Reverse, Reverse...

[NattyBumppo]

Cha Cha now ya’ll.

I wondered during the game why we would run back to back reverses against an opponent like EIU with the game well in hand. It was fun, but a little out of character.

Why show that in a game where we are pretty much keeping the playbook under wraps? To set up a McNutt WR pass to DJK for a 80 yard touchdown to break a game wide open at some point in the future?

But that's just way too obvious to be the case, right?

 

[IowaBanker]

Yeah, the back to back end-around playcalls were certainly interesting. Probably a combination of giving DJK and McNutt the opportunity to have the ball in their hands to make a play, along with giving future opponents something else to think about.

Or, as DJK said before the season, it's an early example of the offense "getting fancy".

 

[hawkcub42]

Doing it once I kind of liked. Give ISU something to think about. But back to back seemed odd.

 

[ArizonaHawkeye88]

Any time you can get more than four yds on a play and spread out the defense, I'm for it.

 

[hawkinaclownhouse]

Doing it once I kind of liked. Give ISU something to think about. But back to back seemed odd.

I think it was as much a matter of the coaches sending a message to EIU and future opponents that if you over pursue in stopping the zone stretch play we will run a reverse and we have 2 wide receivers capable of running the play.

 

[OnLookin08]

The other poster got it. You run those things to make ISU take time out of their practice to cover it. You run it back to back to give them even more to think about. Of course they wouldn't have run it if the game was on the line and they certainly wouldn't have run it twice in a row. There are likely formations and plays we didn't see this weekend that we will see next weekend along with plays like the reverse that we likely will not see on Saturday.

 

[IATrainMaster101]

Honestly, I think it was just a matter of wanting to run that play to both sides with both top wrs. At the point Iowa ran those reverses, it seemed to me that we were managing the game more as a scrimmage.

 

[Icarus]

Iowa often fakes the reverse when running the ball up the middle. This forces the DE and OLB to wait slightly longer to pursue the carrier (they have to make sure he has the ball and not the WR).

Iowa ran the reverses so that future teams would have it on tape. Early last year Iowa gave Chaney the ball on that play about once a game for this reason. It keeps the defense honest.

The reason for the back to back reverses was likely to show that Iowa is willing to do so with either key receiver. That way defenses cannot predict whether or not a reverse is possible based upon Iowa's personnel on a particular play.

Ferentz is very methodical, even if fans don't always realize it. Many seemingly mundane decisions are made with the future (sometimes distant future) in mind. For example, many plays early in the game are intended to reveal weaknesses in the defense that can be exploited later in the game. I personally believe this is part of why we don't score early in games as often as we did at the beginning of his tenure (obviously we haven't had an offense like the 2002 club, either). It's also why we've been much more successful in the 3rd and 4th quarters, especially in big games (see, e.g. the almost easy-looking passing attack in the final drive of the 2008 PSU game).

 

[GoldKey]

I am with Icarus, that Ferentz is very intentional, and there is meaning behind what he does. Still, all in all, seemed weird.

 

[83Hawk]

Yeah, the back to back end-around playcalls were certainly interesting. Probably a combination of giving DJK and McNutt the opportunity to have the ball in their hands to make a play, along with giving future opponents something else to think about.

Or, as DJK said before the season, it's an early example of the offense "getting fancy".

^^^This.^^^

I wouldn't be surprised to see McNutt throw the ball off a reverse at some point this year.

I gotta admit though...I've been watching football for over 40 years...I've NEVER seen 2 end arounds called in a row.

 

[colbol9]

McNutt looked like garbage running it. Not his strong suit.

 

[HawkeyeDenis]

Now that Iowa has that on tape you probably won't see it until November unless its a fake.

 

[imported_ankle23]

Cha Cha now ya’ll.

I wondered during the game why we would run back to back reverses against an opponent like EIU with the game well in hand. It was fun, but a little out of character.

Why show that in a game where we are pretty much keeping the playbook under wraps? To set up a McNutt WR pass to DJK for a 80 yard touchdown to break a game wide open at some point in the future?

But that's just way too obvious to be the case, right?

to keep the clownies from over pursuing the run, which they were doing v. NIU. give their young LBs something to have in their head........give them something xtra to think about.....

 

[DuffMan]

Yeah, it was nice to see one, but two was a bit odd.

Now three on the other hand would have been fricken sweet.

 

[ICHawk24]

I think they were also throwing a bone to DJK and McNutt, who unfortunately didn't get the ball much yesterday. No easier way to make sure your star WRs get the ball than to call the end-around.

I agree that McNutt doesn't look his best on that kind of play. His lanky stride doesn't seem suited for it.

 

[storminspank]

Showing the back-to-back reverse will open other options up against future opponents who see that on tape.