cmhawks99
Well-Known Member
Here you go Rock....this is what they don't get and that Dan was just being mouthy. We more often than not were in position and whiffed....execution wins games, not scheme.
Last edited:
HawkeyeGameFilm Reviews Iowa Defense from Saturday
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
Here you go Rock....this is what they don't get and that Dan was just being mouthy. We more often than not were in position and whiffed....execution wins games, not scheme.
cmhawks99
Well-Known Member
Bottom line, when we don't win, fans look at scheme, never bothering to remember all the games that the scheme won or that the other team had the same scheme they always have as well......execution wins football games and in every team room in America they stress execution and playing clean. Not “oh gee we need to "implement a new scheme"…” every scheme allows for variations and from what I have learned talking to people I trust..Iowa was doing a lot more adjusting than some of our more vocal fans realized.
If you want to blame the coaches for not keeping our kids focused and motivated fine, thats on them. For not teaching them well enuff how important execution is, then again, that is their job. But honestly we weren't losing games because Dan Persa said he knew exactly what we were going to do...for one thats a lie. You still have to guess right. I've seen this broke down by coaches and its bunk.
If you want to blame the coaches for not keeping our kids focused and motivated fine, thats on them. For not teaching them well enuff how important execution is, then again, that is their job. But honestly we weren't losing games because Dan Persa said he knew exactly what we were going to do...for one thats a lie. You still have to guess right. I've seen this broke down by coaches and its bunk.
No, we are talking about how aggressiveness in the D may impact games this year and how the same "play to win" idea applies to D as well as epitomized by the 2010 game.
Somebody earlier mentioned the Persa quote about "knowing what Iowa was going to do" and I would like remind people that both Pryor and Tressel said after the game that the 4th down play was never going to be a pass. They knew Iowa would drop back into coverage like they did on the third down play before where Posey dropped the pass in the endzone. Think of that play as the first part of a double pump if you will. We ended up with 4 Iowa linemen against 6 Ohio players, odds favoring tOSU. Potential outcome is even on a running play.
In a more "aggressive" scheme Morris may have faked a drop back into coverage, for instance, and then blitzed like he did earlier in the game.
Granted this is risky because it could have left an open man in the uncovered zone but in this case Morris was looking at the turf in front of him. Putting pressure on Pryor may have forced him out of bounds. Putting pressure on Pryor may have caused one of the guys blocking Klug to release and pick up Morris giving Clayborn a better chance to make the play. Pryor's throwing was off when he was feeling pressure and a risky throw, w/ Morris bearing down on him, back across the field favors Iowa because the potential outcome favors the defender on a passing play.
In the scenario above the scheme forces Pryor to execute. As it played out, IIRC, the guard pulled off of Klug as Pryor ran to his left and double teamed Clayborn thus allowing Pryor a clear shot at a first down. The player that had to execute was the guard, not the man w/ the ball.
So the questions that arise are will other teams plan on Iowa dropping back into coverage in similar situations this year? Will Iowa actually blitz in a scenario like we faced against Ohio on that 4th down in 2010? What will the number of "big plays" given up look like?
The base 4/3 coverage is the same. We don't have a line like 2009/2010 (yet). Iowa is not going to blitz on every down, but when and how we blitz is going to be the key to success for this year's defense. Playing not to lose on D isn't going to cut it w/ the talent we have this year.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
For the most part, I agree. But there are some instances when doing something differently is in your favor. I've always been a tremendous fan of Norm Parker, and always will be. But against Northwestern, why not tighten up the cushion on their receivers? I'm not even suggesting press coverage. But why give teams like that 7-8 yards, when that's all they want on their passing plays anyway?
cmhawks99
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree at all, but I can't say for sure we did vs NW, but we played up sometimes and I have to assume the guys who were paid to "adjust" surely were doing what they thought gave them the best chance....but yes certainly moving people around and pressing or stunting is a part of adapting. I think sometimes however we did and still failed.
Agree w/ this. One thing for sure is that they are practicing more man and blitz coverage. I think I have been to every open practice of the KF era and it is refreshing to see them working on it a much larger percentage of the time. I think in the past when they tried to adapt and failed it was because they couldn't execute. More practice of these skills should mean better execution on the field this year.
cmhawks99
Well-Known Member
franstheman
Well-Known Member
Umm no. You have to have a scheme that both takes advantage of what your talent is and takes advantage of the weakness of the defense to win games. Running the ball 70% of the time against an 8 man box probably won't win you the game no matter how well coached the team is.
cmhawks99
Well-Known Member
Uhhhh...still no......People who scheme have an idea ahead of time what’s going to happen. That’s what they game plan for…..as far as running 70% of the time, I can only assume that’s an example you are using because a routine check of the box scores would show Iowa clearly didn’t do that and in fact if memory serves they actually passed more last year than in any subsequent year in the past 10ish.
Also some teams, do indeed still run into that box and with a lot of successes…again, execution, execution, execution…..it’s the key. Always has been and always will be.
Last edited:
