But at the end of the day, Iowa needs an offense that can win games in November. It isn't sexy in the least, but it is effective. We won ToP, kept the D fresh and they were ready to make a play when we needed it. That was a beautiful game yesterday and Ferentz once again demonstrated that the boys in the trenches win games. Kudos to the entire staff on that game.
MeatMan
Well-Known Member
and you do? rarrrr!
Hawkfromnorwalk
Well-Known Member
This is funny because wasn't it the last coordinator that fans were asking for more "cuteness"?
The disparagement of the Weisman outside zone (stretch play) is a bit selective. He has gained a lot of yards on that play over the past two years, including yesterday. I don't have a breakdown of the game at my disposal, so I cannot say exactly how many time he creased it, but that play does not go for -2 every time he runs it. Many times the OL gets their job done up front and he hits a crease hard and doesn't get touched for 6 yards and then runs over some fools; and sometimes the DL slants hard to the flow and doesn't give up cutback lanes, and it goes for -2 (no matter which back is running it). It seems like a lot of fans think the -2 yard play is an outside zone, and the 10 yard run is a different play.
I am completely on-board with eliminating the outside zone call on short yardage. It is just too hard to get hats on everyone when the D commits that many bodies to the run. I also like what I have seen from Canzieri running that outside zone, and have no problem with him getting some more carries. Weisman has been pretty good with ball-security this year (N. Illinois fumble not withstanding), so I can understand him getting most of the carries in the 4th.
I am completely on-board with eliminating the outside zone call on short yardage. It is just too hard to get hats on everyone when the D commits that many bodies to the run. I also like what I have seen from Canzieri running that outside zone, and have no problem with him getting some more carries. Weisman has been pretty good with ball-security this year (N. Illinois fumble not withstanding), so I can understand him getting most of the carries in the 4th.
Just caught the tail-end of the game on BTN. Weisman had a 1st down conversion run on OZ (left) on the go-ahead drive. He also failed to convert that last 3rd and short on that drive with an OZ play (right). Iowa started the icing drive with an OZ to Weisman (left) that went for 22 yards. The subsequent OZ (also left) went for -2, followed by Power up the middle to regain those 2, and then of course the boot off the OZ action for the sealing completion.
Looking at the game as a whole, Iowa had 168 yds rushing (3.8 average); Weisman had 88 yds on 17 carries (5.2 average). I would bet the majority of those yards came on OZ plays.
Looking at the game as a whole, Iowa had 168 yds rushing (3.8 average); Weisman had 88 yds on 17 carries (5.2 average). I would bet the majority of those yards came on OZ plays.
Billso
Well-Known Member
And that 5.2 ypc was a full yard better than Canzeri's 4.2, in a game where both backs had significant carries.
Things that make you go "hmmm..."
Sirhouseman
Well-Known Member
It's just so tiring over the years to lose AND win games like this.
Yes, winning is so exhausting.
Yes, winning is so exhausting.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Difference from last year to this year: the players know GD's offense a lot better. Gotta give KF some credit for that. But, must remember, KF is the game manager for Iowa's offense.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure, but it looks like they have also abandoned a lot of the optionality in the passing game. I think Rudock only threw one pass where he and his receiver and his receiver were on totally different pages, though that INT at around the 30 may have been one as well. But that one just looked like he underthrew it.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
'cause, you know, it can't be Ferentz's fault, right?
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Knowing the offense better this year compared to not really at all last year, O'Keef. Want proof? Compare this year's Iowa VS Nebraska game against last year's game. Wouldn't it be great if Iowa won? There's a chance.
Last edited:
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Last year we were told that the new Iowa offense was gonna be a blend of KF run blocking and running game, with GD passing game. Fast forward to this year, and we have KF run game and KF passing game.
