If there are 2 things I hope Phil Parker's defense can improve upon (if you can believe that as good as they are)

HaydenHawk56

HaydenHawk56

Well-Known Member
Certainly in time for the next big game where these issues have a higher percentage of coming to light:

-Limiting the QB breaking contain and running/scrambling for 20 on 3rd and 10
-Getting burnt downfield in the open gaps (better football xs and os guys can chime in here)

In my amateur eyes, I think this boils down to not blitzing enough, especially on 3rd down. We were doing a lot of this late in the Penn St game when we had them backed up around the goal line, but hopefully we can have more wrinkles when we face other mobile QBs who can scramble and or competently throw down the field.

I can certainly see this problem with AM at Nebraska (although the guy is a mistake away from blowing the game), the Michigan QB (he is a downfield threat like Clifford) and certainly the Ohio St QB. I have not seen enough of Michigan St's guy as I have not watched a Michigan St game yet. We will also need to improve upon this if we were to rematch Penn St.

But, the athletic QB who needs 10 and gets 11 with his feet has been a historic problem going back to Norm Parker in Big Games.
 
I'd be concerned about Purdue at this point. They'll have an interesting choice to make at QB: they have one QB with lots of starts who is more mobile and more of a running threat, and then they've started experimenting with a QB who is less mobile but a more accurate passer. Clifford sort of embodied both: making accurate throws (for the most part), and also able to run. Parker's stubbornness in not bring a 5th guy on 3rd downs, or at least having a spy on the QB, has to stop -- agreed. Purdue's rushing game is not a threat, so I think Benson #44, probably needs to sit most of this game out, in favor of Jacobs and the Cash playing most every down. Also need to prepare better this week for the hurry-up offense the Boilers may employ -- last night Iowa's D looked surprisingly disjointed and unprepared to line up/match up with Penn St's personnel when they went hurry-up in the 1st quarter...lots of guys running around trying to get in position late.
 
I'm a big In Phil We Trust guy, I have a hard time finding faults with the man, myself. I love our defensive system and, as I called out a couple weeks ago, I sometimes wonder if it has a bit of a "change up" effect on opposing teams at this point, because you just don't see many other teams running anything like it. Almost like the effect of, in modern times, facing a team that runs the triple option.

As far as the QB scrambles go, I think there have been a couple occasions this year where a mobile opposing QB got loose on us and I was very surprised we didn't have a "spy" assigned. I'm not smart enough to know if that was an oopsie or a deliberate compromise being made, but I did make a mental note of it.

With regards to open gaps downfield, that's just part and parcel of the system. Everyone who plays us knows there are gaps in our zone and exactly where those gaps are. The yards are there for the taking, it's just the way it is, but I think you have to look in the big picture:

- The opposing QB has to make a right on the money throw to hit someone in one of those gaps (it's harder than it looks from the overhead TV perspective - the receiver is often behind an LB but in front of a CB or S...and the D guys are all "eyes on QB"...it's a very nerve wracking throw to make)

- The trade off to leaving these gaps is that, in practical terms, we are all but invulnerable to the deep ball. This really tests opposing OC's patience and nerves, because they have to trust their QB (and, remember, most college QBs are relatively limited in terms of making downfield throws) to hit these gaps again and again to put together a scoring drive OR get greedy and/or panicked and try to throw deep. We've seen how many times deep throws against this D turn into INTs. It's incredible.

- Also remember that this defense will give you yards "between the 20's". There is a ton of space for the offense to work with and a good OC will find ways to make our gaps as large as possible. But, once you are inside the 20, those gaps start to close to the point where they very nearly don't exist. That's how you go ~30 consecutive games holding teams under 25 points when the FBS average is ~30 ppg. Lotsa field goals, almost no TDs. This red zone "pinch" is another factor that will lead OCs to get greedy and try to go for a HR *before* getting into the red zone, I think.

It can be nerve wracking to watch, but you gotta trust that, once the other guys get inside our 20, things will get very hairy for them.
 
OK, I'm sure I'm going to get shouted down for this, but I don't like the spy at all. Sure we've seen some QB runs that have gotten some 1st downs, but we're not getting killed by them. We've given up 3 QB runs of 10 or more yards this year. Yes the extend drives, but they don't beat us.

As Luft said, we're OK giving up yards (hopefully tough yards) between the 20's. What that does is makes teams go 10-12 plays to get a score against a tough defense. When they do that, pat them on the back, tell them "good job, now see if you can do it again without a penalty, turnover, or just getting stopped by our top notch defense".

What a spy does is takes one player out of the play. In a pass play, we lose a zone, most like the 15 yard crossing route after they pull our safety deep. With another LB there, we can cover the middle and both flats. If we want to blitz (which will open up running lanes for the QB), it will be even tougher to spy and cover. We could go man, but anyone that leaks out could give us trouble or get us into a match-up with an LB on a RB or slot.

A way to do blitz and have a "spy" that we've done is use a zone blitz. When a QB reads zone coverage and sees a blitz, he knows that there's a zone open on that area of the field. That's most likely going to be his first option. Dropping a DL into that zone will mess that up and give us a blitz and all zones covered. Check out the two examples from last year's PSU game. On the 1st one, at 14:36 we had ZVV as our "spy" sitting in the middle of the field and still brought the blitz from the edge and the middle. On the 2nd one, we had 2 blitzing up the middle, which would mean he'd have to belly back and go outside if he was even able to escape. (Also, disregard the result of the play. They are examples I was able to find, not cherry picking. I'm not sure the blitzes actually affected the outcome of the play). Link

Having said that, we would have to do something for a QB like Adrian Martinez who leads NU in rushing. It's a completely different situation than QB's like Clifford, Purdy, etc. Is it a spy? Is it a straight push instead of a straight pass rush? Is it cover 3 or cover 6 (my favorite) with 2 lb's both sitting in the middle zones?

I ain't Phil Parker, Norm Parker, or even a good parallel parker, but I do have my thoughts and thought I'd share them.
 
Last edited:
@99topdawg ^^Agree wholeheartedly with the above. UIHawk had a thread on gameday about putting a spy out there and I said the same thing there as you've essentially said here. The implementation of the spy means you either need to rush less 3 (so that we can still drop 7) or you have to risk losing some of your coverage integrity. One of the things that makes our defense so good is that we don't do a ton of exotic things on defense, which allows us to play fast (because we're not spending too much time thinking). Sit in cover 6, keep things in front of you, rally to the ball, make sure tackles...that's the Iowa defense MO. Take 1 of those guys out of the equation and there will be more holes in the zone; commit to only rushing 3 and dropping 7 and we're going to likely allow the QB to pick us apart (or at least there's a better chance of doing so) from the pocket.

There's always a fine line when playing a running QB between getting pressure with 4 vs. controlled rush lanes to disallow for a QB to climb the pocket or break contain. Do you conservatively rush and give the QB an extra second to throw the ball? You probably don't want to make a habit of doing the opposite, going in with pinned-back ears and losing all rush lane responsibility, so it has to be a careful blend of both and the coverage behind it can reflect where the pressure is coming from. Especially prevalent in the RPO world, zone blitzes can be very effective because often times the run/pass option is based on the LB movement (such as in a very common zone/slant RPO). If that LB comes, giving the QB a pass read, often times a DE goes unnoticed because the presumption is that he'll be pass rushing.
 
hawkfan2679 said:
@99topdawg ^^Agree wholeheartedly with the above. UIHawk had a thread on gameday about putting a spy out there and I said the same thing there as you've essentially said here. The implementation of the spy means you either need to rush less 3 (so that we can still drop 7) or you have to risk losing some of your coverage integrity. One of the things that makes our defense so good is that we don't do a ton of exotic things on defense, which allows us to play fast (because we're not spending too much time thinking). Sit in cover 6, keep things in front of you, rally to the ball, make sure tackles...that's the Iowa defense MO. Take 1 of those guys out of the equation and there will be more holes in the zone; commit to only rushing 3 and dropping 7 and we're going to likely allow the QB to pick us apart (or at least there's a better chance of doing so) from the pocket.

There's always a fine line when playing a running QB between getting pressure with 4 vs. controlled rush lanes to disallow for a QB to climb the pocket or break contain. Do you conservatively rush and give the QB an extra second to throw the ball? You probably don't want to make a habit of doing the opposite, going in with pinned-back ears and losing all rush lane responsibility, so it has to be a careful blend of both and the coverage behind it can reflect where the pressure is coming from. Especially prevalent in the RPO world, zone blitzes can be very effective because often times the run/pass option is based on the LB movement (such as in a very common zone/slant RPO). If that LB comes, giving the QB a pass read, often times a DE goes unnoticed because the presumption is that he'll be pass rushing.
Click to expand...

On the Washed Up Walkons podcast review of the PSU game, Kevin Ward said the 2 Clifford scrambles were a result of a DL stunt where the DE got caught up on the twist. So it is not like they were oblivious to the fact Clifford could scramble, they just got out-executed on a few plays.
 
CP87 said:
On the Washed Up Walkons podcast review of the PSU game, Kevin Ward said the 2 Clifford scrambles were a result of a DL stunt where the DE got caught up on the twist. So it is not like they were oblivious to the fact Clifford could scramble, they just got out-executed on a few plays.
Click to expand...
Hey, sometimes the other team's guys make plays too.
 
The top 2 D coordinators are on teams with conservative keep the clock running offenses.

Woods lost his kicker and punt returner. We'll see.
 
spliff45 said:
Phil’s kryptonite is Purdue
Click to expand...
Teams that can throw quick and on time against us can give us problems. Nobody would argue that Purdue's Oline was top notch but they don't have to be when you get rid of the ball in under 3 seconds. Iowa doesn't play a lot of man to man in the secondary and that's what makes the quicker short stuff more open. They often flood a side of the field with receivers so it's like 3 on 2 and it can be an easy read/pitch and catch scenario too. Brohm knows what he's doing and I'm shocked he hasn't climbed the ladder to a bigger gig.

Unless you're blitzing/getting immediate pressure or all up on the receivers at the LOS it's a tough O to defend. Our biggest problem against Purdue (and against everyone we've struggled against) isn't our D so much it's our own O. Going 3 and out all the time and not even burning some clock let alone getting points ourselves just kills what we want to do on D. Even if our D is doing well we just keep putting them right back out there and as the game goes on they can't be expected to maintain their level of dominance. That's where KFs 'complimentary football' style works against him....
 
News Flash. When you play teams as often as we do in the BT, the best D coach in the world won’t escape some demons. Scouting reports are prepped professionally by every coaching staff in the BT. The X and O stuff is no secret to any of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top