Yup.
But slow down on your offensive pass interference when they are going to get picked.
That's talking like something you teach when you want to win.
The World Did Not End!
- Thread starter eyekwah
- Start date
But slow down on your offensive pass interference when they are going to get picked.
That's talking like something you teach when you want to win.
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
I do have an issue with Stanley's performance, but, not the interceptions.
Way too often he was slow getting the offense to the line which only gave him a few seconds to read the defense. He needed to have better tempo.
Also - as has been an issue with Iowa QBs for a long time - he needs to alter his cadence. By giving himself more time at the line, he could have barked out some signals to get Michigan to show its hand or create off-side penalties. He's too robotic and predictable with the signaling and that played right into Brown's strategy.
The other egregious event was when he took that sack after rolling out near the side line. He was way out of the tackle box and could have simply tossed the ball out of bounds. Any QB with any experience should know that. A sack in that scenario is unacceptable.
Way too often he was slow getting the offense to the line which only gave him a few seconds to read the defense. He needed to have better tempo.
Also - as has been an issue with Iowa QBs for a long time - he needs to alter his cadence. By giving himself more time at the line, he could have barked out some signals to get Michigan to show its hand or create off-side penalties. He's too robotic and predictable with the signaling and that played right into Brown's strategy.
The other egregious event was when he took that sack after rolling out near the side line. He was way out of the tackle box and could have simply tossed the ball out of bounds. Any QB with any experience should know that. A sack in that scenario is unacceptable.
hawkeyes87
Well-Known Member
No blame for BF? Michigan blitzing wasn't a surprise.
Also, 2nd pick was going to Tracy again, not ISM. And, like the 1st, he wasn't close to open.
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
I couldn't recall if it was ISM or Tracy, but, either way it's a fly pattern. You throw the ball to the spot. It's on the WR to get there, and, like I pointed out, he had a rusher immediately in his face and was falling backward. Watch the play again. All things considered, it was a damn good throw. The WR has to play strong there and either get the PI call or at least stop the DB from making the catch.
I find it ironic that Nate gets criticized for being too conservative and not taking chances, then, when he does, and it doesn't work, he gets criticized for taking the chance. smh
As for BF, of course he gets some blame, as do all of the coaches. It's their job to have the players prepared, but, why just him? The O-line is Polasek's responsibility, and they were terrible (apparently our guards have zero peripheral vision). KOK's only job is to have the QBs prepared. If Stanley's not reading the blitzes, making good decisions with the ball and not altering his cadence, then where's the criticism of him? Then, of course, the ultimate buck stops with Kirk.
The point is that it's unrealistic and borderline ridiculous to expect a QB to play well with defensive players in his face on almost every snap, especially when those players are outstanding athletes.
Fryowa
Administrator
Hawkeye donors only need three things out of the Hawkeye football program, and if you’re going to be a Hawkeye fan you just have to accept it.
1) 7.5 wins a year
2) No scandals
3) A Ferentz in office.
I don’t know how old Brian’s kids are, but by the time one of them is 30 he’ll be ready to retire and pass it on again.
The people forking over checks to the athletic department value the nice farm boy gee golly image and hospital wave waaaaaaay more than actual wins.
skinnykilmer17
Well-Known Member
These are good points but this might be where we diverge.
These recent hires and additions and shuffling of coaches seems to have one goal in mind and that is the advancement of Brian Ferentz's career track. I am not saying Kirk doesn't want to win but he obviously has ulterior motives and are those motivations at the expense of greater success? We will never know.
Clearly the offensive line was outmatched yesterday and so were Polasek and Brian. And Kirk. But this is the path Kirk created. They have had some modest success in the past few years but yesterday was a real slap in the face and a reminder that these guys had zero experience when they were hired and it really showed. We all know WHY they were hired. There were better and more qualified candidates obviously. I found it unacceptable and I still do. THIS is big boy football as they say. Leave the coaches training programs for the Wartburg's of the world. No offense to Wartburg as they are a really strong D3 program. You get my point though?
Sorry, more of a macro view. Kirk's penchant for nepotism infuriates me. It did then and it still does. End of rant. Time to get some yardwork done.
Last edited:
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
I think it's two different subjects. My point is that the poor performance yesterday doesn't all fall on Nate. In fact, all things considered, you could argue that he actually played pretty well. He had several passes that were released just as he was being hit that were spot on. On the second to last drive, on the third and long attempt to Weiting, the pass was right there. If you watch the play close, Wieting inexplicably cut his route short coming out of the break then tried to catch up to the pass. As I said, I do have issues with Stanley's play yesterday, as detailed above, but he doesn't play in a vacuum.
As for the nepotism, I to have some issues with it, but I don't think it bothers me as much as it does some. BF may not have been the most highly qualified candidate, but it's not like he walked in off the street either. He also has built-in loyalty to the program, which has value. I'm taking more of a wait and see with the offense right now. It was bad yesterday but there have been promising bright spots as well.
I didn't read everything on this point but I am sure that I don't have to. I am sure it contains a whole lot of "KF is overpaid", "Brian is an idiot", "we never change or adjust", etc.
Relax people. Seriously. We are a good football team, top to bottom. Saying that, there are teams we will simply overmatched, such as Rutgers, Illinois, our non conference except ISU, etc. In those games we dominate. However, games against Michigan, PSU, Ohio State, and Wisky we play teams we will not overmatched, and so every little thing comes into play to determine an outcome. That is like the NFL where the slightest of advantage can determine a game.
So yesterday's game was a toss up on paper. There is experience and youth on both sides, and although Michigan has more stars Iowa has talent too. So here are the factors that really played into this game.
1. It was on the road. Maybe it wasn't that loud, maybe it was. But Michigan was much more inspired at home than they were against Wisky. Big advantage for them.
2. Sargent fumbles on the first play and hands them 3 points. We were good to not let it be 7.
3. The wind was prolific. Huge disadvantage to both teams, however, I would say it hurt us more because we were playing from behind the whole game and the one area we could have attacked was the outside edges to counter the blitz and the wind made that much more difficult if not impossible.
4. The throw to Oliver Martin was an obvious PI call that didn't get called because the ball was supposedly not catchable. We get that call and it's probably 7 being since we would have first and goal at the 1. Big swing.
5. The obvious holding by the Michigan defensive backs was something the crew was going to let them play with. They pressed a lot, held off the line and made Stanley eat the ball or slow his read. If these get called like they should, it eases that blitz.
Those were the big defining factors in the game. Change one of those, in a 10-3 game, or a 7 point game if you choose to look at it like that and it swings the outcome.
The only reason a lot of people are upset is because Wisky destroyed Michigan and that supposedly makes Michigan bad. Well, it didn't. And if you watched that game all of those determining factors were on Wisky's side. They were at home. Michigan fumbled inside the 5 when they were going to tie the game. A review went against them. Etc. It just unraveled for a while until they righted the ship at the end.
It happens. We lost by 7. We have junked other teams, like OSU a couple years ago, MSU, etc. Sometimes those things go your way and sometimes they don't. But remember that things are never as good or bad as they seem.
Relax people. Seriously. We are a good football team, top to bottom. Saying that, there are teams we will simply overmatched, such as Rutgers, Illinois, our non conference except ISU, etc. In those games we dominate. However, games against Michigan, PSU, Ohio State, and Wisky we play teams we will not overmatched, and so every little thing comes into play to determine an outcome. That is like the NFL where the slightest of advantage can determine a game.
So yesterday's game was a toss up on paper. There is experience and youth on both sides, and although Michigan has more stars Iowa has talent too. So here are the factors that really played into this game.
1. It was on the road. Maybe it wasn't that loud, maybe it was. But Michigan was much more inspired at home than they were against Wisky. Big advantage for them.
2. Sargent fumbles on the first play and hands them 3 points. We were good to not let it be 7.
3. The wind was prolific. Huge disadvantage to both teams, however, I would say it hurt us more because we were playing from behind the whole game and the one area we could have attacked was the outside edges to counter the blitz and the wind made that much more difficult if not impossible.
4. The throw to Oliver Martin was an obvious PI call that didn't get called because the ball was supposedly not catchable. We get that call and it's probably 7 being since we would have first and goal at the 1. Big swing.
5. The obvious holding by the Michigan defensive backs was something the crew was going to let them play with. They pressed a lot, held off the line and made Stanley eat the ball or slow his read. If these get called like they should, it eases that blitz.
Those were the big defining factors in the game. Change one of those, in a 10-3 game, or a 7 point game if you choose to look at it like that and it swings the outcome.
The only reason a lot of people are upset is because Wisky destroyed Michigan and that supposedly makes Michigan bad. Well, it didn't. And if you watched that game all of those determining factors were on Wisky's side. They were at home. Michigan fumbled inside the 5 when they were going to tie the game. A review went against them. Etc. It just unraveled for a while until they righted the ship at the end.
It happens. We lost by 7. We have junked other teams, like OSU a couple years ago, MSU, etc. Sometimes those things go your way and sometimes they don't. But remember that things are never as good or bad as they seem.
hawkeyes87
Well-Known Member
No, a lot of people are upset because 3 points doesn't cut it.
Michigan gave up 20+ to every non-Rutgers team they've played.
And, 3 of your 5 "defining factors" are the weather and the refs? That's Clown fan stuff.
AIRHAWK
Well-Known Member
The bad thing about this Seth is in the 4th quarter even tho our offense had played like dog shit we still had a chance. Michigan was inept on offense too. We have a 3 year starter at QB. The OC HAS to be able to draw up some plays to get down the field and get back in the game. Michigan was handing it to us. And we pissed all over ourselves. Pathetic
DBAHawkFan
Well-Known Member
So now we’re going to blame the wind? Seriously we scored 3 points. That’s why we lost. Our offense sucks. Keep making excuses for a 3rd year starter.
Ohhh but he doesn’t have his NFL TE anymore
Yet we’re told this is the best WR group we’ve ever had.
We have NFL prospects on the OL
Our RB have experience, and a true freshman who appears to be the best player on offense
Yet we can’t score.
In eight quarters of football against legit P5 programs (ISU, UM) we have scored ONE touchdown.
I can’t wait to hear the BS next Saturday, “Iowa plays old school football. They want to smash you and run all over you....and they will be physical”
Cue to 4th Q and we have 5 yards rushing
Ohhh but he doesn’t have his NFL TE anymore
Yet we’re told this is the best WR group we’ve ever had.
We have NFL prospects on the OL
Our RB have experience, and a true freshman who appears to be the best player on offense
Yet we can’t score.
In eight quarters of football against legit P5 programs (ISU, UM) we have scored ONE touchdown.
I can’t wait to hear the BS next Saturday, “Iowa plays old school football. They want to smash you and run all over you....and they will be physical”
Cue to 4th Q and we have 5 yards rushing
While it’s true the world didn’t end, a former Iowa offensive lineman tweeted he felt he needed to apologize to the defense.
That tells me all I need to know from an actual former Iowa player. It was truly an ugly day for offensive football. Both teams took college football back about 50 years.
Last edited:
MoseSchrute
Well-Known Member
You're not serious, are you? This program needs to focus on maybe winning some damn divisional titles.
Yep. Such a false narrative.
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
Gee. You actually watched the game and gave your observations some good evidence. Are you lonesome?
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the sanity.
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
I was in the Big House. In the end zone. You could not hear yourself think when the crowd wanted a big play from the Blue. Would be glad to hear from anyone who was actually in the House. Stadium was packed, except a very few empty seats in the student section. Some were seen in the library.
Wow. Please tell me you aren’t one of those whack job iowa fans that think iowa has any chance to play for a national title during ferentz’ regime or really at any time ever while on planet earth. It ain’t happening folks. Regardless of what kind of fantasy world you live in, it ain’t freaking happening so please stop the nonsense of these silly statements. The skill position talent required is so dramatically different than anything that ever comes here, it’s just not happening. You have to have speed. You have to score points. You have to be aggressive offensively and have playmakers all over the field that can score on every play. We don’t have those kind. Our lineman are slow. Our qb’s are slow, can’t run and aren’t playmakers. Our receivers are blockers first, route runners second and receivers third...by design. Not that way at top 5 schools. They have tailbacks that get to the corner and are gone. Ours are caught from behind. We play walk ons from 1a schools in the Midwest at skill positions at times and at db. National championship teams get those guys from cali, texas, Florida and Deep South in general where kids have speed and athleticism. National championship teams don’t hire coaches sons or former centers to run offenses. They hire former qb’s, former pro coaches, former college coaches. Flat out...national searches and get the best person for the jib. Period. And if a coach isn’t pulling their weight? They make a switch. Immediately. And they also have fan bases, media and big money boosters as well as administration (primarily the AD) that holds the coach accountable. None of those things happen at iowa. It’s rinse and repeat. And the movie projector plays the same exact show every Fall. It’s just that some of the actors may be different
The defining factors that I outlined were the external factors that certainly determined the outcome of the game, one that was extremely tight to begin with.
The reason we didn't score points was because we could not protect our quarterback. And there are many reasons why. Our backs missed on picking up the blitzers. Each of the lineman got beat at the point of attack and got trucked. Our lineman blew protection assignments and allowed a free rusher. Michigan did a good job mixing their back end coverage between man and zone pre-snap and we were either in the wrong play to begin with, couldn't audible, or had to go to secondary reads, all of which takes time.
We also couldn't run the ball. We committed a lot of penalties, and I don't know what the yardage loss is between penalties and sacks but I am sure it was a lot. We were inside the 40 I think 7 times, and that is when all those things along with turnovers happened. It resulted in a lot of long yardage situations, and nobody can overcome a lot of those. It was a very uncharacteristic game for us, for what we believe and the way we usually play.
Minnesota has better odds of making the playoffs than we do. After 2 conference games and one of them was against the worst team that n the b10.
I'm not delusional about the odds of making it, but to have the odds go to zero after one legit conference game is sad.
