Why were we so Conservative in that 2nd half?

Tschroeder13 said:
i just think he didnt want to run up the score. we really stopped taking chances deep after the goal line stop in start of 2nd half. just ran the clock out.
Click to expand...

A 3 TD lead is hardly running it up. I was worried about giving up a play that could change the game the whole 2nd half. Considering our issues on special teams thus far, and Chaz Powell returning punts, I was afraid he'd break one and give PSU life.
 
silvanthalas said:
Which just goes to show that's there's a world of difference between Iowa and ISU.
Click to expand...

Duh. Do you think its a revelation that ISU football has a long ways to go to catch up to the Iowa's.? Seems rather obvious to me...though unlike you, I'm old enough to remember Iowa of the late 60's and 70's. Iowa emerged from that to build a powerful program, you'll have to forgive fans of other schools...like ISU...who would like to emulate that success.

Perhaps, Silvanthalas, you should get over yourself.
 
ShadasRevenge said:
Penn State put together one good drive for the entire game, and it ended in zero points for them. Iowa could afford to play conservative because they had a 14 point lead, and the PSU offense was never really a threat.

It's been this way for 12 years now, why act surprised?
Click to expand...

And what's the deal with that bend-don't-break defense, anyway? Also, we should run the spread!

:cool:
 
ShadasRevenge said:
Penn State put together one good drive for the entire game, and it ended in zero points for them. Iowa could afford to play conservative because they had a 14 point lead, and the PSU offense was never really a threat.

It's been this way for 12 years now, why act surprised?
Click to expand...

Because that won't work against Michigan.
 
i'm sure i'm not the first to say this in this thread, but here goes anyway. who cares? we won by 3 touchdowns. seems like they know what they're doing.
 
17-3 lead + best defense in the nation + running back who hasn't fumbled in two years of being the lead back + best punter in the nation + a freshman qb for the opponent who it was obvious after 1 quarter couldn't drive their team against our defense + field position = you run the ball, get some first downs, punt, and play some more defense = you win the game.

seriously guys, there's 3 threads at least on why we didn't chuck the ball up in the air 50 times in the second half. Know the team, know the coaching staff, get the philosophy in your head, and stop asking goofy questions. If you want 52 to 30 something games drive to jack trice and watch the cloners. good win clones btw.

If they threw the ball 80 times and two balls bounced off mcnutts shoulder pads and were returned for pick sixes and we lost everybody would be complaining we didn't kill more clock- this just in, nobody plays a perfect football game ever! As long as human beings are still playing the game, there will be never be a perfect scenario by which you hold the other team to negative 800 yards and every run is an 80 yard run for a td and every pass is completed to our team and goes for a td. We won the game, thats why they play the sucka. It was a great, dominating victory, over a good football team.
 
It's all about how GOOD our defense is. Kirk knew that he didn't have to do much of anything with our solid defense. Why risk a pick six or mishap when you can run 3 minutes off the clock and let your defense do what it does best.......not allow TD's.

It wasn't about a stagnant offense, it was about a stellar defense. That's how KF is and will always be....like it or not.
 
I understand why KF does what he does, but for me, I would rather watch them play football for the entire game than to watch them play half a game and then play not to lose. I watch the game for entertainment value and when Iowa plays not to lose in the second half, it is not as entertaining as it could be.

Most of the Iowa players will not play beyond this level, so please Coach Ferentz, let them play for the full game!
 
83Hawk said:
Because that won't work against Michigan.
Click to expand...

Iowa wasn't playing Michigan last night. If Iowa gets behind big against Michigan, I have no qualms about Iowa'a ability to get back into the game.

Against Arizona, Iowa was able to come back and tie it in an environment that was much more hostile than the Big House.
 
DJI9424 said:
I understand why KF does what he does, but for me, I would rather watch them play football for the entire game than to watch them play half a game and then play not to lose. I watch the game for entertainment value and when Iowa plays not to lose in the second half, it is not as entertaining as it could be.

Most of the Iowa players will not play beyond this level, so please Coach Ferentz, let them play for the full game!
Click to expand...

And had they gone out and slung it around and thrown a pick six, people would have been posting "I CANT BELIEVE WE WERE THROWING IT! WE HAVE THE BEST DEFENSE IN THE NATION AND PSU WASN'T DOING ANYTHING! KOK HAS TO GO!'

I guar-on-tee it
 
Iowas defense only gave up 13 points to Arizona and yet we still lost. If any thing that game showed is that no lead is a sure thing. Hey at least we didn't have to worry about giving up a long kick return for a TD or a pick six in the 2nd half, a blocked punt was still in the mix.:rolleyes:
 
I would have liked more offense in the 2nd half, not to run the score up(for JoPa sake), but give the guys on the 2nd team some reps, I am worried about LB's. I know Morris played in the 2nd half, but that was due to injury. We are a little thin since most of our depth in LB are seniors. Just feel that we need to some playing experience to those guys that will be playing more next yr. We you have a chance to get those gusy reps it will only help down the road, plus you are resting our starting D.

It would have been nice to give Coker some plays last night also.

Two weeks until we go to the Big House & that is not to visit your Uncle Tony Two Toes.

Go Hawks!
 
(Yes, yes...you've seen the following post in another thread.....:) )

Head scratcher for Seth: Iowa went up big on BSU (21-0 at half) and chose to continue pouring it on in the 2nd half with the 1st team playing deep into the 3rd quarter.

3:36 remaining third quarter: Ricky Stanzi passed to Derrell Johnson-Koulianos down the middle for 45 yard gain (Michael Meyer made PAT) 0 - 35

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...d=201009250028


So, I don't understand why the difference between how we "acted" versus BSU and PSU.

Either shut it down everytime we're up and in no danger or losing, or, continue to run our usual offense in an actual game so we're that much more prepared when we play our next tough opponent.

I'd prefer the latter over the former every time. Without question.
 
SDK46 said:
(Yes, yes...you've seen the following post in another thread.....:) )

Head scratcher for Seth: Iowa went up big on BSU (21-0 at half) and chose to continue pouring it on in the 2nd half with the 1st team playing deep into the 3rd quarter.

3:36 remaining third quarter: Ricky Stanzi passed to Derrell Johnson-Koulianos down the middle for 45 yard gain (Michael Meyer made PAT) 0 - 35

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...d=201009250028


So, I don't understand why the difference between how we "acted" versus BSU and PSU.

Either shut it down everytime we're up and in no danger or losing, or, continue to run our usual offense in an actual game so we're that much more prepared when we play our next tough opponent.

I'd prefer the latter over the former every time. Without question.
Click to expand...

We had a lot more respect for Penn State's defense is what this tells me. We didn't stop trying to score to not run up the score, we did it because we wanted our best squad to win it for us and it worked.

I've said this before but I really think the coaches said Stanzi has thrown some dumb passes tonight (honestly he was lucky to just have the one interception) let's not let him throw more because we really don't have to move the ball at all because our defense is that bad ***.
 
bcl20 said:
We had a lot more respect for Penn State's defense is what this tells me. We didn't stop trying to score to not run up the score, we did it because we wanted our best squad to win it for us and it worked.
Click to expand...

Huh? :confused:
 
SDK46 said:
(Yes, yes...you've seen the following post in another thread.....:) )

Head scratcher for Seth: Iowa went up big on BSU (21-0 at half) and chose to continue pouring it on in the 2nd half with the 1st team playing deep into the 3rd quarter.

3:36 remaining third quarter: Ricky Stanzi passed to Derrell Johnson-Koulianos down the middle for 45 yard gain (Michael Meyer made PAT) 0 - 35

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...d=201009250028


So, I don't understand why the difference between how we "acted" versus BSU and PSU.

Either shut it down everytime we're up and in no danger or losing, or, continue to run our usual offense in an actual game so we're that much more prepared when we play our next tough opponent.

I'd prefer the latter over the former every time. Without question.
Click to expand...

Why is it difficult to understand that we have different game plans, strategies, and take different actions against different teams?

Also you fail to recognize that we took the air out of the football in the 2nd half against BSU as well. The difference was that Coker and Rodgers both ran for 50+ yards in the 2nd half.
 
DuffMan said:
Why is it difficult to understand that we have different game plans, strategies, and take different actions against different teams?

Also you fail to recognize that we took the air out of the football in the 2nd half against BSU as well. The difference was that Coker and Rodgers both ran for 50+ yards in the 2nd half.
Click to expand...
Oh really....and here I thought this thread was about why Iowa always sits on the ball after they get ahead. Sorry...not buying the 'coaching-devised different strokes for different folks' theory.

I think we get nervous in the big games offensively and the play calling is devised on the fly. Bigger the game, the more into the shell we go. Just my observation.

BTW...Stanzi throwing 45 yards to DJK, with only 3:30 left in the 3rd quarter is NOT taking the air out of the ball. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
CRhawkeye4life said:
Iowas defense only gave up 13 points to Arizona and yet we still lost. If any thing that game showed is that no lead is a sure thing. Hey at least we didn't have to worry about giving up a long kick return for a TD or a pick six in the 2nd half, a blocked punt was still in the mix.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Iowa never had a 14 point lead against Arizona; it's not even a valid comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top