One thing that I think has been overlooked so far this season....

SpiderRico

SpiderRico

Well-Known Member
We have scored in the last 2 mins of the first half or the game in all but one game. The only exception is NW, where we missed a field goal at the end of the first half. Here's the breakdown:

1. Illinois St - Field goal at the end of the first half (3 pts)
2. Iowa St. - 2 touchdowns in the last 2:00 of the game (14 pts)
3. Pitt - TD with :44 left in the first half and FG at the end of the game (10 pts)
4. NT - TD with 1:44 left in the first half (7 pts)
5. Wisc - FG with 1:03 left in the first half (3 pts)
6. Ill - FG at the end of the first half and FG with 2:00 left (6 pts)
7. NW - Missed FG at the end of the first half and took a knee at the end of the game (0 pts)
8. MD - TD at the end of the first half (7 pts)
9. Indiana - TD at the end of the first half (7 pts)

That's a total of 57 points at the end of halves in 9 games. In the past, we just don't get those points as we would be content to sit on the ball or run out the clock.

When the books are written about this season and "NewKirk", to me, this is the biggest NewKirkism of the season and probably one of, if not THE, main reason we are where we're at.
 






Small changes is all we ever needed and all that most people asked for. Northwestern should have been 10 and ISU was a fake field goal at the end. It says a lot about how clutch the team has been too.
 


I just noticed we were the missed field goal and a fake field goal from scoring at the end of every single half this year.
 


whats also very impressive is how few minutes we've actually been behind. I'd like to see that stat
 


We're we behind in the Wisconsin game at all? We trailed most of the first half against ISU and for a couple minutes against Indiana. Is that it?
 




damnfinn said:
whats also very impressive is how few minutes we've actually been behind. I'd like to see that stat
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking about that this morning. It occurred to me that we've spent very little time behind this year. I would live to see the exact number.
 


damnfinn said:
whats also very impressive is how few minutes we've actually been behind. I'd like to see that stat
Click to expand...

Ask and you shall receive:

Ill St - never trailed
Iowa St - trailed for 22:02
Pitt - never trailed
NT - never trailed
Wisc - trailed for 21:59
Ill - trailed for 13:39
NW - never trailed
Md - never trailed
Ind - trailed for 3:35

So in 540 minutes of game time this year, we have trailed for a grand total of 61 minutes and 15 seconds.
 


SpiderRico said:
Ask and you shall receive:

Ill St - never trailed
Iowa St - trailed for 22:02
Pitt - never trailed
NT - never trailed
Wisc - trailed for 21:59
Ill - trailed for 13:39
NW - never trailed
Md - never trailed
Ind - trailed for 3:35

So in 540 minutes of game time this year, we have trailed for a grand total of 61 minutes and 15 seconds.
Click to expand...
how the hell did you find that? I was going to volunteer to rewatch all the games to find out
 


Go Iowa offense. Why have some HN posters gone out of their way not to credit Greg Davis? What the??
They'll compliment Brian F instead.. snork.
 


PCHawk said:
I just noticed we were the missed field goal and a fake field goal from scoring at the end of every single half this year.
Click to expand...

Absolutely!

What I think most "reasonable" fans wanted to see was KF try to take advantage of the "hidden points" that exist at the end of the first half and the end of games. When you are historically involved in as many close games as we are, the hidden points really add up and can ultimately be the difference in whether you win or lose the game. In addition, by going for those hidden points, it also gives you an added advantage of instilling in your team the mindset of attacking and being relentless.
 


I agree that the success in end-of-half situations is impressive and important, but I don't think it is due to a change in coaching philosophy (at least, not a recent change). Iowa started to get more aggressive in these situations a few years ago, and this continued last year. This coincided with their more aggressive approach to 4th downs. So they were not taking a knee or running into the line in these situations the last two years. The difference is last year we saw sacks and check-downs in such situations, and this year we have scrambles for 1st downs and attacks downfield. I really don't think it is a change in philosophy so much as a change in personnel.
 


SpiderRico said:
Absolutely!

What I think most "reasonable" fans wanted to see was KF try to take advantage of the "hidden points" that exist at the end of the first half and the end of games. When you are historically involved in as many close games as we are, the hidden points really add up and can ultimately be the difference in whether you win or lose the game. In addition, by going for those hidden points, it also gives you an added advantage of instilling in your team the mindset of attacking and being relentless.
Click to expand...

It also gives players and coaches more live game situations to improve on clock management.
 


SpiderRico said:
Ask and you shall receive:

Ill St - never trailed
Iowa St - trailed for 22:02
Pitt - never trailed
NT - never trailed
Wisc - trailed for 21:59
Ill - trailed for 13:39
NW - never trailed
Md - never trailed
Ind - trailed for 3:35

So in 540 minutes of game time this year, we have trailed for a grand total of 61 minutes and 15 seconds.
Click to expand...

We can't let Clownnation see this. They may start thinking they should be ranked in the top 5.
 


CP87 said:
I agree that the success in end-of-half situations is impressive and important, but I don't think it is due to a change in coaching philosophy (at least, not a recent change). Iowa started to get more aggressive in these situations a few years ago, and this continued last year. This coincided with their more aggressive approach to 4th downs. So they were not taking a knee or running into the line in these situations the last two years. The difference is last year we saw sacks and check-downs in such situations, and this year we have scrambles for 1st downs and attacks downfield. I really don't think it is a change in philosophy so much as a change in personnel.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on the change to going for it more on 4th downs, but I disagree with you on KF being just as aggressive in the past few years on end of half situations. More often than not, unless field position dictated it, we were always content to go to the locker room with the score at the time. This year, regardless of field position, we are making a concerted effort to move the chains in the last 2 minutes and get critical scores.

I know the end result doesn't necessarily prove or disprove a change in philosophy, but thru 9 games last year, we had a total of 30 points in the last 2 minutes of both halves. With 7 of them coming at the end of the Maryland game when it was already sewn up by Md. So in essence, we got a total of 23 points in 9 games....or 2.5 ppg. This year, we've gotten 6.33 ppg in the final 2 minutes of halves. For a team that has always lived and died by one score outcomes, a difference of nearly 4 ppg is HUGE and I think is indicative of the change in aggressiveness this year and to things like what is talked about in the book "The Slight Edge" which the coaching staff and player leaders embraced this offseason.
 


You could be right. I don't have a great memory for such things, but I do remember Iowa being more aggressive at half last year, though not more successful obviously. I am thinking of the Nebraska game where they were aggressive, leading to a fumble right before half (and a TD for Nebraska). I went back and looked through many of the play-by-plays from last year, and Iowa was pretty much always passing in end-of-the-half situations, but as I said earlier, lots of sacks and 4 yd completions in those situations.
 






You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top