STILLBUSTER
Well-Known Member
Sheridan has it a pick-em and most have Mz favored x 1. I get that books want equal $ on both sides but there seems so little to support this being such a close call. The only notable stats being:
Scoring offense: Mz = 30.3 (44th) / IA = 29.1 (49th)
Scoring defense: Mz = 15.2 (6th) / IA = 16.4 (7th)
3rd down defense: Mz = 39.1% (55th) / IA = 38.95% (53rd)
Instead, I look at the last 3 games and see:
Mz: 3-0 (K ST, @ ISU, KS = a combined avg record of 5-7).
IA: 0-3 (@NU, OSU, @Minny = a combined avg record of 7-3).
Offense
Mz: 29 pts / 386 yds (186 pass, 200 rush, 5.0 / rush)
IA: 19.3 pts / 291 yds (197 pass, 94 rush, 3.6 / rush)
Defense
Mz: 11.7 pts / 298 yds (153 pass, 145 rush, 3.5 / rush)
IA: 22.7 pts / 387 yds (226 pass, 161 rush, 4.2 / rush).
So, while Mz was performing like a respectable team should -- beating equal / inferior opponents -- Iowa was winless against what, on average, were equal / inferior opponents.
What's more, I see scary things that specifically exploit the weaknesses contributing to the Hawk's embarrassing free-fall:
-- A running QB
On the season, Gabbert rushed 99 times for 239 yards. Over the last 5 games, he rushed for 58 times for 239 yards., including a high of 22 for 74 yards against Nebraska. During those games he was only 79 / 149 (53%) passing for 4 td's / 3 oskies.
This is a big red flag for a several reasons:
1) Mz focused on emphasizing Gabbert's legs -- something the Hawks were humiliated by multiple times against Persa, Pryor and Weber (who went a combined 36 rushes for 161 yards)
2) Pinkel showed his ability and willingness to abruptly tweak the offensive gameplan toward a strength, or, at least an attempt to add another wrinkle to keep opposing defense off guard. KF ... not so much.
(Can't tell you the number of times I correctly predicted the following series to occur during the Minny game: 1st down pass (incomplete) - 2nd down rush off guard / tackle into stacked defensive front (for 3 or less yards) - 3rd down pass (incomplete). Not that my accuracy is anything special. Any chimp paying attention could get pretty close because ... it's Iowa.)
3) Iowa's 3rd-down defense over the last 3 games = 25 / 47 (a disgraceful 53.2%), while it's 3rd-down offense = 11 / 35 (an equally pathetic 31.4%).
The trifecta of an offense that can't stay on the field + a defense that can't get off the field + a big, strong QB who has begun to emphasize his legs = bad news for Iowa.
-- Red zone defense
Mz is #1 in the country, allowing 101 pts on 13 td's / 4 fg's. Teams score 55% of the time.
IA is #24 in the country, allowing 170 pts on 21 td's / 8 fg's. Teams score 76% of the time.
Both have equally proficient red zone offenses (IA = #12: 89%, 31 td's / 10 fg's; Mz = #17: 88%, 29 td's / 14 fg's) so this favors Mz -- a higher liklihood of scoring against the weaker defense.
-- Sacks
Mz = #6 in the country, avg 3.1 / game.
IA = #82 int he country, avg 1.7 / game.
This indicates a defense willing to take well-timed blitz opportunites and executing them very successfully. We all know how the OL & Ricky have handled that recently.
-- Intangibles
Mz on a 3-0 run; IA on a 0-3;
the "late game in Arizona" hex;
the bad "Missouri chickens" karma of a few year's ago coming round.
I look at the stats, trends, tendencies and see an easy win for Mz. Even Sagarin's calculations support this:
Rating: Mz = 88.32 / IA = 79.24
ELO: Mz = 88.57 / IA = 76.30
Predictor: Mz = 87.51 / IA = 82.58
Schedule: Mz = 26th / IA = 51st.
On average, Mz should win by at least 8.
Personally, I see the same ****** as the last 3 games. Iowa finishes with another humiliating come-from-ahead loss as Gabbert dinks, dunks and runs for the winning td ...
Mz 29 - IA 24.
***Edit: fixed the Sagarin predictor (had them reversed).
For the record, I did not curse. (Although, Lord knows I've been cursing Iowa football every day since November 13th. Not to mention, cursing myself for not following through with a call to my bro-in-law in Vegas to put a c on Minny to cover what I knew would be a Hawkeye loss.)
I typed the word s-c-r-i-p-t (as in -- a deliberate written direction that a performance will follow to it's conclusion) and for some reason it was censored.
Scoring offense: Mz = 30.3 (44th) / IA = 29.1 (49th)
Scoring defense: Mz = 15.2 (6th) / IA = 16.4 (7th)
3rd down defense: Mz = 39.1% (55th) / IA = 38.95% (53rd)
Instead, I look at the last 3 games and see:
Mz: 3-0 (K ST, @ ISU, KS = a combined avg record of 5-7).
IA: 0-3 (@NU, OSU, @Minny = a combined avg record of 7-3).
Offense
Mz: 29 pts / 386 yds (186 pass, 200 rush, 5.0 / rush)
IA: 19.3 pts / 291 yds (197 pass, 94 rush, 3.6 / rush)
Defense
Mz: 11.7 pts / 298 yds (153 pass, 145 rush, 3.5 / rush)
IA: 22.7 pts / 387 yds (226 pass, 161 rush, 4.2 / rush).
So, while Mz was performing like a respectable team should -- beating equal / inferior opponents -- Iowa was winless against what, on average, were equal / inferior opponents.
What's more, I see scary things that specifically exploit the weaknesses contributing to the Hawk's embarrassing free-fall:
-- A running QB
On the season, Gabbert rushed 99 times for 239 yards. Over the last 5 games, he rushed for 58 times for 239 yards., including a high of 22 for 74 yards against Nebraska. During those games he was only 79 / 149 (53%) passing for 4 td's / 3 oskies.
This is a big red flag for a several reasons:
1) Mz focused on emphasizing Gabbert's legs -- something the Hawks were humiliated by multiple times against Persa, Pryor and Weber (who went a combined 36 rushes for 161 yards)
2) Pinkel showed his ability and willingness to abruptly tweak the offensive gameplan toward a strength, or, at least an attempt to add another wrinkle to keep opposing defense off guard. KF ... not so much.
(Can't tell you the number of times I correctly predicted the following series to occur during the Minny game: 1st down pass (incomplete) - 2nd down rush off guard / tackle into stacked defensive front (for 3 or less yards) - 3rd down pass (incomplete). Not that my accuracy is anything special. Any chimp paying attention could get pretty close because ... it's Iowa.)
3) Iowa's 3rd-down defense over the last 3 games = 25 / 47 (a disgraceful 53.2%), while it's 3rd-down offense = 11 / 35 (an equally pathetic 31.4%).
The trifecta of an offense that can't stay on the field + a defense that can't get off the field + a big, strong QB who has begun to emphasize his legs = bad news for Iowa.
-- Red zone defense
Mz is #1 in the country, allowing 101 pts on 13 td's / 4 fg's. Teams score 55% of the time.
IA is #24 in the country, allowing 170 pts on 21 td's / 8 fg's. Teams score 76% of the time.
Both have equally proficient red zone offenses (IA = #12: 89%, 31 td's / 10 fg's; Mz = #17: 88%, 29 td's / 14 fg's) so this favors Mz -- a higher liklihood of scoring against the weaker defense.
-- Sacks
Mz = #6 in the country, avg 3.1 / game.
IA = #82 int he country, avg 1.7 / game.
This indicates a defense willing to take well-timed blitz opportunites and executing them very successfully. We all know how the OL & Ricky have handled that recently.
-- Intangibles
Mz on a 3-0 run; IA on a 0-3;
the "late game in Arizona" hex;
the bad "Missouri chickens" karma of a few year's ago coming round.
I look at the stats, trends, tendencies and see an easy win for Mz. Even Sagarin's calculations support this:
Rating: Mz = 88.32 / IA = 79.24
ELO: Mz = 88.57 / IA = 76.30
Predictor: Mz = 87.51 / IA = 82.58
Schedule: Mz = 26th / IA = 51st.
On average, Mz should win by at least 8.
Personally, I see the same ****** as the last 3 games. Iowa finishes with another humiliating come-from-ahead loss as Gabbert dinks, dunks and runs for the winning td ...
Mz 29 - IA 24.
***Edit: fixed the Sagarin predictor (had them reversed).
For the record, I did not curse. (Although, Lord knows I've been cursing Iowa football every day since November 13th. Not to mention, cursing myself for not following through with a call to my bro-in-law in Vegas to put a c on Minny to cover what I knew would be a Hawkeye loss.)
I typed the word s-c-r-i-p-t (as in -- a deliberate written direction that a performance will follow to it's conclusion) and for some reason it was censored.
Last edited:
