The difference a week can make!

[longtimer]

Ohio state our offensive line was great. There were holes to run and Stanley got great protection. Wisconsin no blocking and Stanley had NO chance. Wisconsin that much better? We were not ready to play? Coaching and schemes?

Receivers were open all day vs Ohio State. I didnt see an open receiver all day at Wisconsin (at least not wide open)???

The offensive line was the biggest surprise to me in both games but why I cant explain

 

[cincyhawk]

Ohio state our offensive line was great. There were holes to run and Stanley got great protection. Wisconsin no blocking and Stanley had NO chance. Wisconsin that much better? We were not ready to play? Coaching and schemes?

Receivers were open all day vs Ohio State. I didnt see an open receiver all day at Wisconsin (at least not wide open)???

The offensive line was the biggest surprise to me in both games but why I cant explain

Wisconsin blitzed. OSU didn't. Iowa's blocking scheme can't handle delayed speed rushes without all-world tackles. We have 2 freshmen.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Wisconsin blitzed. OSU didn't. Iowa's blocking scheme can't handle delayed speed rushes without all-world tackles. We have 2 freshmen.

Wisconsin rushed 4 most of the game - they didn't even blitz. We just can't block 4 guys with 5 linemen unless the d-line telegraphs where it plans to rush.

 

[Caddy]

Ohio state our offensive line was great. There were holes to run and Stanley got great protection. Wisconsin no blocking and Stanley had NO chance. Wisconsin that much better? We were not ready to play? Coaching and schemes?

Receivers were open all day vs Ohio State. I didnt see an open receiver all day at Wisconsin (at least not wide open)???

The offensive line was the biggest surprise to me in both games but why I cant explain

OSU simply did not show up.

 

[cincyhawk]

Wisconsin rushed 4 most of the game - they didn't even blitz. We just can't block 4 guys with 5 linemen unless the d-line telegraphs where it plans to rush.

They run 3 linemen. The guys coming up on the end were lbs. So yes, they rushed 4, but the would delay the lb till the tackle committed or slant him across the tackle's face and twist the d tackle around the outside, simultaneously collapsing the pocket and pushing the QB into a sack.

Half the time they lined them up on a shifted line so the dt was outside and the lb was standing on his hip.

So they rushed 4, but brought more than linemen.

 

[okeefe4prez]

They run 3 linemen. The guys coming up on the end were lbs. So yes, they rushed 4, but the would delay the lb till the tackle committed or slant him across the tackle's face and twist the d tackle around the outside, simultaneously collapsing the pocket and pushing the QB into a sack.

Half the time they lined them up on a shifted line so the dt was outside and the lb was standing on his hip.

So they rushed 4, but brought more than linemen.

Thanks, professor. A blitz is bringing 5. They rarely did that, they just brought 4, one of which was a LB as is typical in a 3-4 set. I don't want people to think we succumbed to some crazy blitz package yesterday because we didn't. We got straight up dominated 4 on 5 and with 7 defenders back no one was open. That performance by the coaching staff was just crazy - it's not like Wisconsin was gambling and running some high risk defense. They were just rushing 4, but we had no answer for it.

Thing is, Iowa used to be good enough up front that if you ran a 3-4 you basically conceded 5-6 yards per run on first down.

EDIT - Cincyhawk I don't want to sound condescending with the "thanks, professor" quip, either. Apologies if it came across that way. I'm still rip $hit pi$$ed right now.

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

Thanks, professor. A blitz is bringing 5. They rarely did that, they just brought 4, one of which was a LB as is typical in a 3-4 set. I don't want people to think we succumbed to some crazy blitz package yesterday because we didn't. We got straight up dominated 4 on 5 and with 7 defenders back no one was open. That performance by the coaching staff was just crazy - it's not like Wisconsin was gambling and running some high risk defense. They were just rushing 4, but we had no answer for it.

Thing is, Iowa used to be good enough up front that if you ran a 3-4 you basically conceded 5-6 yards per run on first down.

This is all true. But damn tough to do with frosh tackles, even 10 games in. That said, not having some experienced depth, even with 2 key injuries, has to be put on the coaches.

Iowa, at least under KF, relies heavily on 2 main position groups...Oline and LB. They are common strengths in good/great years when solid...and the opposite in tough years. KF can develop these positions as good or better than anyone...but it takes 2-3 years. When we have a large # lost to graduation or injury, it exposes the lack of experienced depth. This is a valid knock on recruiting/KF.

We have talent, but we lack Depth of experienced talent. Oline shows that this year, and i fear LB will show that next.

 

[DDThompson]

OSU simply did not show up.

Yeah sure. Score 17-17 after 27 minutes. But they never showed up.

 

[DDThompson]

This is all true. But damn tough to do with frosh tackles, even 10 games in. That said, not having some experienced depth, even with 2 key injuries, has to be put on the coaches.

Iowa, at least under KF, relies heavily on 2 main position groups...Oline and LB. They are common strengths in good/great years when solid...and the opposite in tough years. KF can develop these positions as good or better than anyone...but it takes 2-3 years. When we have a large # lost to graduation or injury, it exposes the lack of experienced depth. This is a valid knock on recruiting/KF.

We have talent, but we lack Depth of experienced talent. Oline shows that this year, and i fear LB will show that next.

James Daniels let three LBs straight up the gut. Stopped counting at third time.

This is the head of the O-line. He’s got to have his head on a swivel.

He’s been average this season — not going pro after this season.

 

[okeefe4prez]

We have talent, but we lack Depth of experienced talent. Oline shows that this year, and i fear LB will show that next.

Yeah, the defense typically takes a pretty major step backwards when we turnover two good LBs. If Epenesa develops, though, he will cover that up because he will draw a double team, which will make the defense way better.

 

[AreWeThereYet]

This is all true. But damn tough to do with frosh tackles, even 10 games in. That said, not having some experienced depth, even with 2 key injuries, has to be put on the coaches.

Iowa, at least under KF, relies heavily on 2 main position groups...Oline and LB. They are common strengths in good/great years when solid...and the opposite in tough years. KF can develop these positions as good or better than anyone...but it takes 2-3 years. When we have a large # lost to graduation or injury, it exposes the lack of experienced depth. This is a valid knock on recruiting/KF.

We have talent, but we lack Depth of experienced talent. Oline shows that this year, and i fear LB will show that next.

I think overall Iowa tends to be more cyclical with linebackers than offensive line.

Iowa rolled over its linebacker personnel in 2014, 2010, 2007 and 2003. 2014 was a weak year even without injuries at linebacker, 2010 couldn't keep the new linebackers healthy, 2006 new linebackers were ok but db's weren't healthy, 2003 was a good transition.

 

[vork22]

Iowa isn't the first team in history to be forced to start young offensive lineman. I don't buy this excuse at all. Why does it make Iowa look like a high school offense and other less prominent schools still put up yards? Illinois has 3 freshman on the line and a freshman TE. They put up 152 yards passing and 134 yards rushing against Wisconsin. I get it we clearly didn't execute but seriously 66 yards? What did our coaching staff do to prepare this offense? I dont remember what Stanley's line was at the half but I know late in the first half he was 2/5 for 5 yards. Any poster on this site could suit up and do that. Not even joking. Something is wrong with our running game and it goes deeper than the inexperience on the left side.

 

[IndianaHawk]

Yeah, the defense typically takes a pretty major step backwards when we turnover two good LBs. If Epenesa develops, though, he will cover that up because he will draw a double team, which will make the defense way better.

Wouldn’t it be awesome having a sophomore doubled teamed. Impressive.

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

Iowa isn't the first team in history to be forced to start young offensive lineman. I don't buy this excuse at all. Why does it make Iowa look like a high school offense and other less prominent schools still put up yards? Illinois has 3 freshman on the line and a freshman TE. They put up 152 yards passing and 134 yards rushing against Wisconsin. I get it we clearly didn't execute but seriously 66 yards? What did our coaching staff do to prepare this offense? I dont remember what Stanley's line was at the half but I know late in the first half he was 2/5 for 5 yards. Any poster on this site could suit up and do that. Not even joking. Something is wrong with our running game and it goes deeper than the inexperience on the left side.

Nothing explains or excuses 66 yards. But overall the running woes and protection issues against pressure(stunts, blitzes, erc) is absolutely much to do with frosh tackles....and running too much...with frosh tackles...against pressing front 7s-8s.

Another common theme in the bad losses(Wisc, ME, MSU). Drops and turnovers. And punting and punt receiving.

I still believe if the early drops to extend drives are catches...field position, confidence improve...and we see a very different game. We caught the balls early against OSU, extended drives, opened it up...and continued to catch the ball.

 

[cincyhawk]

Thanks, professor. A blitz is bringing 5. They rarely did that, they just brought 4, one of which was a LB as is typical in a 3-4 set. I don't want people to think we succumbed to some crazy blitz package yesterday because we didn't. We got straight up dominated 4 on 5 and with 7 defenders back no one was open. That performance by the coaching staff was just crazy - it's not like Wisconsin was gambling and running some high risk defense. They were just rushing 4, but we had no answer for it.

Thing is, Iowa used to be good enough up front that if you ran a 3-4 you basically conceded 5-6 yards per run on first down.

EDIT - Cincyhawk I don't want to sound condescending with the "thanks, professor" quip, either. Apologies if it came across that way. I'm still rip $hit pi$$ed right now.

You and me both, man.

No offense taken. I ramble. I think the reason they used to be better at it is because they had better linemen. We haven't had a top NFL pick there in a while.