KXNO Morning Show

[DJL]

Deanvogs, you have succintly stated Iowa's defensive philosophy. Why people think we need to change is beyond me. This team is in the top few teams in the Big 10 in every meaningful category year in and year out. Is it maddening at time, of course it is. However, Indiana scored 13 points Saturday and Northwestern had 10 last year on offense and a fumble recovery in the end zone for their other 7. How it is that the defense was to blame for the outcome is beyond me. Even last year's IU game only resulted in 24 points for the Hoosier with five interceptions contributed by our offense.

For the most part, I agree. It's frustrating at times, but generally the D gets the job down. What worries me is that at the end of 3 games now, the D has had a chance to win the game for us; 2 times we lost, and the 3rd we should have lost. We weren't just giving up short passes either. I don't know what we can do differently, but I'm just saying we need to do something.

 

[Stiles]

I'm not saying bump and run coverage on the outside, but shorten up the cushion we give. Those teams don't run that many routes past 15 yards, so a 4-5 yard cushion is pretty reasonable IMO.

But by playing tighter (not TIGHT, but tighter) coverage on the outside, you can lessen the stress on the linebackers in pass coverage, which does make it easier for them to defend the run.

Chappell is far from a mobile QB, he's no serious threat on the ground. Michigan also goes downfield much more than an Indiana or Northwestern, so our typical philosophy works better.

Serious question: how many passes did Indiana attempt that was over 15 yards? Not including passes from the 10 to the back of the endzone and such.

Fans that want to "coachem up" like you are so annoying. I am sure Kirk and Norm will listen to your suggestions, because you are only a couple of years out of high school football. It think Kirk's ability to coach and adjust over time have been proven out.

Indiana scored 20, even if you count the last touchdown. Defense wasn't the issue. Indiana had 24 points last year with 5 or 6 Iowa turnovers. Last year NW had 10 offensive points, the year before 22 with 5 IA turnovers. These offenses aren't giving IA to many problems. IA either turns it over or doesn't play up to par offensively.

You cannot expect the defense to hold teams to under 20 every game, even teams like Indiana, which has a quality offense.

 

[tm3308]

You do understand that Iowa WANTS the teams to take those short passes don't you? The whole defense is predicated on keeping everything in front of you, and making tackles. Make teams have 10+ play drives and execute the whole way down the field. Why would we shorten up coverage, unless we changed our whole defensive philosophy?

Yes, I know that's what we want. Against 90% of the teams we play, that's what the offense DOESN'T want, which is why it's so effective a vast majority of the time. But when the offense builds THEIR philosophy around taking those 5-10 yards gains, regardless of who they're playing, we don't take them out of their rythm.

Most teams can't consistently execute those 10 play drives against us, because QB's get impatient and force a throw downfield that gets knocked down or intercepted. But IU and NW are extremely efficient with those long, execution-essential drives, because that's what they do all the time, and their QB's embrace that concept.

 

[Stiles]

Deanvogs, you have succintly stated Iowa's defensive philosophy. Why people think we need to change is beyond me. This team is in the top few teams in the Big 10 in every meaningful category year in and year out. Is it maddening at time, of course it is. However, Indiana scored 13 points Saturday and Northwestern had 10 last year on offense and a fumble recovery in the end zone for their other 7. How it is that the defense was to blame for the outcome is beyond me. Even last year's IU game only resulted in 24 points for the Hoosier with five interceptions contributed by our offense.

+1

 

[tm3308]

Fans that want to "coachem up" like you are so annoying. I am sure Kirk and Norm will listen to your suggestions, because you are only a couple of years out of high school football. It think Kirk's ability to coach and adjust over time have been proven out.

Indiana scored 20, even if you count the last touchdown. Defense wasn't the issue. Indiana had 24 points last year with 5 or 6 Iowa turnovers. Last year NW had 10 offensive points, the year before 22 with 5 IA turnovers. These offenses aren't giving IA to many problems. IA either turns it over or doesn't play up to par offensively.

You cannot expect the defense to hold teams to under 20 every game, even teams like Indiana, which has a quality offense.

I never said the coaches would listen to me, for any reason. It's just what I would like to see against the teams that run fairly unique offenses. If disagreeing with the coaching staff on some things is a cardinal sin, then I guess I'm going to Hell. Guess what? It's perfectly fine to not agree with everything that the coaches do. That doesn't mean I'm any less of a fan, who doesn't love the Hawks. Just because I understand what we do doesn't mean I always have to agree with it.

 

[Stiles]

I never said the coaches would listen to me, for any reason. It's just what I would like to see against the teams that run fairly unique offenses. If disagreeing with the coaching staff on some things is a cardinal sin, then I guess I'm going to Hell. Guess what? It's perfectly fine to not agree with everything that the coaches do. That doesn't mean I'm any less of a fan, who doesn't love the Hawks. Just because I understand what we do doesn't mean I always have to agree with it.

Sorry but the facts get in the way of your arguements. Iowa is 6th in score defense nationally. Annually in the top 25. NW and Indiana, do not and have not moved the ball on us at will, like you seem to imply.

I don't have an issue when people complain about legitmate things. Punt safe, clock management, some play calling, etc. All you do is complain about the defense, which has been the one consisent thing in the Ferentz/Norm era.

Like I said before, you won't have post 100 times the last two days about our bad defensive philospohies if we scored 2 of 4 redzone touchdowns.

 

[tm3308]

Sorry but the facts get in the way of your arguements. Iowa is 6th in score defense nationally. Annually in the top 25. NW and Indiana, do not and have not moved the ball on us at will, like you seem to imply.

I don't have an issue when people complain about legitmate things. Punt safe, clock management, some play calling, etc. All you do is complain about the defense, which has been the one consisent thing in the Ferentz/Norm era.

Like I said before, you won't have post 100 times the last two days about our bad defensive philospohies if we scored 2 of 4 redzone touchdowns.

Just like I wouldn't have posted about our poor tackling or poor special teams play after games we won (Iowa State for special teams and just about any game before Wisconsin for tackling).

Those two teams have actually put up right around 400 yards against us pretty consistently since 2005. There have been a few exceptions, but in the 10 games played against those two teams since 2005, they have gained at least 390 yards in 7 of them. And two of the games where they failed to do so (last year's games), Northwestern was essentially without their starting QB, and Indiana had 4 possessions that started inside of our 35-yard line (2 TD's, FG, Sash's Pinaball), so they didn't have an opportunity to really rack up the yards just because of field position. They move the ball fairly well against us, and have for the last 5 years.

And I never said our defensive philosophy is bad. I just would like to see some tweaks get made against these two team in particular. It works very well against everyone else, and I don't argue with the results. But there is a reason that THESE two teams give us fits, and I think that our defensive philosophy not forcing them out of their comfort zone has something to do with it.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

I'm not saying bump and run coverage on the outside, but shorten up the cushion we give. Those teams don't run that many routes past 15 yards, so a 4-5 yard cushion is pretty reasonable IMO.

But by playing tighter (not TIGHT, but tighter) coverage on the outside, you can lessen the stress on the linebackers in pass coverage, which does make it easier for them to defend the run.

Chappell is far from a mobile QB, he's no serious threat on the ground. Michigan also goes downfield much more than an Indiana or Northwestern, so our typical philosophy works better.

Serious question: how many passes did Indiana attempt that was over 15 yards? Not including passes from the 10 to the back of the endzone and such.

Good points...BUT...we are down how many LBs? And unless/until Bernstine and/or others are able/ready/healthy enough to step up and give our CBs and Ss a breather, I think we sort of "have to" play off the way we do.

Chappell may not be Denard Robinson or Dan Persa, but he CAN run. But worse, if we commit too early to the run, we become vulnerable deep/over the top.

Indiana didn't attempt many passes downfield. How could they with the cushion and safety help we give?

I think, at least until we have health and depth in the back 7, that we have to be willing to give up some run yardage to spread/pistol/pass-oriented teams. Our luck was that Indiana lost Willis a month ago, which made them much weaker in the run game. Still, they run that reverse a couple times, with some success.

I think the ONE series that infuriated me was when we broke up a pass toward the goal line--barely, given that an Indiana OL damn near caught the ricochet--and then they ran it successfully on the very next play! And I think THAT is why we give the cushion we do, i.e., not enough seasoned experience in our D-backfield.

 

[Dexter]

I just don't get posts like this. We average over 400 yds of offense and about 35 points per game. What's not to like about that?

Like someone said earlier, go be a fan of Michigan if you want creative offenses......how's that working out for them?

By the way, we could bring in the most creative-minded offensive coordinator in the history of college football and we would be running the exact same thing we are now. Why? Because that's the way our head coach likes it. If you don't like it, then petition to have our head coach removed.

hawkeye12345 is the same nincompoop ragging on KOK on the other board because the offense is ONLY averaging 30 ppg but we have the talent to average 45.

 

[ColoradoHAWKEYE]

Good points...BUT...we are down how many LBs? And unless/until Bernstine and/or others are able/ready/healthy enough to step up and give our CBs and Ss a breather, I think we sort of "have to" play off the way we do.

Chappell may not be Denard Robinson or Dan Persa, but he CAN run. But worse, if we commit too early to the run, we become vulnerable deep/over the top.

Indiana didn't attempt many passes downfield. How could they with the cushion and safety help we give?

I think, at least until we have health and depth in the back 7, that we have to be willing to give up some run yardage to spread/pistol/pass-oriented teams. Our luck was that Indiana lost Willis a month ago, which made them much weaker in the run game. Still, they run that reverse a couple times, with some success.

I think the ONE series that infuriated me was when we broke up a pass toward the goal line--barely, given that an Indiana OL damn near caught the ricochet--and then they ran it successfully on the very next play! And I think THAT is why we give the cushion we do, i.e., not enough seasoned experience in our D-backfield.

+1

I think you are spot on with why we don't dramatically change up the philosophy of our back 7.

 

[tm3308]

Good points...BUT...we are down how many LBs? And unless/until Bernstine and/or others are able/ready/healthy enough to step up and give our CBs and Ss a breather, I think we sort of "have to" play off the way we do.

Chappell may not be Denard Robinson or Dan Persa, but he CAN run. But worse, if we commit too early to the run, we become vulnerable deep/over the top.

Indiana didn't attempt many passes downfield. How could they with the cushion and safety help we give?

I think, at least until we have health and depth in the back 7, that we have to be willing to give up some run yardage to spread/pistol/pass-oriented teams. Our luck was that Indiana lost Willis a month ago, which made them much weaker in the run game. Still, they run that reverse a couple times, with some success.

I think the ONE series that infuriated me was when we broke up a pass toward the goal line--barely, given that an Indiana OL damn near caught the ricochet--and then they ran it successfully on the very next play! And I think THAT is why we give the cushion we do, i.e., not enough seasoned experience in our D-backfield.

The fact that we're down so many linebackers is why I have this opinion. Especially when your two best coverage backers (Tarp and Nielsen) are out, I figured it might not be a bad idea to reduce the stress of pass coverage placed on the unit.

Castillo hasn't looked too bad at all in his time at CB, and I thought Lowe was solid enough by the end of last year.

Indiana and Northwestern don't go deep very much against anyone else, either. That's my point, that their offenses are built around those short passes. We don't take away what they want to do. They're an exception to be sure, because against 90% of the teams out there, taking away the downfield passing game throws a wrench into the offensive gameplan. But it doesn't against IU and NW.

 

[ChosenChildren]

TM 3308, I'm just not buying it.

Iowa's defense was terrific Saturday:

1. Indiana scored 13 points, well under their average.
2. Indiana gained about 310 yards of total offense, way under their average.

The game would not have been close if we score 2 TDs in the red zone out of 4 attempts (we scored none). The problems were with the offense, not the D.

Iowa's defense is in the top 10 nationally in yardage given up and average points given up, and that is against one of the nation's toughest schedules.

I just don't have any issues with our defense this year.

 

[tm3308]

TM 3308, I'm just not buying it.

Iowa's defense was terrific Saturday:

1. Indiana scored 13 points, well under their average.
2. Indiana gained about 310 yards of total offense, way under their average.

The game would not have been close if we score 2 TDs in the red zone out of 4 attempts (we scored none). The problems were with the offense, not the D.

Iowa's defense is in the top 10 nationally in yardage given up and average points given up, and that is against one of the nation's toughest schedules.

I just don't have any issues with our defense this year.

They had a good game statistically, absolutely. But they allowed an offense to march down the field in crunch time, and that hasn't been a one-time occurence this year. I would probably be much less concerned if we already had Northwestern in the rearview mirror. And if we win next week I'll settle down quite a bit. But these are always the two games that worry me the most, and playing them back to back just blows.

 

[ShadasRevenge]

Yes, I know that's what we want. Against 90% of the teams we play, that's what the offense DOESN'T want, which is why it's so effective a vast majority of the time. But when the offense builds THEIR philosophy around taking those 5-10 yards gains, regardless of who they're playing, we don't take them out of their rythm.

Most teams can't consistently execute those 10 play drives against us, because QB's get impatient and force a throw downfield that gets knocked down or intercepted. But IU and NW are extremely efficient with those long, execution-essential drives, because that's what they do all the time, and their QB's embrace that concept.

To say that NW's offense has been "effective" against Iowa is patently false. Last year that offense scored 10 points against the Iowa defense, the year before 22, 7 of which came on a field that was 15 yards long due to a Brodell fumble on a punt.

The defense didn't cost Iowa the win in either of the last two NW games; the culprits were either turnovers and injuries (2008), or injury and penalties (last year)

Yes, it sucks to watch a team like NW dink and dunk their way down the field. That being said, the majority of the time those possessions end in a punt or field goal attempt.

 

[JohnnyDakota]

To say that NW's offense has been "effective" against Iowa is patently false. Last year that offense scored 10 points against the Iowa defense, the year before 22, 7 of which came on a field that was 15 yards long due to a Brodell fumble on a punt.

The defense didn't cost Iowa the win in either of the last two NW games; the culprits were either turnovers and injuries (2008), or injury and penalties (last year)

Yes, it sucks to watch a team like NW dink and dunk their way down the field. That being said, the majority of the time those possessions end in a punt or field goal attempt.

So..........

The show this morning was average at best today. Lots of things to work out. (Travis doing the show from Omaha is a work in progress) Way too many calls and Travis repeating himself over and over again.

 

[SeattleHawkeye]

You do understand that Iowa WANTS the teams to take those short passes don't you? The whole defense is predicated on keeping everything in front of you, and making tackles. Make teams have 10+ play drives and execute the whole way down the field. Why would we shorten up coverage, unless we changed our whole defensive philosophy?

I don't think TM is calling for a defensive philosophical overhaul (I could definitely be wrong), and everybody recognizes forcing a college team to run 10-15 plays offensive drives are challenging. I think the point is that if an offense is going to run short routes and throw underneath most of the game, why not shorten the CB's cushions from 7 to 3-5 yards? I think that's the biggest difference not having Spievey this season, as I'm fairly certain he played fairly tight D by Ferentz/Norm standards. And so it's clear, I'm certainly not advocating any sort of defensive overhaul, as the results speak for themself, but I would like the CB's to play a couple yards tighter (ala Spievey). I think Greenwood and Sash are veteran enough to cover over the top, and sometimes it's easier to jam WR's inside coming from a shorter distance (cushion).

 

[tm3308]

I don't think TM is calling for a defensive philosophical overhaul (I could definitely be wrong), and everybody recognizes forcing a college team to run 10-15 plays offensive drives are challenging. I think the point is that if an offense is going to run short routes and throw underneath most of the game, why not shorten the CB's cushions from 7 to 3-5 yards? I think that's the biggest difference not having Spievey this season, as I'm fairly certain he played fairly tight D by Ferentz/Norm standards. And so it's clear, I'm certainly not advocating any sort of defensive overhaul, as the results speak for themself, but I would like the CB's to play a couple yards tighter (ala Spievey). I think Greenwood and Sash are veteran enough to cover over the top, and sometimes it's easier to jam WR's inside coming from a shorter distance (cushion).

I'm definitely not calling for overhaul. Just for a few slight tweaks against the two teams that want what we give our opponents.

 

[JAHayes23]

The only issue I had w/ the D was a pretty obvious one, they couldn't get pressure out of the 3 man front and got ate up for first downs everytime they went to it. It wasn't working and never worked the entire game. You want to be upset about the defense there ya have it. Went to the 3 man front way too often considering it was a disaster.

However like everybody else is saying, the offense has been a problem. And a lot of the blame has to fall on KOK. Against IN he clearly outsmarted himself when Coker rushes for 122 on 16 carries in the first half, then gets the ball 7 times in the 2nd half. We had 3 straight drives that we didn't even have a rushing attempt. Against the worst run d in the big 10???? I'm sorry but that absolutely can not happen, I don't care about "creativity" I care about playing smart. You don't abandon the run when the opponent can't stop it, you don't stop playing to score when you're only up by 17 at the half. You don't leave the best senior QB in the country in the game throwing passes up 37-6 w/ 3 minutes to go. For years we've talked about Iowa football is sound smart football. But it hasn't been offensively w/ KOK running the show.

 

[deanvogs]

I don't think TM is calling for a defensive philosophical overhaul (I could definitely be wrong), and everybody recognizes forcing a college team to run 10-15 plays offensive drives are challenging. I think the point is that if an offense is going to run short routes and throw underneath most of the game, why not shorten the CB's cushions from 7 to 3-5 yards? I think that's the biggest difference not having Spievey this season, as I'm fairly certain he played fairly tight D by Ferentz/Norm standards. And so it's clear, I'm certainly not advocating any sort of defensive overhaul, as the results speak for themself, but I would like the CB's to play a couple yards tighter (ala Spievey). I think Greenwood and Sash are veteran enough to cover over the top, and sometimes it's easier to jam WR's inside coming from a shorter distance (cushion).

When you change the cushions of the DB to short ones, you take away the underneath pass, but you open up the downfield pass. As a defense you pick your poison. There are always holes in a D that can be exploited by good offensive execution. That is what I don't understand about some posters....they seem to think that the other team isn't supposed to make plays.

Now your point on Spievey on the other hand is spot on I believe. He had the talent to play his assignment (not get burned over the top) and tighten up coverage on the outside. I think it speaks more to the talent of Spievey than anything else. Yet when you do that, you still open up the possibility of a Penn St. type play with a pump fake. Players a human and make mistakes, you just hope it isn't often!!

 

[tm3308]

When you change the cushions of the DB to short ones, you take away the underneath pass, but you open up the downfield pass. As a defense you pick your poison. There are always holes in a D that can be exploited by good offensive execution. That is what I don't understand about some posters....they seem to think that the other team isn't supposed to make plays.

Now your point on Spievey on the other hand is spot on I believe. He had the talent to play his assignment (not get burned over the top) and tighten up coverage on the outside. I think it speaks more to the talent of Spievey than anything else. Yet when you do that, you still open up the possibility of a Penn St. type play with a pump fake. Players a human and make mistakes, you just hope it isn't often!!

Remember, I'm only calling for these slight tweaks against IU and NW. They don't run many deep routes against anybody, especially NW. By taking away the deep passing game, you're taking away something that they don't really utilize in their gameplans anyway. Against pretty much every other team we face, I like our scheme a lot. I'd just like to see slight adjustments against these two teams, who run the kind of offense that is built around beating our defense.