In 3rd OT after penalty

[HawkPrdatr40]

What upsets me Iowa just keep the kicking team on the field? That says alot about how conservative KF can be.

Iowa should have run the offense back on the field and maybe force ISU offsides. I was hoping we would go for it, but to not atleast show we might is ridiculious to me.

 

[Mac50702]

This is one i could see from both sides, so not totally too conservative. On one hand you have not been able to stop them from scoring recently and it is highly likely they will settle for a field goal after missing two already. On the other If we dont make it, then they can take the chance on the FG and win. Myself I would have went for it. I would have rather lose putting it all on the line, than lose, by not trying. which is what we did both times.

 

[Hawkfromnorwalk]

Hindsight is 20/20. Had we gone for it and not gotten it everybody freaks out because we didn't go for the FG.

 

[HawkPrdatr40]

Hindsight is 20/20. Had we gone for it and not gotten it everybody freaks out because we didn't go for the FG.

Okay I get that. My other question is how come you keep kicking team on and not run offense out to maybe draw them offsides.

 

[silvanthalas]

Hindsight is 20/20. Had we gone for it and not gotten it everybody freaks out because we didn't go for the FG.

Did you need hindsight to know we were not going to stop their offense once they had their shot again?

No, you didn't. Everybody knew they were going to score again, therefore everybody knew the game was over once we kicked the FG.

Pointing to hindsight any time our coaches screw the pooch is just excusing their mistakes.

 

[Hawkfromnorwalk]

Did you need hindsight to know we were not going to stop their offense once they had their shot again?

No, you didn't. Everybody knew they were going to score again, therefore everybody knew the game was over once we kicked the FG.

Pointing to hindsight any time our coaches screw the pooch is just excusing their mistakes.

I wanted them to go for it too. And I agree that they should have. In the end though every action in football has two end results, success or failure. Had the D held ISU to a field goal and it goes into the 4th OT nobody remembers the 4th and 1.

 

[tm3308]

I wanted them to go for it too. And I agree that they should have. In the end though every action in football has two end results, success or failure. Had the D held ISU to a field goal and it goes into the 4th OT nobody remembers the 4th and 1.

Except that we are supposed to be playing the odds. The odds that we were going to hold ISU to a field goal were VERY long. They had all the momentum. They were at home. The place was going insane. The game was over as soon as we elected to keep the kicking team out there, and everyone in the stadium (expect for the one person who's opinion matters) knew it.

 

[Hawkfromnorwalk]

Look guys, I agree with what your saying. The basic premise is that every choice that is made that fails is questioned. The right choice should have been to go for it but he didn't, it led to us losing the game, and now everybody wants answers.

 

[ssckelley]

You have to put the offense back out there. First of all the defense did not look like it was capable of keeping the Cyclones out of the endzone they needed the TD. The offensive line was the strength of the Iowa team today, they would have gotten us that yard. Secondly, even if you don't get it the Cyclones probably would have gotten conservative on offense to get in good position for a field goal and they had missed the previous 2. I like my chances to go for it on 4th and 1.

 

[hawkeye12345]

The op has a very valid point that I think some are missing. Going for it or not isn't the point, its at least TRY and get their d to jump offsides. We have a timeout to burn. We don't have to take the delay of game penalty. Its just another example, of which are becoming many, where our coaches have no clue of what is transpiring un front of them.