LB Depth Has Caused D to Stay in Base

[MisterWinky]

Watching the MSU game from last year, one thing that stands out is the multiple looks the Defense ran, from zone blitzes with Ballard dropping into middle zone coverage to running man free when MSU went empty backfield on 3rd down in the 2nd quarter.

Iowa did not try any of that vs Wisky and it is b/c of the lack of depth/health of the LBs (and no Spievey).

It will be interesting to see if they try and mix it up at least a little bit Satrurday or if they continue to stay base and try to not give up the big play.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

I think that you hit the nail on the head. LB inexperience reduces the options of what the D can do. Having the D be multiple is only good if they can execute it with consistency. That is the problem with having youth/inexperience at pretty critical positions.

 

[wdmhawk]

I hope they mix it up, otherwise I doubt MSU has any problems moving the ball. They have better receivers than Wisky does, and equal talent at RB. I like our O's ability to move the ball, so why not take some chances early and try to rattle Cousins.

 

[PlanoHawk]

I don't know if we can really expect us to mix it up with the youth/inexperience we have back there right now. this is not a knock on the abilities of the guys we're putting out- but they just don't have that much game experience.

I do however, expect improvement from last week to this week.

 

[STILLBUSTER]

There has been a glaring lack of anything but plain vanilla base D. Agree it has to do with the depleted / rookie LB's and inconsistent CB's but also believe it has something to do with Norm's absence.

Even given the above, I still think Norm would have tried some well-timed aggression during Wisky's game-winning drive, especially when they faced a couple 3rd / longs & even a 4th down, to at least keep them honest. Really nothing to lose because, as it turned out, damned if they did and damned when they didn't.

The entire defense during Norm's absence has relied on the front 4 to wreak havoc. That's a lot of pressure. In retrospect, considering Wisky's massive and equally talented OL, they really did quite well to carry the other 2/3 of the D.

I expect a much better overall defensive performance vs MSU, even if they continue to not vary from the base.

Unfortunately, I also expect a much worse offensive performance against a much stouter MSU D.

 

[MidnightBlueSix]

We also didn't have Norm there to dial up the plays and to know the right scenarios to mix things up. He'll be in the booth Saturday but apparently won't be coaching (yeah, right).

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

There has been a glaring lack of anything but plain vanilla base D. Agree it has to do with the depleted / rookie LB's and inconsistent CB's but also believe it has something to do with Norm's absence.

Even given the above, I still think Norm would have tried some well-timed aggression during Wisky's game-winning drive, especially when they faced a couple 3rd / longs & even a 4th down, to at least keep them honest. Really nothing to lose because, as it turned out, damned if they did and damned when they didn't.

The entire defense during Norm's absence has relied on the front 4 to wreak havoc. That's a lot of pressure. In retrospect, considering Wisky's massive and equally talented OL, they really did quite well to carry the other 2/3 of the D.

I expect a much better overall defensive performance vs MSU, even if they continue to not vary from the base.

Unfortunately, I also expect a much worse offensive performance against a much stouter MSU D.

That's not true. Iowa's D got a bit risky for a time there against Forcier at the end against Michigan. We brought a few blitzes and we showed them both 4-3 and 3-4 looks.

Furthermore, we've been doing A LOT of different things with the DL. And that's not terribly surprising because we did a lot of different things with our DL back in 2004 too.

One thing that has inhibited our ability to play more nickel looks is that some of our top safety back-ups had seemingly been dinged up a little bit and/or their play had been a bit inconsistent. Thus, against teams that are good at running the ball, I don't think that we're as keen about using nickel packages that are more CB-heavy. If Iowa can play a LB against the run ... we tend to err on that side of things. Of course, with the injuries that we've been dealing with ... it's harder to determine what the right thing to do will be.

 

[Saginawbay]

Watching the MSU game from last year, one thing that stands out is the multiple looks the Defense ran, from zone blitzes with Ballard dropping into middle zone coverage to running man free when MSU went empty backfield on 3rd down in the 2nd quarter.

Iowa did not try any of that vs Wisky and it is b/c of the lack of depth/health of the LBs (and no Spievey).

It will be interesting to see if they try and mix it up at least a little bit Satrurday or if they continue to stay base and try to not give up the big play.

Would agree LB play has been a problem and injuries have made it worse.