Unfortunatelythis is how it is in my opinion.

[ottoman89]

Iowa is what they are, under Ferentz. Inconsistent. For some reason, Iowa can never live up to the standards and the hype with him. We should know by now ( and we don't, and it's hard to swallow ) that with Ferentz, if expectations are media high, then we won't live up to them.

We're always better underrated and/or off the radar.

I myself need to quit believing the hype they give me, because so far with Ferentz, and high hype it's nothing but letdowns, meltdowns, and embarrassments.

Now, I don't know why this is, but;

- In 2008 we lost all these close games that were close, which caused for a frustrating, and hectic season.
- In 2009 we won them all, and went on to WIN the Orange Bowl after flowing under the radar.
- Now, in 2010, with a Senior QB who is putting up Heisman potential numbers, a Great DL, nice RB, good WR, nice Defensive Secondary... I mean, everything you want to have a National Championship/BCS type season, and we aren't winning them. We're coming out flat, heartless, and unorganized.

I wish I knew what it was, but it's pretty frustrating.


Looking to the future, if Ferentz and the staff DO NOT change there philosophies, and schemes. Iowa will continue to have letdowns and meltdowns. For instance, what's Iowa's worst scenario on Defense when facing an Offense? The opponent running the spread, and Iowa has YET to do something to constantly slow it down. It takes the DL away, and exploits our LBs who play Nickel. On offense? We're not aggressive enough. We get up, and slow down. They need to learn to keep the pedal to the medal, and put someone away. And not let up. IF they don't adjust, then we're going to stay where we are. Tier 2.


Just my post, that I didn't intend to be this long when I started. Haha.

 

[528646]

Actually, I think Iowa does pretty well against spread style offenses, so I'm not sure where all the talk to the contrary is coming from.

Blaming the defense for the loss yesterday is a bit silly, in my mind. It's a team game - the D needs help from the offense in these games in the way of sustained drives and points on the board (which didn't happen yesterday). Playing a spread offense, you should be gameplanning from an offensive standpoint to run clock by making sure you are sustaining drives.

2 for 14 on 3rd downs yesterday - I don't think you need to look any further than that stat. We bailed ourselves out a little by going 3/4 on 4th downs, but you shouldn't be putting yourself in the position where you HAVE to go for it on 4th down FOUR times.

At any rate, I think that stat tells you the offense had many opportunities to extend drives and didn't come through.

 

[jocohawk]

I pretty much agree with this post.

I'm not for sure why it is, that the team can't seem to take care of business when expectations are high, but I always hope to be "disrespected" by the media. Their best recruits as often as not seem to be under the radar type players. I'll take the underdog role for this team every time.

PS, when was the last time we had a corner jump an out route?

 

[bradk6]

17 points against that defense is an embarrassment. Not enough points to beat a decent NW team. One can only assume entitlement set in as it did a few years ago.

 

[ottoman89]

17 points against that defense is an embarrassment. Not enough points to beat a decent NW team. One can only assume entitlement set in as it did a few years ago.

I'm not directly saying that the Defense was an embarrassment against Northwestern. I'm saying in general.