Stanford just showed Brian how he can be different

[Joshbrown]

Up 55-0 and Stanford throwing the ball all over the field.

When Iowa gets up by 10 points they usually try and run out the clock, even if it's still the first quarter.

BF needs to keep the hammer down until the clock reads double 0.

Give me a thumbs up if you want to see that approach to know things have changed.

 

[tksirius]

I guarantee we won't be seeing that.

 

[hawki1971]

Totally agree with you both! So where do we go from here?

 

[Drakebulldog93]

But Stanford played ISU...but I get your point...we COULD have put up 60 plus against the Clowns last year.

 

[99topdawg]

Just hope we get up 55-0.

 

[revkev73]

You get up big...you try to run the clock...and play for the tie. Everyone knows that!

 

[IndianaHawk]

Up 55-0 and Stanford throwing the ball all over the field.

When Iowa gets up by 10 points they usually try and run out the clock, even if it's still the first quarter.

BF needs to keep the hammer down until the clock reads double 0.

Give me a thumbs up if you want to see that approach to know things have changed.

That won't be BF's decision.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

You get your first team out and you put in the second team and you let them play like it's 0-0. That's always frustrated me in the early season games. You can learn alot about your back-ups but you have to stress them and let them play. It's like leaving CJ in that Florida game last year in the fourth quarter...get Stanley in there. CJ could only hurt himself in that game late...both physically and draft-wise.

 

[NEIChawk]

Jesus, I hope if we're down by 55 we throw the ball all over the field, lol

 

[ArvadaHawk]

Totally agree with you both! So where do we go from here?

kirk's contract is fine. don't question it.

 

[EstronHawkKing]

when I got home last night I turned on that game, Stanford looked damn good.

 

[SCHawkeye2]

Up 55-0 and Stanford throwing the ball all over the field.

When Iowa gets up by 10 points they usually try and run out the clock, even if it's still the first quarter.

BF needs to keep the hammer down until the clock reads double 0.

Give me a thumbs up if you want to see that approach to know things have changed.

Sadly, I am doubtful we would throw the ball all over the field even if we were DOWN 0-55.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

I don't know about throwing the ball around up 55-0...but up by 10 you sure as hell don't pack it in and allow your opponent to take back the momentum.

 

[DDThompson]

Up 55-0 and Stanford throwing the ball all over the field.

When Iowa gets up by 10 points they usually try and run out the clock, even if it's still the first quarter.

Fake news on both.

Up 55-0, Stanford had 4 passing plays and 7 rushes.

So "running out the clock" up 10-0 in the first quarter would be for Iowa to continue to run their offense. Ohhh-kay.

Opening week of Hyperbole season

 

[Seth53]

At a minimum I hope the Iowa offensive staff was looking at their passing game schemes.

 

[TulipCityHawk]

I'm old school, I guess. I don't like the idea of running up the score on an overmatched team. If subs are in and the other team is blitzing, stacking 10 in the box, etc., and not respecting what you're trying to do, I'm fine with throwing the ball some. I just don't like throwing deep balls downfield with under 5 minutes to go up that big. But again, that's just me. And I would love to be in that position...

 

[Joshbrown]

I don't know about throwing the ball around up 55-0...but up by 10 you sure as hell don't pack it in and allow your opponent to take back the momentum.

I don't know if you watched the game . . . but Stanford put in their back-up . . . then they put in their 3rd stringer. Those guys got valuable experience that will serve them well down the line. I remember KF putting in Sokol(?) for a few plays and all he did was hand off the ball to a RB who ran straight into the line. Nothing positive was gained from that experience. In fact I would argue it was demoralizing for everyone involved. Guys who patiently sat on the bench waiting for their chance were ordered to NOT show what they could do. I've seen that repeatedly during KF's time. It's bad coaching. It doesn't prepare the team for the future, and it sends a message of weakness inspired by PC-ism. I would argue the reason CJB didn't earn the starting spot in 2014 was because he scored a TD (against Purdue IIRC) in a game where KF told him to run it into the line.

 

[tksirius]

I'm sure you'll get some backlash, but what you just posted is accurate. Now, cue someone to mention the one or two times when a backup actually threw in a blow out...

I don't know if you watched the game . . . but Stanford put in their back-up . . . then they put in their 3rd stringer. Those guys got valuable experience that will serve them well down the line. I remember KF putting in Sokol(?) for a few plays and all he did was hand off the ball to a RB who ran straight into the line. Nothing positive was gained from that experience. In fact I would argue it was demoralizing for everyone involved. Guys who patiently sat on the bench waiting for their chance were ordered to NOT show what they could do. I've seen that repeatedly during KF's time. It's bad coaching. It doesn't prepare the team for the future, and it sends a message of weakness inspired by PC-ism. I would argue the reason CJB didn't earn the starting spot in 2014 was because he scored a TD (against Purdue IIRC) in a game where KF told him to run it into the line.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

I don't know if you watched the game . . . but Stanford put in their back-up . . . then they put in their 3rd stringer. Those guys got valuable experience that will serve them well down the line. I remember KF putting in Sokol(?) for a few plays and all he did was hand off the ball to a RB who ran straight into the line. Nothing positive was gained from that experience. In fact I would argue it was demoralizing for everyone involved. Guys who patiently sat on the bench waiting for their chance were ordered to NOT show what they could do. I've seen that repeatedly during KF's time. It's bad coaching. It doesn't prepare the team for the future, and it sends a message of weakness inspired by PC-ism. I would argue the reason CJB didn't earn the starting spot in 2014 was because he scored a TD (against Purdue IIRC) in a game where KF told him to run it into the line.

Nope, didn't watch the game. But I agree wholeheartedly. All the players deserve their shot. Using backups as simple placeholders while the clock runs down is pathetic. There's no substitute for real game experience.

 

[MoseSchrute]

It doesn't prepare the team for the future, and it sends a message of weakness inspired by PC-ism.

I'm not sure how PC-ism applies in this situation. Otherwise I pretty much agree with your post.