Pass Rush and Run Blocking

[NikeHawk21]

I hate to be negative after a nice win, and there was certainly a lot of positives from yesterday but these two things still concern me.

Two total sacks in two games against inferior opponents. Yesterday we did get significantly more pressure but I am still a little concerned. Nothing from Golston (although I do feel kind of bad for him because he has to slide in on passing downs).

For the run blocking there is just too much or penetration into the backfield. I know we ended with 5 yards a carry but the majority of that was made up against a worn down Rutgers defense (due to their poor offense). Negative run plays are drive killers. Part of it is we just need to get healthy with Barnwart and Jackson out.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

Teams aren't holding the ball very long. Rutgers tried to throw it down field and Epenesa was in their face all day long. Sacks stats are glory stats...but a pass rush and the disruption, unfortunately is often not captured in any stat sheet. Epenesa was as dominant as I have seen him...he was amazing...but stat sheet only shows one sack...and 6 hurries or something like that.

As for the run blocking...Rutgers loaded the box and they paid for it...and they still got 5 yards a pop. Think about this too...how many QB sneaks did we have or poor field position conservative plays? A lot. I think the run game will keep getting better...but maybe worse before it does. We really haven't played an elite defensive line yet...but ISU will provide a solid test...their front seven is really solid. Iowa is still trying to figure out who the top 5 OL are and what the best combination is. The good thing, we have 9 guys that can play...and if another injury happened...there isn't a large drop off. I don't remember us ever playing this many guys and moving them around like we are doing. It's interesting.

 

[racerhawk]

Teams are loading up to stop the run, and we are still running it ok.

Defensively, in both games, teams were trying to get the ball out very quickly. Neither team could run, or pass the ball deep downfield. When rutger tried yesterday, it didn't go well. The defense totally shut down rutger. It was a stifling performance. Yes, they can get better for sure, but the D line mauled rutger.

 

[hwk23]

Kirk said in his postgame, from his view, Rutgers was getting too much penetration, too often and it's going to be something to work on. I think that's accurate. Part of it is probably that we played a lot of different combinations, due to the Jackson injury, still figuring it out. I'm not worried about the DL at all.

 

[homes]

Tons (okay, quite a few) of hurries on their QBs, they weren't comfortable back there all day. Not as splashy as the sack, but disruptive still the same.

 

[HuckFinn]

Urban Meyer talked about Rutgers defensive scheme and rated the scheme as tough to block against. I think I read that ISU uses the same defensive theories. Did I hear this right?

 

[koralakers]

I thought pretty bleak offensive showing (again). They way the defense dominated, a decent offense, against the worst team in the BIG (by far), we shudda put up 50.

 

[MoseSchrute]

I thought pretty bleak offensive showing (again). They way the defense dominated, a decent offense, against the worst team in the BIG (by far), we shudda put up 50.

We might have put up 45 if not for that damn punter they had.

 

[PCHawk]

I thought pretty bleak offensive showing (again). They way the defense dominated, a decent offense, against the worst team in the BIG (by far), we shudda put up 50.

Field position skewed the score quite a bit. If a fair amount of punts roll into the endzone, we might have had 40. Also had backups in late or we probably get 37. Terrible clock management cost us 4.