Harsh reality

[MelroseHawkins]

I dunno.
Iowa's offense awarded Michigan 10 points.
Let's also give them 3 points in the differential when they coughed up the ball on the short field. Take away the 7 points coughed up by the punt return (as good as that kid did running him down)...DeJean doesn't let that guy loose.

Corum was held in check.
McCarthy was largely ineffective, and spent some time on his back.
The Michigan offense didn't find the endzone unless they were starting from 6 yards or less.

Granted, Michigan didn't HAVE to do much. Outside of one drive, they couldn't do much. And that drive only netted 3.

I agree. Nothing about Saturday's game should be put on the defense. The offense did not hold up it's part with the complimentary game. They turned the ball over in its territory. The D was more than fine.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I have said it for at least two years. The offensive line sucks. As a previous poster said fire the oline coach. He should have been fired first but we know Kirk is not going to do that. Our quarterback for most of the year if not all of the year has been terrible. We need a good offensive coordinator who knows how to develop quarterbacks. I know it’s not going to happen but Brian should probably be the number one pick for oline coach. I don’t know who the offensive coordinator should be but he needs to be given complete control of the offense. Make the right hire and keep Phil happy and you’re right there. The defense is outstanding and everyone in the college football world knows it.

The thing is Iowa had a backup QB that was pretty non-productive. In addition to that, the backup QB also was a statue and brought nothing with his legs. That was just another huge hurdle for this team to overcome an more amazing they went 10-2 in the regular season. So the QB is not very accurate and doesn't really run too much. LOL.

But, I like the Deacon though. It's a story.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

There is absolutely a chance but Kirk does have to do something that all of us believe that he’s never done before. Give complete control to the right man to run the offense. It’s very simple but not necessarily easy for him.

I'm kind of in this boat. He's at the end of his career and well he really may not have any other choice at this point. Also, his son will be moving on so he may just say F it. That's my thinking.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I really don't understand how you can honestly have this takeaway after watching the games. Michigan scored three field goals without help from Deacon and awful punt coverage. Allar and McCarthy are not otherworldly quarterbacks. Both are overrated, and I'd go so far as to say that Allar isn't very good at all. Do we win both games? Probably not. But I think it's more likely that we split than lose both, and there's a non-zero chance we are 13-0 right now with an average offense.

I'll go one step further here, I think there's a solid chance we win last night if Kirk had taken a look at his quarterback room and given whoever else looks best other than Deacon the start against Nebraska and last night. We almost certainly win with an offense that 1. doesn't turn the ball over, and 2. can score 14-20 points. Deacon has proven again and again that he cannot do the second, and even when BF resolves not to even bother trying to score points, Deacon even fails at the first. Rolling him out is malpractice. Deacon ain't it. Neither he nor Petras belong on a P5 roster. Blah blah "you aren't at practice," I don't care. No reason not to have gone to the bullpen with nothing to lose in week 13 with the West locked up. Beathard was buried on the roster once upon a time--that's the only evidence I need to know that I don't care at all for Kirk's QB evaluation. Get dudes on the field and see who shows up.

I'm so over putting the dude out there with the "best leadership." Our offense doesn't need leadership, it needs to score points. Being the most mature dude in the QB room isn't relevant when you suck at playing football. I believe whole heartedly that we would have more likely than not won at least ten, and maybe one more game, if we hadn't picked up the back-up to Graham Mertz's back-up in the transfer portal this offseason.

Great take. Entire post.

For krist's sake, the offense has been pretty much last the last two years and who-fully bad the year prior to that. The offense hasn't been good for years. If there is NO OTHER reason to go to the pen and try something else, WHAT IS THERE?

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I agree that the Ferentzes model of evaluating quarterbacks is lacking. The examples that stick out to me are McCann starting when we had Banks on the sideline. Christensen playing when Stanzi was clearly the better option. Quarterback development has been an issue for Kirks entire time at Iowa. Is there one quarterback that was better their senior year than their first start? I don’t think so. Tate looked like a superstar in the making his first year as the starter. We would be competing for the national championship if we had a decent offense. I believe Michigan had one drive for three points. Everything else was handed to them.

Also, the fact that Iowa really hasn't had an QB's really stick in the NFL or contribute on a team is telling. Throw in WR as well and you see where the deficiency is in Iowa's program. You shore those two positions up and Iowa could really have some special seasons.

If ya can't, they aren't going to be competitive in the new landscape of the BIG 10. It's gotta get fixed.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Dochterman mentioned this in his BCG recap...when Iowa's defense was on the field, it felt like Iowa had a chance (except in the second half of PSU when they got worn down). When Iowa's offense was on the field, the idea of scoring points seemed ludicrous.

Both of these games could have been so different with a few plays breaking differently. Yet, our offense was completely incapable of creating any breaks. What an odd feeling, and what an odd team to cheer for.

That missed INT by Jackson I think was a huge point in the game. Boy, if he could have got that and possibly returned it who knows........

 

[Will C]

Worse than continuing with a horrible offense is to continue with a horrible QB. Some coaches would have taken some losses to develop an new QB. I really like Deacon but not as Iowa QB. It is so hard to believe that the QB bench is that bad. Especially when one has not played a lick and the other won a bowl game. Come On!!!

 

[HawkPowerlifter]

I agree. Nothing about Saturday's game should be put on the defense. The offense did not hold up it's part with the complimentary game. They turned the ball over in its territory. The D was more than fine.

I think the most glaring issue were the turnovers and the one punt return, which is normally very good. Incidentally, Taylor is now the all-time leader in punt yardage for the NCAA. The former record holder was on a 2-11 team. Also, the defense played very well. I think you add DeJean in there, and some of the shorter stuff Lee played soft on doesn't happen. Our defense also held the Wolverines to their lowest offensive output of the season and the lowest in the Harbaugh era.

While some of that doesn't matter to much since we lost, sometimes I think the final score is not indicative of how the game went. We gave them two touchdowns essentially with the punt return and the reversed incomplete/fumble call. Both were first and goal situations. The Patterson fumble on their 30 on 3rd and 2 was a killer as well. Throw in some uncharacteristic penalites on good punt returns and false starts and we shot our self in the foot alot.

I noticed Hill didn't pick up his blindside or feel the pressure. He also struggled with touch. He threw behind several open receivers. We ran the ball ok, but just never found that rhythm we get. We also never truly flipped the field like we normally do, which usually leads to a score of some sort. t

In the end, Michigan was the better team. I just don't think the final score was as indicative of how the game was played.

 

[CP87]

I think the most glaring issue were the turnovers and the one punt return, which is normally very good. Incidentally, Taylor is not the all-time leader in punt yardage for the NCAA. The former record holder was on a 2-11 team. Also, the defense played very well. I think you add DeJean in there, and some of the shorter stuff Lee played soft on doesn't happen. Our defense also held the Wolverines to their lowest offensive output of the season and the lowest in the Harbaugh era.

While some of that doesn't matter to much since we lost, sometimes I think the final score is not indicative of how the game went. We gave them two touchdowns essentially with the punt return and the reversed incomplete/fumble call. Both were first and goal situations. The Patterson fumble on their 30 on 3rd and 2 was a killer as well. Throw in some uncharacteristic penalites on good punt returns and false starts and we shot our self in the foot alot.

I noticed Hill didn't pick up his blindside or feel the pressure. He also struggled with touch. He threw behind several open receivers. We ran the ball ok, but just never found that rhythm we get. We also never truly flipped the field like we normally do, which usually leads to a score of some sort. t

In the end, Michigan was the better team. I just don't think the final score was as indicative of how the game was played.

On his first fumble inside the 10 (the one that was given to Michigan on review), Iowa had a great play set up. The blitzer was unblocked, but Iowa had a hot-receiver crossing into the vacated area who was wide open. The blitzer was coming in Hill's face, so the immediate dump off to the hot crosser should have been obvious.

And the second fumble was just one of about a dozen examples this season of Hill having no pocket awareness, no ball security, and a super-long wind-up.

It is like Hill gives us all the mistakes of Stanzi with none of the ability to make plays to overcome those mistakes.

 

[Hawkboys]

On his first fumble inside the 10 (the one that was given to Michigan on review), Iowa had a great play set up. The blitzer was unblocked, but Iowa had a hot-receiver crossing into the vacated area who was wide open. The blitzer was coming in Hill's face, so the immediate dump off to the hot crosser should have been obvious.

And the second fumble was just one of about a dozen examples this season of Hill having no pocket awareness, no ball security, and a super-long wind-up.

It is like Hill gives us all the mistakes of Stanzi with none of the ability to make plays to overcome those mistakes.

Not sure if this is accurate or now, but I was thinking through the Ferentz' lack of holding the starting QB accountable since CJ forced their hand how many years ago.

And the only thing I can really think of is that they just don't want to have to start over coaching the QB. It's almost laziness or lack of ability to adjust the offense at all or to spend and new effort building up the best candidate for the role.

 

[Gander Hawk]

Ok, we have to be real here. It's pretty obvious that Michigan was toying with the Hawks last night. They showed vs OSU that they can throw the ball, and Iowa's secondary has not exactly been airtight this year. Harbaugh could have thrown the ball all over the field and wracked up more total offensive yards, if they needed to. But they didn't need to. They didn't need to go on 4th and 1 from the Iowa 30 in the 4th quarter, but they could have, would've certainly made it, and continued in for a TD at that point in the game. But Harbaugh on offense does only what he has to, to win. And last night, they only needed to utilize 1 aspect of their offense -- the less risky part of their offense. But let's not delude ourselves, there was no way Iowa was winning that game last night.

True but you don't need to downplay the only respectable part of Iowa's performance.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Not sure if this is accurate or now, but I was thinking through the Ferentz' lack of holding the starting QB accountable since CJ forced their hand how many years ago.

And the only thing I can really think of is that they just don't want to have to start over coaching the QB. It's almost laziness or lack of ability to adjust the offense at all or to spend and new effort building up the best candidate for the role.

One of Stanzi's best attributes was his ability to just flush the bad plays and move on and perform. He'd throw a pick six and just flush it and wait for the next drive. Not all QB's can do that.

I don't think Deacon has a problem flushing the bad plays like the turnovers but Stanzi would just hit another gear after it seemed.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Not sure if this is accurate or now, but I was thinking through the Ferentz' lack of holding the starting QB accountable since CJ forced their hand how many years ago.

And the only thing I can really think of is that they just don't want to have to start over coaching the QB. It's almost laziness or lack of ability to adjust the offense at all or to spend and new effort building up the best candidate for the role.

I think you hit on something. It's a "comfort" thing I think with KF. He likes predictability.

 

[Hawkboys]

I think you hit on something. It's a "comfort" thing I think with KF. He likes predictability.

Even if it predicts failure.

 

[Gander Hawk]

One of Stanzi's best attributes was his ability to just flush the bad plays and move on and perform. He'd throw a pick six and just flush it and wait for the next drive. Not all QB's can do that.

I don't think Deacon has a problem flushing the bad plays like the turnovers but Stanzi would just hit another gear after it seemed.

Stanzi also benefited from a dominant defense that made up for his famous "Rick-6's."

 

[SCHawkeye2]

Not sure if this is accurate or now, but I was thinking through the Ferentz' lack of holding the starting QB accountable since CJ forced their hand how many years ago.

And the only thing I can really think of is that they just don't want to have to start over coaching the QB. It's almost laziness or lack of ability to adjust the offense at all or to spend and new effort building up the best candidate for the role.

Perhaps they realize the QB really doesn't matter if you cant pass block and receivers cannot get open.

 

[CP87]

Stanzi also benefited from a dominant defense that made up for his famous "Rick-6's."

Our defense over the last 3 years are just as good as those D's (I would actually say better, but it is debatable).

 

[okeefe4prez]

Our defense over the last 3 years are just as good as those D's (I would actually say better, but it is debatable).

Last year we had a d-lineman who didn't start get drafted early in the first round. We also had Jack Campbell, who was better than Edds or Angerer. This year we have Higgins who is also better than Edds or Angerer. We have had a good run of going legit two deep on the d-line, which is key for a stellar Iowa defense and our back seven is as good as it has ever been with the exception of 2003, when we had one of the best back sevens in the history of the game with Greenway, Hodge, Sanders, Considine, Allen and Johnson. When Antwan Allen and George Lewis are the only two guys you even want to consider attacking as an OC, you know you have a stout back seven.

We don't have a Clayborn/Matt Roth type of guy on the d-line, but I'll take the depth we have over that outlier any day. This has been one helluva run for Phil Parker. He is the key to this run we have had.

 

[Gander Hawk]

Last year we had a d-lineman who didn't start get drafted early in the first round. We also had Jack Campbell, who was better than Edds or Angerer. This year we have Higgins who is also better than Edds or Angerer. We have had a good run of going legit two deep on the d-line, which is key for a stellar Iowa defense and our back seven is as good as it has ever been with the exception of 2003, when we had one of the best back sevens in the history of the game with Greenway, Hodge, Sanders, Considine, Allen and Johnson. When Antwan Allen and George Lewis are the only two guys you even want to consider attacking as an OC, you know you have a stout back seven.

We don't have a Clayborn/Matt Roth type of guy on the d-line, but I'll take the depth we have over that outlier any day. This has been one helluva run for Phil Parker. He is the key to this run we have had.

A quibble but I wouldn't put Higgins ahead of Angerer. Angerer had a very promising NFL career ended by injury.