Put this crap to bed; disparity in Nebby plays and yardage vs Iowa

[ChosenChildren]

When the experts were asked before the season how Iowa's overall talent stacked up against Nebraska and Wisconsin, most of them said that Iowa was third in that category. Somehow, we beat them. I chalk it up to the work ethic and discipline of this particular team and the job done by the coaching staff this year. Really amazing work!!

 

[ICHawk24]

Iowa's game plan on defense was to stop the run, and let Tommy throw into a soft Cover 2, where INT opportunities would exist.

Nebraska's running backs went 29 for 91, 3.2ypc. Tommy went 9 for 46.

We took away the short stuff and let Tommy throw into the secondary. Sure, he got some yards, while averaging 6.6 yards per attempt, which is rather pedestrian. But the gameplan worked to perfection, resulting in FOUR INTERCEPTIONS.

Then Kirk went old Kirk and didn't attempt to do much on offense. We got the solid win, and led by two scores (11 points) for over 25 minutes in the second half.

A lot of fans want to hand-wave away turnovers as if they are accidents or ********. Iowa was 8th in the country in picks, and 12th in total turnovers gained. It is a skill. Gameplan worked.

Two straight victories in Lincoln.

WIN NUMBER TWELVE.

12-0.

 

[ApexHunter]

When the experts were asked before the season how Iowa's overall talent stacked up against Nebraska and Wisconsin, most of them said that Iowa was third in that category. Somehow, we beat them. I chalk it up to the work ethic and discipline of this particular team and the job done by the coaching staff this year. Really amazing work!!

This is why I cringe when I hear debates over talent. Obviously, every team wants as much raw talent as they can get, but it's much more about what you do with what you have. Iowa has been in the 50s in terms of recruiting rankings. Georgia has been right around the top 10.. same with Texas and look where they are in comparison. Developing the talent you have and putting them in the best possible position to succeed is a big part of it. Getting them to gel and work as a team is the other and that's more of an art in the types of personalities and managing them.. you know.. coaching

 

[smac07]

What I and other posters are trying to give you tangible, and quantifiable metrics which to use, but you discard those and say, welp Unicorns exist, and you can't prove the DON'T exist, therefore it isn't tangible that they don't exist. I mean the more talented teams GENERALLY produce more all conference players, and more NFL players (See 'Bama, OSU, etc.). The more talented teams GENERALLY win the games (See 'Bama, OSU, MSU, Iowa's records).

How seriously would you take someone if they told you the 1997 5-6 Colorado football team was more talented than the Huskers than year? I mean Nebraska did only beat Colorado 27-24 that year, so it was closer than it should be, so therefore Colorado was better???? I mean they started the season ranked #8, but went 5-6, but they were "more talented" than the 13-0 Huskers.

Well I haven't seen that game in a long time so I couldn't even venture a guess.

You point to NFL and all that great stuff but Nebraska has more players drafted to the NFL than Iowa, Heisman winners too.

and you missed my point yet again, Team Talent levels are not based upon NFL or individual accomplishments. For Example
Eric Crouch Heisman winner, in 2001 was by far the most talented player on his Team, the Team talent level was clearly below Miami, and Colorado.

Spout off NFL, Player conference team as much as you want, but you can only GENERALLY Assume and Guess at a Team Talent Level.
But you try to make an assumption and show it as fact when there is no possible way you can.

 

[smac07]

This is why I cringe when I hear debates over talent. Obviously, every team wants as much raw talent as they can get, but it's much more about what you do with what you have. Iowa has been in the 50s in terms of recruiting rankings. Georgia has been right around the top 10.. same with Texas and look where they are in comparison. Developing the talent you have and putting them in the best possible position to succeed is a big part of it. Getting them to gel and work as a team is the other and that's more of an art in the types of personalities and managing them.. you know.. coaching

THANK YOU! Texas is the Perfect Example, most talented year after year yet they are terrible sometimes!

I am not sure why so many people are giving me so much crap for mentioning a viable Option not a statement of fact.

 

[uihawk82]

Forest Evashevski, a great football mind and a great coach at Iowa, had this to say about turnovers: Each turnover on average costs your team 50 yards of field position. Nebraska's 5 turnovers cost them at least 250 yards. Always factor that into your yardage statistics. Using that metric, Nebby's 5 turnovers (I'm counting the horrific 4th and 1 fade call) reduce Nebby's net yardage to 183 yards; Iowa's one turnover results in total net yardage of 200 yards. Makes sense, doesn't it??

Good stuff and very similar to what I called 'wasted yardage'.

A lot of interesting comments on this thread.

Really great athletic talent such as speed, jumping ability, strength do not always translate into being able to quickly read a trap play and filling a hole, or instinctively seeing a hole and cutting off your blockers butt. And then you have to get all 11 players in synch to have a really good team.

Just raw talent doesnt always win games.

 

[PCHawk]

Not every team will be as inept, offensively, as Nebraska. It's the first year for that style of offense. That had to kill their head coach. They could've kicked the FG instead of going for the fade route in the endzone in the fourth quarter. Then..within one score.

So in your hypothetical made field goal scenario, does Nebraska get a hypothetical onside kick too? Otherwise they still wouldn't have the ball in a one possession game.