Miller: Getting Defensive
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
Rawkhawk73
Banned
Jon, I agree with everything you said concerning the defense with one exception. In a season in which it appears that the stars are aligned.....where it appears personnel are in place for a major national run that we hadn't seen in 25 years.....the "micro" does matter.
Take a look at the National Championship contenders over the past several years. With the exception of USC, which for 2-3 years was putting an NFL team on the field, most teams have that one or two games where they needed to make a stand or a big play. The great teams do that.
In the two games we lost, we were tied/in the lead with less than 5 minutes to go. Both times, the defense gave up long scoring drives which allowed the other team to win the game. In the macro, even in those two games, the defense did a pretty decent job. But in the micro sense, with the game on the line, one possession, the defense couldn't come up with a stop.
The great Iowa defenses we remember, whether it be 1985 and Larry Station stopping Jamie Morris on 3rd and short. 2004 against Wisconsin when Drew Tate came out and gave them 2 short fields in a row and the defense gave up nothing. 2008 Penn State and the defense forcing an interception that gave us the ball back. These are the things that define a GREAT defense and the things great Iowa defenses have done in the past.
In the end, this is the reason why I think fans have been somewhat frustrated. Because in the times that have REALLY mattered, the defense hasn't risen to the occasion.
In the end, stats tell a story, but they don't tell the WHOLE story.
Take a look at the National Championship contenders over the past several years. With the exception of USC, which for 2-3 years was putting an NFL team on the field, most teams have that one or two games where they needed to make a stand or a big play. The great teams do that.
In the two games we lost, we were tied/in the lead with less than 5 minutes to go. Both times, the defense gave up long scoring drives which allowed the other team to win the game. In the macro, even in those two games, the defense did a pretty decent job. But in the micro sense, with the game on the line, one possession, the defense couldn't come up with a stop.
The great Iowa defenses we remember, whether it be 1985 and Larry Station stopping Jamie Morris on 3rd and short. 2004 against Wisconsin when Drew Tate came out and gave them 2 short fields in a row and the defense gave up nothing. 2008 Penn State and the defense forcing an interception that gave us the ball back. These are the things that define a GREAT defense and the things great Iowa defenses have done in the past.
In the end, this is the reason why I think fans have been somewhat frustrated. Because in the times that have REALLY mattered, the defense hasn't risen to the occasion.
In the end, stats tell a story, but they don't tell the WHOLE story.
Last edited:
JDMisMyHero
Member
Good post Jon. What do you think of the teams that Iowa has problem with, that throws the quick short passes, like Indiana and NW. Let the corners hit the wr at the line, which slows them and throws the timing off and give DL time to rush the qb and LB go zone? And you still got the S in zone. Just want the opinion of someone I look up to 
hawkfan8691
Well-Known Member
Amen Jon. Unfortunately, trying to get through to some of the hardheaded Iowa fans is easier said than done
Saginawbay
Well-Known Member
Jon
Interesting read and I would agree defense has made us the program we are no question. What has been frustrating this year is we have given up two long game driving TD's. So it is frustrating knowing how close this team is to being undefeated. Both games defense was unable to make a play in both AZ and UW games, and just makes it frustrating.
Interesting read and I would agree defense has made us the program we are no question. What has been frustrating this year is we have given up two long game driving TD's. So it is frustrating knowing how close this team is to being undefeated. Both games defense was unable to make a play in both AZ and UW games, and just makes it frustrating.
Here's what I don't understand. If you know the other teams strategy is going to be to get the ball out quickly because their o-line isn't a match for your d-line why not play everyone up and make the quarterback hold the ball a little longer? Why not make them beat you deep once?
Take Northwestern for example. We all know what they're going to try and do. But why not play the corners up and make them prove they're even able to throw the ball downfield without one of our safeties getting to it. But by allowing them to run 5 yard slants/outs all game you effectively eliminate the two best units on Iowa's defense (d-line and safeties)
Take Northwestern for example. We all know what they're going to try and do. But why not play the corners up and make them prove they're even able to throw the ball downfield without one of our safeties getting to it. But by allowing them to run 5 yard slants/outs all game you effectively eliminate the two best units on Iowa's defense (d-line and safeties)
BSpringsteen
Well-Known Member
This is one of the smartest posts I have read in a long time on here.
Look, every defensive scheme has its holes, and we can debate ad naseum whether we ought to be blitzing and trying to force errors and be susceptible to the big play, or play the defense that we've played for ten years. Both defenses can be scored on, no defense is perfect.
So I am going to take this position.
If Nick Foles doesn't throw a perfect pass, who knows how that happens, and that was a PERFECT pass.
If KF doesn't have a massive brain fart and we call a punt safe, we win that game.
And even if Indiana scores and we lose that game, shouldn't 20 points be an expectation for our offense against a team like Indiana?
Our defense was beat in one instance.
Our ccoaches stunk in one instance.
Our scheme let us down in one instance.
We have been burned badly with LB's being forced to cover the fastest and best WR on the team before. That would have been another hash mark in that category.
I don't think anyone on here wants Iowa to change its scheme. What I think we want (and maybe this is where we really are missing Norm more than we know) is to be able to make the adjustments necessary as game terms dictate.
Because you have NO DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR! Look at it this way, if your boss goes on vacation and your are left to run things, are you going to make any drastic changes? No. You will do things pretty much the routine way things have been done. Even if things go wrong, if you can prove that you did things according to standard procedure, you will be fine.
Also, you have two guys making the decision one guy made before. The odds of getting two guys to agree on making a risky move (having zone corners play bump and run) are way higher than just getting one guy to do it.
Seriously guys, it is on the players to execute even without the coaches making any adjustments to help them.
So, instead of having Prater play bump and run, he will just have to react quicker and jump some of these slants. Also, it will be up to Clayborn and company to get off the ball faster to disrupt Persa before he can finish his drop or reset outside the pocket.
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
Not to be smart...
but sometimes the other team is just better than you are on a particular play, or a particular game. I would argue the defense did make a crucial stop against Wisconsin, our special teams let us down with the fake punt. Of course Wisky still had to go the remaining 50 yards for a TD, but we did have them stopped.
And no one stops the opponent EVERY time. The great 2008 defense had Iowa rally from a 15-point fourth quarter deficit against Illinois only to give up a drive and FG at the end. In 2008 Stanzi took Iowa down the field for the game-winner against a very good PSU defense. Penn State fans were upset with their staff for not playing certain schemes on the last drive. In 2009 Greenwood intercepted a bad Denard Robinson pass for Iowa to win 30-28. Two more first downs and Michigan would have been lining up for a FG attempt. In 2009 MSU drives the length of the field for a go-ahead TD, then sees Iowa go right back for Stanzi-to-McNutt to win it for Iowa.
My point is that games that come down to the last possession between teams of somewhat-equal talent won't always go our way. It's football. It doesn't mean that our coaches are stupid when we lose, or that we coached circles around the opponent when we win. The teams that win national titles are generally good enough so that only 1 to 2 games a year come down to the last possession. They are winning comfortably, then they escape in the few close games they find themselves in.
I would agree that this season is frustrating (to a degree) because (my opinion) we have one of the best overall teams we've had in a long time. More offensive weapons and good, experienced skill talent on that side of the ball than we are used to seeing at Iowa. We can move it against anyone's defense, which hasn't always been the case. But here we are in November with a Big 10 title still square in our sites if we take care of Northwestern this week. I would take that scenario every year as an Iowa fan.
but sometimes the other team is just better than you are on a particular play, or a particular game. I would argue the defense did make a crucial stop against Wisconsin, our special teams let us down with the fake punt. Of course Wisky still had to go the remaining 50 yards for a TD, but we did have them stopped.
And no one stops the opponent EVERY time. The great 2008 defense had Iowa rally from a 15-point fourth quarter deficit against Illinois only to give up a drive and FG at the end. In 2008 Stanzi took Iowa down the field for the game-winner against a very good PSU defense. Penn State fans were upset with their staff for not playing certain schemes on the last drive. In 2009 Greenwood intercepted a bad Denard Robinson pass for Iowa to win 30-28. Two more first downs and Michigan would have been lining up for a FG attempt. In 2009 MSU drives the length of the field for a go-ahead TD, then sees Iowa go right back for Stanzi-to-McNutt to win it for Iowa.
My point is that games that come down to the last possession between teams of somewhat-equal talent won't always go our way. It's football. It doesn't mean that our coaches are stupid when we lose, or that we coached circles around the opponent when we win. The teams that win national titles are generally good enough so that only 1 to 2 games a year come down to the last possession. They are winning comfortably, then they escape in the few close games they find themselves in.
I would agree that this season is frustrating (to a degree) because (my opinion) we have one of the best overall teams we've had in a long time. More offensive weapons and good, experienced skill talent on that side of the ball than we are used to seeing at Iowa. We can move it against anyone's defense, which hasn't always been the case. But here we are in November with a Big 10 title still square in our sites if we take care of Northwestern this week. I would take that scenario every year as an Iowa fan.
JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
You act as though there is an on-off switch.
To me, the Wisconsin game was the one where the defense got pushed around. Even then, the badgers had to go double digit plays to score on four of their five scoring drives..two of them 15 plays.
The Arizona game, I am sorry, but the defense gave up one legit TD drive and the other team made a helluva play
That is what people are taking out of the equation, too....that the other team has scholarship caliber players, some that will be in the NFL, and can make plays, too. It's always that Iowa's defense has to stand in the gap ten times out of ten.
As much as the defense allowed vs Wisconsin on the scoreboard, there were many facets of that game that created the loss. In the AZ game, the defense was LAST on the list of concerns.
BSpringsteen
Well-Known Member
For the simple reason that it validates your opinion
No, because it articulates very well where the frustration has lied, not in the scheme, not in the personnel, but in the end results when its mattered most.
For the simple reason that it validates your opinion
LOL.
On a related note, Yunno you and I haven't always seen eye to eye, but IMO a good post is one that sparks thoughtful discussion. So I say to you, "Good post."
Stiles
Well-Known Member
Jon, I agree with you and the point of your article. The macro and end result is what matters and wins and stats have proven this out.
The only thing I will disagree with is our level of talent. Just because a guy was not "highly recruited" doesn't mean he isn’t “elite”. Additionally they may not come in “elite”, but by the time they play and or graduate they are elite. This has been proven out with the number of players in the NFL.
It is a huge credit to the coaches how the players are developed into elite players, but that has nothing to do with the scheme.
So even though you like our scheme, I don't think you can claim that it is even more impressive with players that aren't elite. That isn't true, we have elite talent on defensive and have had in the past.
FWIW, I would define elite as a college player that makes it to the NFL.
The only thing I will disagree with is our level of talent. Just because a guy was not "highly recruited" doesn't mean he isn’t “elite”. Additionally they may not come in “elite”, but by the time they play and or graduate they are elite. This has been proven out with the number of players in the NFL.
It is a huge credit to the coaches how the players are developed into elite players, but that has nothing to do with the scheme.
So even though you like our scheme, I don't think you can claim that it is even more impressive with players that aren't elite. That isn't true, we have elite talent on defensive and have had in the past.
FWIW, I would define elite as a college player that makes it to the NFL.
Great, Great post. Our defense as a whole over the past 9 years has been very, very good. Our defense is the reason that we have finished in the top 8, 4 times out of the last 8 years. Our defense is the reason that we have been to multiple January Bowl games and 2 BCS games and won some very big games.
But on the final drive of games particularly against Arizona and Wisconsin and Indiana this year, our defense fails miserably. When the game is on the line with 1-4 minutes to play, it seems like our defense rarely stops anybody. Against Illinois in 2008, our offense just tied the game with a late TD and 2 point conversion and we go into bend but don't break and Illinois scores a game winning FG against us. Why can't we change things up on the final drive and play more press coverage on receivers or try to blitz more. THE GAME IS ON THE LINE. You can't let a team dink and dunk all the way down the field on you especially if the team only needs a FG to win the game.
Our defense as a whole, Jon Miller, has been great over the years. I don't think anybody is going to argue with that fact. But time and time again on the final drive, when the game is on the line, Our Defense doesn't seem to stop anybody because teams go for broke and have to go for it on 4th down. So then you have to change your defense up a little bit and try to be more aggressive.
Rawkhawk73
Banned
Good people can certainly disagree and this is just where you and I disagree.
I've heard you state all year one reason or another why things have happened to the defense. Foles is the most accurate passer Iowa will face all year....until we faced Tolzien......until we faced Chappell. Or Wisconsin's O-line is the best since Iowa's in 2002. Or every QB we've faced throws short outs and sacks are hard to come by.
There's nothing wrong with saying that Iowa's defense just doesn't have that "it" factor this year.....WHEN IT'S COUNTED. In the big picture sense, they've done what they've needed to do, but when it's come down to "nut-cuttin'" time, they haven't. I just don't understand what's so wrong with admitting that.
If our team has been built on defense over the last 10 years as you state (and I agree with), then in those FEW times when the game is on the line, you should be able to depend on that unit....."dance with the one that brung ya". There have been two times we have needed the defense in the closing minutes of a tight game this year......Arizona and Wisconsin. In both cases, they allowed each team to drive over 50 yards for a touchdown.
No one, certainly not me, is asking them to be perfect. But you openly wonder why fans seem upset or frustrated and people are giving legitimate reasons and you want to sweep them under the rug. That's your perogative, of course. Just know that this is where a lot of us are coming at this from.
SixAMtailgate
Well-Known Member
Jon, overall good piece, and while overall the Iowa defense has played well as a unit, that still isn't going to change my angry reaction to either of the following "micro" situations:
1. A linebacker lined up on a WR on 3rd and 6 and getting beat on a quick slant or square in route.
2. Our corners giving an 8 yard cushion on 3rd and 5 or more when the corner is alone on that side and has safety help over the top.
That is all.
1. A linebacker lined up on a WR on 3rd and 6 and getting beat on a quick slant or square in route.
2. Our corners giving an 8 yard cushion on 3rd and 5 or more when the corner is alone on that side and has safety help over the top.
That is all.
sergeanthulka
Well-Known Member
Agree 100%, RAW.
Our front 4 is phenominal, yet, we are allowing teams to scheme away from them, basically taking that advantage off the table. Coaching is a game of adjustments, yet, we seem stubbornly unwilling to make the point/counterpoint adjustment.
Chappel wasn't going to hurt us throwing the ball down the field & he also spent the entire week in a walking boot. Our corners are above average & our safeties are exceptional. Yet we allow him to throw to a first look the entire game. That is a lack of feel for what is going on, imo...
