It's not the defensive philosophy in 1-3 quarters.

[Maroons19]

Iowa's defense is sound and keeps teams from hitting big plays during the first three quarters. It's not the entire philosophy that needs to change. It's the 4th quarter philosophy that needs to change. By the time the 4th quarter rolls around opposing teams adjust. If they are down they stop running set-up plays/throw away plays trying to catch us off guard. On 2nd and 2 the opposing team isn't running dive to just get the first down. When we have teams down in the 4th they commit to throwing out of spread formations (not out of tight formations that could be run/pass that would necessitate 3 linebackers staying in like we would see in the first 3 quarters). They are sending more receivers into the routes and b/c we never blitz they have time to run 12-15 yard intermediate routes. And refs don't call as many holdings/drive killing penalties that we tend to rely upon as part of our philosophy.

Point being when an opponent is down in the 4th and is committed to spreading the field and throwing it, I just can't figure out how you stay with 2 deep safeties and 3 linebackers. Either a safety needs to come up or linebackers need to come out - and press the receivers so they can't just run free into open areas of the zone. During our two minute drive last night, OSU pressed us - they didn't back off.

 

[northendzone1]

Pretty sure that was the scheme last year and they won some games. Matter of fact I think they won a few a couple years back with it too....but I might be wrong? Someone should check the tape and maybe you could break down the film for us. Maybe explain the intricacies of the cover 2 defense? Or state your case for the nickel on every play. How about the 3 3 5, that works for Michigan right?

Execution folks! Players need to make plays

 

[WhitUp]

I agree with the OP we used to bring in more DB's late in the game. It makes no sense having linebackers chase recievers when theres not much threat of a run. I get sick of the execution mantra. We had 5 chances this year at game ending drives and we went 1/5(the one stop being the Indiana player dropping the ball). Not to mention our struggles against Indiana and NW every year running the spread the whole game. Not calling for anybody to be fired here, just at what point do we stop blaming execution and start changing our philosophy when time after time we've seen it fail(end of game philosophy that is).

 

[tm3308]

The scheme works very well when you've got guys like Angerer, Edds, or Greenway out there, who CAN cover receivers. The only problem I have with the way we do things (on both sides of the ball) is that we never seem to adjust the schemes to the players we have. That's why it looks outdated from time to time, because the players just aren't always there.

It's not ALWAYS execution. I mean yeah, they didn't execute. But it's not always a case of them screwing something up. Sometimes the guys just don't have the ability to execute the way their predecessors did. That doesn't make them bad players by any means. It's hardly an insult to say that not everyone is Chad Greenway.

So the system is NOT outdated. We just stick with it even when the players we have don't seem to be able to play up to the level of Edds/Angerer/Greenway. That's very frustrating at times for me, but the system can and does work when you have the right players.

 

[Maroons19]

Pretty sure that was the scheme last year and they won some games. Matter of fact I think they won a few a couple years back with it too....but I might be wrong? Someone should check the tape and maybe you could break down the film for us. Maybe explain the intricacies of the cover 2 defense? Or state your case for the nickel on every play. How about the 3 3 5, that works for Michigan right?

Execution folks! Players need to make plays

Asking Troy Johnson to "execute" covering a receiver deep down the field is like asking Lil Lick and Baewinkle to execute an alley-oop. It ain't happening. Just because it works on paper doesn't mean it works in the game if the player doesn't have the physical ability. Regarding the "itricacies" of the cover 2, how complicated do you think this stuff is? We are not analyzing a NASA launch. It's just football. Do you think it takes an engineering degree to understand what a 2-deep zone is?
You can't call plays like you have Edds and Angerer when you don't have Edds and Angerer. Is that simple enough?