My Sunday morning 2 cents worth

Hawkfnntn

Well-Known Member
I like to sleep on what all happened to help me digest what all I saw. And what I saw was a young qb that after the game he had last week seemed to have the reins pulled in on him. Coaches made an overwhelming effort this entire game to pound it. There were over 50 carries in this game when you include what Rudock did as well. He must have been told that if the pass isn't wide open to run it. And if it is wide open and you can run it to still run it. Felt bad for CJF he should have had that TD.

Not sure if it's because of the opponent that the game plan was what it was but Rudock wasn't allowed to grow with his receivers much in this game. I was happy to see more targets to TEs this game. I think there were 7 completions to them and a few more attempts. I wish the deep ball he threw to Hamilton would have been more on the money. Would have liked to see him go up for a ball.

In regards to the running game I don't think this Oline is what we were all hoping it would be. Maybe they will be as the year goes on but there should have been more chunk plays and clean 5 yard runs against this team. I am not a proponent of taking the redshirt off of Daniels in this case because if he's the 3rd rb now where does that put Canzeri, the only rb on this roster capable of making big plays at? It has him not being used much and rumored to want to transfer. I like the Weisman Bullock and Canzeri 3 headed monster. They all compliment each other well and your not going to have a game where all 3 of them are worked too much to where a 4th rb is needed. It looked to me like they played him because the coaches wanted to see what they have in Daniels and maybe they promised him prior to the season after seeing him in August that they would play him. He could be really really good. I hope he is. But what good is a really good player doing blowing his redshirt by having 5 touches in a really low on the radar game. There will be games going forward where he's used less then that if not at all unless Weisman gets nicked. A player 4th or lower on the depth chart shouldn't be having his red shirt burned unless it's a desperation move.

I feel bad for Powell. I don't think this coaching staff knows what to do with him. They need to throw that damn bubble screen play out of the playbook. I would like to ask you readers to find the last time that play worked for a big play or to get a big 1st down when it was 3rd and long. Cause the Brad Banks era is all that comes to mind for me there. This was a game Powell should have gotten lots of work but they ran a bunch of bodies out there all games long and it didn't allow Rudock any kind of chance to work with who should be the top guys on the depth chart. The staff must really be in love with Shumpert for some reason that we all don't know. He just can't catch the dang ball. He caught 2 balls out of what 4 or 5 that were on his hands? I think he needs KMM Hillyer Cotton and Powell to be the core group. That's a mix of possesion type guys with good hands in KMM and Cotton (who also has some speed) with Hillyer who's a bigger guy that I'm impressed with his run blocking. And Powells game breaking ability needs to be on the field more.

As far as the D goes I thought the Dline played well at plugging the run but no body seems to be able to just beat their guy and get to the passer. There were a couple of times where the qb escaped the pocked with pressure in his face but I think all would agree that's not where it should be.

It's tough to grade out on D much against a team like this. Hitchens had a great game. It was nice to see a pick off of quick pressure in the qbs face. More of that would be great. Is Lomax hurt or was King just given a chance to start this game? I didn't get to listen to radio. Witch ever one of them is on that island is going to get picked on alot this year. He got beat bad on that studder go route. That was about the only head shaking play I remember the D having. This game wasn't going to tell us much more about the D.

Overall I wish they didn't put the training wheels on Rudock. Would have rather seen them have confidence in him and not dummy down the playbook quite that much. He looked tenative to pull the trigger and not trust his receivers (maybe that's for good reason). That'll put a ton of pressure on the Oline this year to be roadgraters and we'll see if they are up to it as the year goes on.
 








Good breakdown. You're about where I'm at. I think they might have reigned him in a bit. I'm concerned about the amount of carries Weisman gets. I realize he's a bruiser, but they're going to wear him down/out as the season wears on. I don't think Bullock looked good and wish Canzeri would get more of his touches.
To answer your question, yes Lomax is hurt. King played alright aside from the td he gave up. He recovered a fumble if IRC.
 




Also, Iowa had to run the ball since Rudock was running for his life because the O-line doesn't block very well.
 


That's not putting the training wheels on. That's the strategy we should be using all the time, especially against inferior opponents. We ran the ball 67% of the plays yesterday. We really tilted toward run in the 2nd half.

Teams like Wisconsin and Alabama are usually around 65-70% run every year on average. Since the strength of our team is almost always the OL we should be doing the same.

I think KF's mindset of 50/50 balance is a big reason we struggle to beat the MAC teams and ISU's of the world.

If you notice, about 90% of the plays in the 2nd half were two TE sets. That's good for two reasons. It helps the power running game AND it plays to Rudock's strengths as a QB (short and medium length passes).
 


That's not putting the training wheels on. That's the strategy we should be using all the time, especially against inferior opponents. We ran the ball 67% of the plays yesterday. We really tilted toward run in the 2nd half.

Teams like Wisconsin and Alabama are usually around 65-70% run every year on average. Since the strength of our team is almost always the OL we should be doing the same.

I think KF's mindset of 50/50 balance is a big reason we struggle to beat the MAC teams and ISU's of the world.

If you notice, about 90% of the plays in the 2nd half were two TE sets. That's good for two reasons. It helps the power running game AND it plays to Rudock's strengths as a QB (short and medium length passes).

I didn't have a problem with running the ball more instead of passing at all. That isn't what I was eluding to. In fact I wish they would have ran more last game. I think the type of passing plays they ran and the dinking and dunking that Rudock did was by either the coaches or his own choice was to be pretty conservative. Had more down the field shots the first game and not too many in this one. Now I'm not saying they need to go deep like they tried last week 5 times a game. But more then once would sure be nice to keep teams honest. I agree 100 percent with you on the 2 te sets. TEs are a big strength to this team and they should have 2 of them on the field more often then not.
 


I agree about the O-Line.

For every long run Weisman had, he was stuffed for 1 or fewer yards twice. (it seems) and I think it's true in fact. This 2 to 1 ratio is disconcerning and a big reason why drives fizzle out. Five drives fizzled out on Saturday. 5.
 


I agree about the O-Line.

For every long run Weisman had, he was stuffed for 1 or fewer yards twice. (it seems) and I think it's true in fact. This 2 to 1 ratio is disconcerning and a big reason why drives fizzle out. Five drives fizzled out on Saturday. 5.

I always wonder if we shouldn't run more on 3rd down. It's almost a surprise play to run on 3rd down any more. I counted 6 non-scoring drives on Saturday. 5 out of the 6 non-scoring drives ended with passing plays on 3rd down (either an incomplete pass, a pass short of the 1st down or a sack, 1 time). The other non-scoring drive was Weisman's run on 4th and 1, where we got a **** poor spot.

We were 50% on 3rd down (7 for 14). So 5 out of the 7 failed attempts on 3rd down were passing plays. Again, one of the 3rd downs was a Weisman run for 3 yards that set-up the 4th and 1 run (that failed but was a good call).
 


I didn't have a problem with running the ball more instead of passing at all. That isn't what I was eluding to. In fact I wish they would have ran more last game. I think the type of passing plays they ran and the dinking and dunking that Rudock did was by either the coaches or his own choice was to be pretty conservative. Had more down the field shots the first game and not too many in this one. Now I'm not saying they need to go deep like they tried last week 5 times a game. But more then once would sure be nice to keep teams honest. I agree 100 percent with you on the 2 te sets. TEs are a big strength to this team and they should have 2 of them on the field more often then not.

Oh, I agree with that view. I think when we are throwing we should go downfield more often but generally we should try to run more often play mix wise (last week was fine especially in the 2nd half).
 


I agree about the O-Line.

For every long run Weisman had, he was stuffed for 1 or fewer yards twice. (it seems) and I think it's true in fact. This 2 to 1 ratio is disconcerning and a big reason why drives fizzle out. Five drives fizzled out on Saturday. 5.

Exactly and that's what I was trying to get at. In that game I was hoping to see way more 5-7 yard gains before he was touched then what he had. He was stuffed quite a lot and that's what helps contribute to putting us in the 3rd and longs that we are never any good at converting.
 


Wow...maybe I need to watch the games again. I think the offensive line is playing pretty well, outside of the stupid mental penalties Saturday. Rudock has time to throw, our backs are picking up blitzes and they seem to be in control of the line of scrimmage. We were running into 8 man fronts against MS most of the day and the way they play, it's tough to run outside them. The negative plays were typically to the right side and our backs tried to get outside rather than put a foot in the ground and get what they could. The weakness in a 30 fronts is typically inside where you double the nose and pull the opposite guard to trap the LB. I couldn't figure out why we weren't saying inside between the nose and tackle, but Weisman did break a few on the outside.

My feeling is that the OL typically takes a few games to get it really rolling and become more consistent. That's why I'm glad we played this week...we needed the work. Going into Lames with a couple of games helps matters. Rudock shouldn't be surprised by anything...and I think he will handle the pressure well. I also think we are going to pound the **** out of the ball...then go deep when their safeties get sucked up to make tackles. I don't think they have an answer for our offensive line. If Northern Iowa controlled the line of scrimmage...I expect we will do the same. We are bigger and more athletic. I honestly think this is a big game for the guys on this team. We've lost two in a row. They want the Cornhole trophy in their case in Iowa City.
 




Top