Schwartz: Bleak Outlook for Hawkeyes in Ames

[judzeehawk]

Are you serious? Army and Navy run the triple option flexbone, Brian runs more of a "one option bonehead" offense. Their QBs consistently rush for 200 yards per game. Nate rushed for -23 and two fumbles.

I fully expect ISU to load the box and force Iowa to throw. That is why I think we need to be successful throwing to win. I also expect ISU to score; they are much better than Wyoming. Success passing will let Wadley wear them down later in the game.

Yeah I'm serious. People it's just the first game. Everybody expects 400 yards passing! It's not necessary. Yes it would be great to have a very nice passing attack but people are going to scream no matter what. Give Stanley and BF a chance. Who cares if the clowns stack the box. Good luck with that! I think we'll see some different plays this week.

 

[Bigtenchamp]

Well.. yes we could lose at Ames - However thinking you really can know much about either team from one game is laughable.

All we know right now is that Iowa might have a good defense.. maybe.

Everything else, on either side is speculation.

 

[HawkeyeDenis]

I don't buy the "bleak", statement. ISU played an opponent from a lower class they should beat. They have always played an aggressive defense and it worked early in the game for them. I doubt their defensive line is going to dominate Iowa's offensive line.

Saturday Iowa played against a defense that stacked the box on nearly every play, yet Iowa got 3 TDs through the air and Wadley got over 100 yards rushing. Wyoming has a good defense. But they couldn't stop Iowa. Though Iowa can't afford to spot ISU 4 turn overs and expect to win.

On offense UNI had to play catchup after their early miscues. 21 of ISU's points were defensive/special teams. Unlike UNI, Iowa's defensive line will probably be one of the tougher D'lines that ISU will meet all season. If Iowa plays disciplined defense, ISU will have trouble moving the ball.

The big concern in this game is that the game is in Ames and Iowa has a new QB. But I would expect that he will enter this game with more confidence than he had when he played against Wyoming.

 

[TJHawkeye]

I don't know why such a big thing is being made about opponents stacking the box. They always stack the box against the Hawks because we have always been a run first team. This happens every game. Until we change our scheme, we will live with this every game. It can be ugly football, but its the way Kirk wants it.

 

[Tate4Heisman]

I stopped reading Schwartz's articles about a month ago, do yourself a favor and do the same.

 

[nilkin]

This post served it's real purpose, get Hawk fans all in a tizzy and post post post. Not to mention it also evolves into a rivvalry post; therefore, clown fans rebut rebut rebut hawk posts or agree agree agree with the bleck.

It got me to look at already 5 pages. It worked; up go advertising revenue based on views.

 

[Oldmanhawk]

I watched the ISU game last night. Their Linebackers are small and lack speed. Their defensive line looks undersized. What they have on the defensive line is not impressive and they have no depth. I hope it is 95 degrees and humid on Saturday. Run the Ball Run the Ball, Run the ball..eventually their defense will turn into a wet noodle. Their running game isn't that impressive and Park is not as gifted as I thought he was. UNI racked up 400 yards of offense on them and UNI constantly killed or ruined long plays with penalties. It wasn't as big a mismatch last night as the score says and I am quite sure that UNI is going to be down this year. I suspect they wont have a winning record.

I'm not sure what ISU game u were watching? UNI had some hogs up front and thats with them wearing White too which makes u look little smaller..There wasnt a UNI lineman under 305 i dont think. I disagree..that was the biggest physically looking ISU Dline I've seen in a while...accept when they went to that 3-4 D and cant recall his name but he's a RS frosh i think with long arms but he's listed at 6'5 and 290 and came it at DT in a 3-4 passing down..

Now their D line isnt as big as ours but its not that far off. Lima is a big cat. But that's a UNI Oline that was experinced and had 3 seniors. Dunne their QB is very solid QB..he can throw the fball..he made one real bad decision I saw when he rushed throw in end zone..he should have thrown it away. The other pick by ISU players were good breaks on ball by DB's.

WE have much better O and D lines IMO but make no mistake that ISU team has some stud skill players...Lazard and Butler are going to be a hard match for any defense. They have a lot of WR's and Montgomery is physically an impressive RB who honestly reminds me of a RB we would have.

I'm trying to take the B&G glasses off and went into watching the ISU game with the mindset that it wasn't SU and they were playing a traditionally top 15 FCS team..Park is a really good QB and to say otherwise is non sense. He can force some stuff but he's got an arm and quick release. He was an Army AA QB out of HS for a reason. Honestly I'm glad we are playing ISU this early as i think our defense being healthy right now is great and it could take ISU offense few games to really start to gel.

As for ISU LB's..Harvey and the other OLB are not slow and while they are prob 10 lbs undersized they are athletic. Lanning to me looked like he was thinking a lot and not reacting like a MLB should. We should expose that.

One think I did notice is ISU shuffled in 3-4 new D lineman to sub and it didnt seem to be a major drop off like has been in years past for them.

I live in Ames and went to the game..I watched the Hawk game. UNI WR's and RB for that matter looked far better than anythign Wyoming had.

I'm predicting a Hawk win..28-24

 

[SouthSideHawk]

He's one of our writers. I'm not defending his opinion but his right to have one here. There were a few responses in this thread with people wondering why we allow him to have one.

It might serve the same purpose if you had Randy Peterson on here also. But, I suppose that might be seen as a conflict of interest with the rag for him. He could give an opposing viewpoint each week. I'm sure he would be happy to if the rag would let him.

 

[RobHowe]

It might serve the same purpose if you had Randy Peterson on here also. But, I suppose that might be seen as a conflict of interest with the rag for him. He could give an opposing viewpoint each week. I'm sure he would be happy to if the rag would let him.

We'll take it under consideration.

 

[ghawk407]

I did not read the bleak article till after reading all of this. Now things look so bleak is there still time to forfeit the game?
If not go kick their buts . GOOOOOOO HAWKS

 

[hwk23]

Bleak? Ha ha. Oh no it's the clowns. Do they have a single position group better than Iowa? Maybe WR arguably. BLeak is when that Michigan juggernaut came rollin in last year.

 

[HawkU]

This post served it's real purpose, get Hawk fans all in a tizzy and post post post. Not to mention it also evolves into a rivvalry post; therefore, clown fans rebut rebut rebut hawk posts or agree agree agree with the bleck.

It got me to look at already 5 pages. It worked; up go advertising revenue based on views.

Exactly. Controversy sells but if not done properly can backfire and tarnish a brand, amongst other things. Does any respectable brand want to be known as the National Enquirer of their niche? I wouldn't think so.

I get that Schwartz is entitled to his opinion (and so are we) and the HN staff defending his right to that but I think the staff is really missing the big picture.

People who visit HN want good information about the Hawks but are quite possibly feeling punk'd when they click on a Schwartz article and find a total lack of congruency. His articles either don't support the headline or he goes off on some wild tangent that doesn't match up with said headline.

If that doesn't define trolling or click-baiting I don't know what does. So far it appears that HN wants this to be their business model and that's a shame really.

 

[RobHowe]

Exactly. Controversy sells but if not done properly can backfire and tarnish a brand, amongst other things. Does any respectable brand want to be known as the National Enquirer of their niche? I wouldn't think so.

I get that Schwartz is entitled to his opinion (and so are we) and the HN staff defending his right to that but I think the staff is really missing the big picture.

People who visit HN want good information about the Hawks but are quite possibly feeling punk'd when they click on a Schwartz article and find a total lack of congruency. His articles either don't support the headline or he goes off on some wild tangent that doesn't match up with said headline.

If that doesn't define trolling or click-baiting I don't know what does. So far it appears that HN wants this to be their business model and that's a shame really.

You're overreacting.

 

[theboat]

I don't know why such a big thing is being made about opponents stacking the box. They always stack the box against the Hawks because we have always been a run first team. This happens every game. Until we change our scheme, we will live with this every game. It can be ugly football, but its the way Kirk wants it.

Personally, I am ok with the other team stacking the box with quarterbacks

 

[Caddy]

I don't buy the "bleak", statement. ISU played an opponent from a lower class they should beat. They have always played an aggressive defense and it worked early in the game for them. I doubt their defensive line is going to dominate Iowa's offensive line.

Saturday Iowa played against a defense that stacked the box on nearly every play, yet Iowa got 3 TDs through the air and Wadley got over 100 yards rushing. Wyoming has a good defense. But they couldn't stop Iowa. Though Iowa can't afford to spot ISU 4 turn overs and expect to win.

On offense UNI had to play catchup after their early miscues. 21 of ISU's points were defensive/special teams. Unlike UNI, Iowa's defensive line will probably be one of the tougher D'lines that ISU will meet all season. If Iowa plays disciplined defense, ISU will have trouble moving the ball.

The big concern in this game is that the game is in Ames and Iowa has a new QB. But I would expect that he will enter this game with more confidence than he had when he played against Wyoming.

Wyoming had the 101st ranked defense last year. Hardly a good defense. As far as stacking the box goes, well Stanley better get used to it because that is what he is going to see every single game with blitz after blitz. Our pass blocking is not good, and Stanley does not look comfortable back there. We are going to see much better defenses than what we saw Saturday. Hopefully someone will emerge at receiver that he can go to consistently, but I just don't see anyone that is consistently going to be able to get open against B1G defenses.

 

[deanvogs]

Wyoming had the 101st ranked defense last year. Hardly a good defense. As far as stacking the box goes, well Stanley better get used to it because that is what he is going to see every single game with blitz after blitz. Our pass blocking is not good, and Stanley does not look comfortable back there. We are going to see much better defenses than what we saw Saturday. Hopefully someone will emerge at receiver that he can go to consistently, but I just don't see anyone that is consistently going to be able to get open against B1G defenses.

One year has nothing to do with the next in college football. After another 5 or 6 games, we can judge this years Wyoming Defense in a better light of what it is. What we do know is this years D, is not last years D.

 

[deanvogs]

Wasn't Swartz the writter who first came out after the 2014 season blasting Ferentz and saying it was over, the end, he was done? Hopefully this article looks just as stupid after the fact.

 

[Seth53]

"Bleak" does smack of click bait quite honestly.

With that said, Ferentz is .500 vs ISUx. That says a lot.

Recently, we lost to a 2-10 team in 14, eeked out a 6 point win vs a 3-9 team in 13, and lost two in a row 11-12.

Bleak sounds over the top, but historically dicey does not.

http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Iowa.htm

 

[DMLadyhawk]

Wyoming had the 101st ranked defense last year. Hardly a good defense. As far as stacking the box goes, well Stanley better get used to it because that is what he is going to see every single game with blitz after blitz. Our pass blocking is not good, and Stanley does not look comfortable back there. We are going to see much better defenses than what we saw Saturday. Hopefully someone will emerge at receiver that he can go to consistently, but I just don't see anyone that is consistently going to be able to get open against B1G defenses.

Well I was at the game and I beg to differ. Wyoming was well-prepared on defense and started off well. Stanley just played his first college game with a reserve center. It took him time to settle in. The passblocking is not bad - although since we were missing 2 starters it will no doubt improve next week. I believe that Easley is going to be a dependable contributor. He seems to have a nose for where the ball will be and he runs good routes. Between him and VandeBerg it would be nice to see someone else emerge. I think this will happen with more experience. We also have a kicker which was not a given.

The defense was stellar. Josh Allen completed a lot of underneath passes because that is what there was. Notice they only scored 3 points. The line wore out their line as the game went on and Allen was doing a lot of running around to get away. Also, there were a lot of platoon type defensive line substitutions which bodes well for the Big Ten season.

 

[homes]

Hmmm - Maybe Schwartz can bake some brownies for the boys and make them feel better about heading into such a bleak situation.

Ferentz is 9-5 since blowing the 2002 game, and only 1 of those losses was a clear ISU win. We've all been hard on him for not handling ISU more (and deservedly so in some years (2014 for example)), but I don't see anything in the recent history that suggests ISU should be the favorite in this game. It will be a close game, because, yes, it is ISU's Super Bowl (it just is), so that is an intangible that the Hawks must face each year.