homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
And also it makes things that much easier for the opposing D too!
Players saved staff from serious scrutiny
- Thread starter hawkIhoops
- Start date
And also it makes things that much easier for the opposing D too!
2008:
Michigan State - 13 points
Iowa State -17 points
Northwestern - 17 points
Purdue - 22 points (against a 4 win Purdue defense that gave up 38 to ND and 48 to Northwesten)
2009:
UNI - 17 points
Arkansas State - 24 points
Penn State - 21 points (7 by blocked punt)
Michigan State - 15 points (7 in the last drive during 2 min. offense)
Minnesota -12 points (no TD's)
Northwestern - 10 points
Ohio State - 24 points (7 on 99 yard KO return)
2010:
Indiana - 18 points
Northwestern - 10 points
Minnesota - 17 points (7 on KO return)
Ohio State - 17 points
I'd say you need to look a little beyond 3 qtrs of play to see how anemic the offense has been there Chief.
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
It looks like you're having trouble putting games into context there Chief.
Most of those games are either 1) early in the season, 2) against pretty darn good Ds, or 3) late in the season when we're hurting at RB (and the passing game is hindered by poor weather and/or wind).
I suppose that you're not accounting for the fact that the '08 O ended up averaging over 30 points per game. Furthermore, when we were more healthy at OG and RB, we were averaging EVEN MORE points per game in '10.
Dragonhawk
Banned
since Maine riddled them for well over 300 yds passing this team should have passed fro the beginning the moment they saw 8 men in the box they were clearly saying beat us thru the air because you won't on the ground, we need more games passing the ball like this one to get teams away from 8-man fronts and into a true defense that has to respect both aspects of the game
iowahawkeyes89
Well-Known Member
Its a philosophy, the Iowa offense is about TOP and not turning the ball over. Keeping the oppositions offense off the field.
Iowa isn't built to put up 30+ points a game like Michigan.
Those years you reference were pretty solid, as far as W's and L's.
And BTW, Iowa put up 40+ against ISU and 30+ against TTU. So I would say its been pretty successful thus far 2011.
Ok, so I can't use the games early in the season against cream puffs, late in the season when "our run game was hurting" like Minnesota or Northwestern, bad weather, when there are any injuries at OL or RB, or against any good defenses like Ohio State.
Strange how these factors didn't limit Wisconsin or Ohio State the past two seasons??? Keep the excuses coming, you're Great!
scourt
Well-Known Member
All I was saying in my reply was whose word about Iowa football is more credible, yours or Podolaks. It's a no brainer. You were directly disputing what ED said about how we were practicing this week and what we were preparing for. You haven't got a clue what goes on in practice and Ed certainly does. BTW the hurry up worked pretty good.(Gee, I wonder how, if they weren't prepared)
It's hard not to put up 30 against TTU who we were favored to beat by more that many or against ISU that went 3 OT's.
Sure I agree Iowa did well over that time, but it has also been proven that we significantly underperformed over the last 3 years by the number of games we lost leads in the 4th qtr playing just this style. Ferentz has a decent overall record, but a lousy record protecting late one possession leads. There is no reason the 2008 team should have lost 4 games by 12 points or that last years team should have lost 5 games with over a dozen players who are either in the NFL this year or are future NFLers (Reiff, Prater, McNutt, etc...)
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
You just proved my point ... both teams (Wisky and tOSU) had better RB depth than we've had in recent years AND their respective OLs have been healthy at the end of the year.
That's why it's so important for us to develop more depth at RB and continue to bring along our running game ... that way we'll have more success pounding the rock as the weather turns cold!
It's too bad that you confuse logic with excuses.
olivecourt
Well-Known Member
That's probably why we threw the ball 23 times in the first half. How did that work out?
Nevermind that OSU played heavily out of the Shotgun with multiple wide receiver packages the last 2 years with Pryor in at QB.
We don't have the talent to favor a run heavy offense this year. Meanwhile, we have the best WR trio in the Big Ten and a QB who developed playing out of the shotgun in HS. It makes sense to utilize your talents rather than stubbornly trying to force the players into yours.
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
Which are you using?
This is the same "logic" that you tried to sell when saying that JVB played poorly at ISU because it was the 2nd game of the year. Meanwhile, Jantz, in his first ever action against FBS competition, didn't seem to have any troubles.
Yes, I suppose if you discount our offense when...
1) It's early in the season
2) It's late in the season
3) We play good defenses
4) Our refusal to get backup RB's any time leads to decrease RB depth
5) The weather is bad
...then I guess our offense is working as intended.
burky247
Well-Known Member
Were we practicing the no huddle offense in practice because we were thinking about using it during Saturday's game? Or were we practicing it because Ferentz took so much heat about not trying for the win at the end of regulation against ISU. I have a very hard time believing the first option is true.
uofihawkInation
Well-Known Member
Without reading any post in this thread besides the OP, I must say, you are completely wrong. KOK had called a wonderful game before the comeback. Players didn't execute. We had the ball at the 11 yard line before half time, ended up missing a 45+ yard field goal. How? POOR EXECUTION. Rewatch the game, and you will see tons of mistakes by the offense in the first half and even the 3rd quarter.
silvanthalas
Well-Known Member
The quote was that Iowa was going to USE the hurry up. I and others say that we were not until we were forced to, which was evident by the fact that *gasp* it was not used until we were forced to.
So, let me know when you're done moving the goalposts.
FrozenMadman
Well-Known Member
I made a post along this line a few days before the Pitt game and was pilloried by the people on this site. The OP is absolutely correct. The OP and my earlier post are (were) vindicated by what was done on Saturday and by simply observing, objectively, what this team is capable of and not capable of. We have weaknesses on defense and strengths on offense. The coaches need to see things for what they are and respond accordingly.
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
The late in the season reasoning is linked to the weather. And, in particular, it is correlated to the fact that Stanzi was primarily a "touch" passer. He wasn't as capable as Vandenberg of delivering a ball on a rope. With Vandenberg at the helm, Iowa's passing game should probably be less hindered by the weather.
Do you disagree ... is this NOT logical thinking?
As for playing good defenses ... good defenses tend to slow/stop most opposing offenses. Thus, to not score much against PSU's or tOSU's D is more par for the course ... and not a knock on the O. Besides, if you recall how well Iowa's OL fared against Heyward ... it's not like they were playing poorly either.
As for getting the back-up RB more reps ... Bullock saw quality reps against Pitt ... although, he was primarily getting experience in pass-pro.
Pakistanzi
Banned
I get what you're saying, but your stats don't support your argument. We were losing to Pittsburgh virtually the entire game, and had no choice but to chuck the ball in the 4th quarter. We threw what, 20 times in the 4th quarter? We were leading or tied with ISU virtually the entire game so the need to pass the ball a lot wasn't there.
I would be curious to see the 1st half vs. 2nd half breakdown of pass attempts against Pitt. My guess is that we easily attempted at least twice as many passes in the 2nd half, and that was largely out of necessity.
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
Tressel still leaned more heavily upon the run ... even out of shotgun.
The evidence (because that is what you provide when you make an argument):
End of the season in '10 for tOSU:
vs PSU: 43 rushes, 13 passes (run-heavy)
vs Iowa: 36 rushes, 33 passes (even split)
vs Mich: 45 rushes, 27 passes (run-heavy)
If you can run the ball late in the season in the midwest, it compensates for any drop in th passing game due to poor weather.
The "traditional" schools that tend not to have their passing games get hurt by poor weather are also the same teams that tend to rely much more heavily upon a short passing game ... which is both a high percentage passing game AND it also is basically their own version of a running game.
