No faith in backup RB's?

A

azhawkeyefan

Well-Known Member
Looking at the play by play chart, once Weisman got hurt in the 2nd Quarter Iowa only attempted 3 more runs with RB's the entire game (2 to Bullock and 1 to hobbled Weisman). For a game that was 1 possession game going into the 4th quarter, doesn't it seem they gave up a little early in the run game? Sure, MSU was stuffing the run early on Iowa. They stuffed us early last year in East Lansing too, and our dumpster fire of a team last year stuck with the run and finally broke through in the 4th quarter.

Was abandoning the run so early an indication of how the coaches feel about the RB's behind Weisman?
 
The run game just wasn't working. They made the right choice. I think it says more about how they felt the o-line was handling that MSU defensive front.
 
Burning Daniels RS will go down along with a plethora of other head scratchers Cap'n has done in his tenure. Daniels should have been in there to give it a go a few times. We don't have the burners on the flanks to keep the DB's honest, we need to be able to run the ball to keep the D honest.
 
Clark said:
The run game just wasn't working. They made the right choice. I think it says more about how they felt the o-line was handling that MSU defensive front.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree with this. I mean, I agree it wasn't working early, but to completely abandon the run like that gets away from who we are. 11 rush attempts by running backs and we give up? I would understand if we were lighting up the sky with our passing game, but 26-46 is not great. Yes we had success at the end of the first half, but once adjustments were made, and MSU knew we weren't going to run, our passing game had little chance of being successful.
 
Clark said:
The run game just wasn't working. They made the right choice. I think it says more about how they felt the o-line was handling that MSU defensive front.
Click to expand...

Which is why I brought up last years game at MSU. MSU was stuffing the run game, but Iowa stuck with it. We've seen this pattern with Iowa before, opposing defense shuts down run early, but Iowa stubbornly sticks with the run game only to see it start to break through in the 3rd and 4th quarters.

If Weisman doesn't get nicked up and was 100%, I have to believe that Iowa would have made more of an effort to try and get the running game going.
 
Iowa should have kept stretching the field. They missed Cotton who was open on the post and completed the ball to Tavaun Smith on the double move, even Shumpert was open(probably would have dropped it anyway) on the underthrow from Rudock. Thats what MSU was giving Iowa, they hit 1 and overthrew the other. Michigan State had 9 guys at the LOS consistently. Throw over the top, it was there.
 
eveningnewsteam said:
Iowa should have kept stretching the field. They missed Cotton who was open on the post and completed the ball to Tavaun Smith on the double move, even Shumpert was open(probably would have dropped it anyway) on the underthrow from Rudock. Thats what MSU was giving Iowa, they hit 1 and overthrew the other. Michigan State had 9 guys at the LOS consistently. Throw over the top, it was there.
Click to expand...
Shumpert is an awful receiver. He should literally not see the field, ever.
 
azhawkeyefan said:
Looking at the play by play chart, once Weisman got hurt in the 2nd Quarter Iowa only attempted 3 more runs with RB's the entire game (2 to Bullock and 1 to hobbled Weisman). For a game that was 1 possession game going into the 4th quarter, doesn't it seem they gave up a little early in the run game? Sure, MSU was stuffing the run early on Iowa. They stuffed us early last year in East Lansing too, and our dumpster fire of a team last year stuck with the run and finally broke through in the 4th quarter.

Was abandoning the run so early an indication of how the coaches feel about the RB's behind Weisman?
Click to expand...

I was thinking something similar...I realize it isn't worth the paper it's written on, but aren't Bullock and Weisman separated by a slash as co-starters? Yet when Weisman goes down, you all but give up on the running game. While it's true we were banging our head against a brick wall...it was very un-Ferentz-ian to give up the run game so unequivocally.
 
eveningnewsteam said:
Iowa should have kept stretching the field. They missed Cotton who was open on the post and completed the ball to Tavaun Smith on the double move, even Shumpert was open(probably would have dropped it anyway) on the underthrow from Rudock. Thats what MSU was giving Iowa, they hit 1 and overthrew the other. Michigan State had 9 guys at the LOS consistently. Throw over the top, it was there.
Click to expand...
I think the deep passing game became less of an option as the game went on and MSU realized we weren't going to run it; they were no longer biting on play action.
 
This is item #5 in KFz's book "IOWA football: playing not to lose".

#5 - avoid playing underclassmen if at all possible. If you do, and he makes a mistake, rather than show you have confidence in him, bench him for several games and burn that year of eligibility. (especially for skill players with exceptional talent) If a Senior shows similar limitations...stay with him as long as you can. He's earned it.
 
hawkdrummer1 said:
This is item #5 in KFz's book "IOWA football: playing not to lose".

#5 - avoid playing underclassmen if at all possible. If you do, and he makes a mistake, rather than show you have confidence in him, bench him for several games and burn that year of eligibility. (especially for skill players with exceptional talent) If a Senior shows similar limitations...stay with him as long as you can. He's earned it.
Click to expand...
This. It's infuriating. Canzeri has been basically benched since his fumble as well.
 
Makavelihawk said:
This. It's infuriating. Canzeri has been basically benched since his fumble as well.
Click to expand...

Other than all the carries he received after the fumble.

He isn't playing much because he is our 3rd best RB. Our third best tackle doesn't play much either.
 
ICHawk24 said:
Other than all the carries he received after the fumble.

He isn't playing much because he is our 3rd best RB. Our third best tackle doesn't play much either.
Click to expand...
He might be our 4th best running back, but that's not the point. The point is, what the coaching staff considers to be our best running back gets dinged up, and we just completely abandon the run.
What I don't understand is that Iowa seems to have a luxury right now that they don't usually have. Multiple running backs with different styles. So the Hammer couldn't run them over, why not try someone like Canzeri who might hit the hole faster? Why not mix in a Daniels, just to see if a different guy can scratch out a few yards to keep the defense off the field? Obviously they were keying on MW, and he wasn't going to do much after getting hurt. It seems to give up on the run game all together shows a lack of confidence in the other guys that were getting some hype in the off-season.
 
DJL said:
He might be our 4th best running back, but that's not the point. The point is, what the coaching staff considers to be our best running back gets dinged up, and we just completely abandon the run.
What I don't understand is that Iowa seems to have a luxury right now that they don't usually have. Multiple running backs with different styles. So the Hammer couldn't run them over, why not try someone like Canzeri who might hit the hole faster? Why not mix in a Daniels, just to see if a different guy can scratch out a few yards to keep the defense off the field? Obviously they were keying on MW, and he wasn't going to do much after getting hurt. It seems to give up on the run game all together shows a lack of confidence in the other guys that were getting some hype in the off-season.
Click to expand...

our best running back gets dinged up...which everybody saw coming. KFz didn't learn much from last year. (fill in your joke here)

Weisman is a horse, love the guy. But you can't just run over Mich St, Ohio St, Wisconsin etc...like ISU, directional Michigan, and the hapless Gophers.

When asked about stopping an opponent, you'll often hear a DC say "we need to make them one dimensional". Teams don't have that challenge with IOWA...we do it to ourselves.
 
Last edited:
Just my opinion, but the way MSU's defense closed down the gaps and prevented any running lanes it wouldn't have mattered who was back there. It's not as though we had any success prior to Weisman leaving the game. Our running game was nonexistent and wouldn't have been a factor on Saturday regardless of who we had back there.

On a side note, I'd of loved to have tried to run it down their throats late in the game had their D been worn down, but the fact is its hard to get a wear a defense out, when the most running they did the majority of the game was back to the sidelines after holding us 3 and out. When TOP is as lopsided as it was there's no way a defense is going to be that gassed, and if they were it would be time to start faking injuries to bring the next man in.
 
DJL said:
The point is, what the coaching staff considers to be our best running back gets dinged up, and we just completely abandon the run.
Click to expand...

We gave up because we couldn't block them, at all. The RB wasn't the problem.
 
Clark said:
The run game just wasn't working. They made the right choice. I think it says more about how they felt the o-line was handling that MSU defensive front.
Click to expand...
When the guard play is as bad as it was on Saturday, running the ball is about as impossible as it was for the Hawks Saturday. The interior defensive lineman for Sparty were absolutely dominant.
 
MSU's defense was as good as advertised. They are one of the best Iowa will see this year.

The line wasn't able to get backs going — and the longer pass plays were dicey as well. Look at what worked in the last five minutes of the first half — a lot of dinkin' and divin'. I was begging for the short game earlier — use it to open up the middle. But alas, that is not what happened.

I'm not overly dismayed by the offense — yet. Fact is they just played one of the best defenses in the nation. Hawks are still a 6-6 team, just as I called in August.

FWIW — I predicted a loss to sparty before the season started. I did expect Iowa to be 5-1 entering tOSU. I still believe the Hawks will get a win over Purdue and will upset someone else. Right now I'm thinking Nebby ... subject to change on that upset call.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top