I was basically talking about points allowed in general, but ya you're right on that one. I wasn't arguing against JD's posts either because I do believe the offense was the problem. Case in point, the last 3 games of the season against NW, OSU, and Minny, Iowa averaged 19.3 PPG and lost all 3 games. But while going 6-2 the first 8 games, the O averaged 34.1 PPG while having such opponents as Arizona, PSU, Mich. St., and Wisky in there, which are generally some pretty tough D's to face.
The 'Iowa Can't Stop the Spread Offense' Myth
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
I was basically talking about points allowed in general, but ya you're right on that one. I wasn't arguing against JD's posts either because I do believe the offense was the problem. Case in point, the last 3 games of the season against NW, OSU, and Minny, Iowa averaged 19.3 PPG and lost all 3 games. But while going 6-2 the first 8 games, the O averaged 34.1 PPG while having such opponents as Arizona, PSU, Mich. St., and Wisky in there, which are generally some pretty tough D's to face.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Some key stats against Northwestern (Since 2005):
TOP:
2005- Iowa, 30:42; NW, 29:18
2006- Iowa, 26:38; NW, 33:22
2007- Iowa, 28:39; NW, 31:21
2008- Iowa, 30:07; NW, 29:53
2009- Iowa, 25:40; NW, 34:20
2010- Iowa, 28:51; NW, 31:09
What this shows is that Northwestern consistently keeps the ball for at least an equal amount of time as the Iowa offense, and usually they win the TOP battle. The next stat I'm about to show is a big reason why the above is true.
Northwestern's third down efficiency (with our season average allowed for comparison):
2005: 9-18 (50%) (We allowed conversions on 45.3% of third downs in 2005)
2006: 7-13 (53.8%) (40.8%)
2007: 6-16 (37.5%) (39.8%)
2008: 9-19 (47.3%) (34.54%)
2009: 9-18 (50%) (35.68%)
2010: 9-16 (56.25%) (40.11%)
Big shock, the one year that we beat Northwestern in this span, is the one year we held them below 40% on third down (which also happens to be the only year that we kept them either at or below our % of conversions allowed).
When we can't get them off the field on third down, they can keep the ball without scoring, limiting our chances offensively. That puts an even higher premium on our offensive possessions, and any mistake is amplified because of it.
If the offense wouldn't make any mistakes, we'd have no trouble. But we've pretty much always been defense-first under Ferentz. And our defense has struggled against Northwestern in particular, evidenced by the above stats. Northwestern bleeds us out slowly, they don't go for the jugular right away.
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
I remember those McCarney days (my seats are right behind the visitors bench). His teams came into Kinnick breathing fire. Fitz has his players amped up for Iowa as well. I remember last year (at that miserable venue in Evanston) when NW came out after halftime. They looked super jacked for a team that was behind and playing in the rain. Well, they won.
I sure as hell hope all of the players and fans in Kinnick meet Fitz and the kitties with some intensity this year.
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
I hope our quick LB corps is ready this year. They got shredded last year.
Having said that, Iowa should always score more than 21 points against NW.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Like I said though, we don't get as many possessions against Northwestern because of how their offense stays on the field and plays keep away. It makes it more difficult to put up a lot of point of your own, especially if you make any mistakes.
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
Yes, it's definitely a combination of things. Iowa had PLENTY of opportunities on offense to ice the game in the fourth quarter (recall that they were up 17-7 and driving for a score. Who loses that game? I still contend that the offense beat us more than anything else.
If you can't hang on to the ball and get first downs, you put a tired defense on the field. NW ran 50 plays in the second half. Sure, I wish the D wasn't exhausted and could get a stop. But, they couldn't.
I still contend the best way to beat a spread D is to not give up big plays and keep the ball (and then of course score more than 21 points)
Edit: Ironically, Iowa's offense is pretty much designed for ball control and TOP dominance.
Last edited:
LG210
Well-Known Member
I agree that Iowa's offense didn't do Iowa's defense any favors in a lot of games last year (sometimes scoring too quickly, ironically). However, I still believe (anecdotally) that Iowa's defense has a more difficult time with quality spread opponents than quality pro-style opponents, regardless of Iowa's offensive performance.
I wasn't trying to explain wins and losses, rather, I was simply trying to explain why Jon's original analysis was potentially overstating Iowa's success against spread-type offenses. If you are analyzing wins and losses, last year's offense certainly was not free of culpability.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
If linebackers are so important to Iowa's defense, why would the defense put "shreddable" linebackers on the field? It would be like not having any life jackets on a boat. I mean, what kind of an excuse is that? Our defense is bad because the most important part of our defense is "shreddable"? That's just bad preparation. At least, coaches should use other schemes to take pressure away from linebackers who are "shreddable".
"IOWA WON'T SCORE MORE THAN 21 POINTS AGAINST NW IF THEIR D CAN'T GET OFF THE FIELD. I mean, figure it out, just once... How is Iowa's offense gonna score more points when the other team's offense hogs the ball because Iowa's d can't get off the field? - and Ferentz is conservative on offense and defense?
Iowa will need some pick sixes to score more.
No one is disputing Iowa's run defense. It's great - especially against Penn St, Michigan St., and Michigan with the running QB with no shoelaces and no passing ability. The exception was the Minny game last year.
Iowa just can't stop the pass.
The question as it pertains to the Iowa State game: why hasn't Iowa State's spread beaten Iowa's D?
State needs to stop the avalanche of turnovers. Then it could be a game.
Last edited:
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Were you watching this team last year? Injuries decimated our LB corps. Our best two coverage backers (Tarp and Nielsen) were either out or not 100%. We were down to 2nd and third string at each position.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Keep on making the excuses - it sure doesn't win games.
It's not the D's fault that the D emphasizes linebackers even when those linebackers are "shreddable". That's just bunk.
And it's certainly not good coaching.
It's not the D's fault that the D emphasizes linebackers even when those linebackers are "shreddable". That's just bunk.
And it's certainly not good coaching.
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
Injuries were a major problem for Iowa's defense last year, particularly at the linebacker position.
If Iowa's offense can convert, keep drives going, and not turn the ball over, they won't be giving it right back to a pretty good offense.
Lastly, take a deep breath. I was at the NW game last year and with Iowa up 17-7, Stanzi throws a pick. On the next possession, they can't convert on 3rd down. Iowa's defense had allowed 7 points up to that point. Is that bad? You can't give a competitive team multiple opportunities to beat you. By turning the ball over and failing to convert on 3rd down, Iowa did just that. Eventually, the defense gets tired.
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
Go back and watch the games from last year, then. Teams consistently exploited our LBs in the passing game. Our LBs did the best they could, but they had injuries, and were starting a true freshman MLB.
I think it will be quite a bit better this year.
You don't like that term "shreddable" do you?
Why are you so ideological about this? The success of Iowa's D on the field doesn't even matter to you, because you are fixated on your theory that Ferentz and Parker are too inflexible in their schemes.
Be more logical, and less ideological.
+1000
Jon is using just a little bit of sleight of hand by going strictly by points allowed, and then dumping it on the offense for not scoring enough.
Iowa's defense has been DREADFUL on 3rd downs against NW and some of the other spread teams. The defense can't get off the field...bend don't break, take what you can get...it comes back to bite them in this situation.
NW limits Iowa's touches, thus harder to get in a rhythm, magnifies any Iowa turnovers. Until Iowa's defense doesn't give up 3rd down conversions at a rate 10 to 15% higher than their regular season average...it is fair to say Iowa can't stop the spread.
Redzone defense is still solid...but their are 80 other yards out there. They can keep NW between the 20s fairly well and keep the points low and game close...but NW is limiting Iowa's offensive chances by converting 50% on 3rd down.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Iowa's d does pretty well against some spread offenses. tOSU is an example.
Pryor couldn't pass very well.
Iowa's d gets bogged down with any proficient passing offense - spread, pistol, or pro-style. One-on-one matchups in space (not at the LOS) kills Iowa's defense. tOSU and Pryor is an example.
We all want to help Iowa become a better team.
Fixating on a certain part of the team usually doesn't help the team get better.
Pryor couldn't pass very well.
Iowa's d gets bogged down with any proficient passing offense - spread, pistol, or pro-style. One-on-one matchups in space (not at the LOS) kills Iowa's defense. tOSU and Pryor is an example.
We all want to help Iowa become a better team.
Fixating on a certain part of the team usually doesn't help the team get better.
Last edited:
This. You need to account for how many yards the "spread" teams are racking up against us. Missouri had 434 passing yards against the Hawks. NW had 318 passing yards and 26 first downs compared to Iowa's 17.
RocknRollface
Well-Known Member
For whatever reason Iowas offense has been horrid against NW. That is not the fault of the defense. TOs and injuries have played a big part.
NW offense has averaged below 21 points the last five years against Iowa.
Iowa should be able to easily average 24+ points against such an average D.
You also absolutely cannot ignore all the fluke turnovers and injuries that occurred in the 08 and 09 games. Those were really the only reasons Iowa lost either one of those years. It had nothing to do with lack of ability to stop the spread. Iowa actually shut them down both of those years.
Those were both going to be blow out wins for Iowa without the 6 turnovers in 08 and the Staniz broken ankle/TD play in 09.
Last year Persa just flat out beat us after Stanzi failed to put the game away and you have to give them full credit for that one.
NW offense has averaged below 21 points the last five years against Iowa.
Iowa should be able to easily average 24+ points against such an average D.
You also absolutely cannot ignore all the fluke turnovers and injuries that occurred in the 08 and 09 games. Those were really the only reasons Iowa lost either one of those years. It had nothing to do with lack of ability to stop the spread. Iowa actually shut them down both of those years.
Those were both going to be blow out wins for Iowa without the 6 turnovers in 08 and the Staniz broken ankle/TD play in 09.
Last year Persa just flat out beat us after Stanzi failed to put the game away and you have to give them full credit for that one.
Those are good stats, but lets not cherry pick. How often in those games did the D get off the field only to have the offense turn the ball over? Or have an onsides kick recovered? Or give up the ball/points on special teams?
A lot of crap has factored into NW winning the TOP in games against us recently, and usually it isn't because they are moving the ball all over the field on our D.
After taking a closer look at the last three box scores...it turns out that this seems to be a bit misleading as well... Northwestern really isn't putting together "drives" outside of their 4 scoring drives.
Seems like in 08, 09 and 10 outside of the TD or field goal drives, they've been held almost exclusively to 5 or 6 plays and punt.
So, while the offense and turnovers are probably the biggest reason...most of these NW wins have been second half comebacks, where the defense can't get off the field. Somehow losing their mojo a bit after the half as well.
With northwestern, the OFFENSE is the problem, not the defense. There is absolutely no reason we shouldn't have scored 30+ each of those games. The problem is we have kept northwestern in every game by our conservative offense , and it has bit us in the butt! We have dominated a number of those games and could have been ahead 2 or 3 touchdowns very easily. Unfortuneately, we seem to always have at least 1 quarter when they outscore us by 10-14, and that is the difference in the game.
