498-2

[Franisdaman]

This statistic is about a few things:

1) Iowa State’s two long TD strikes we blew it on (as was mentioned).

2) Iowa’s usual winning of the TOP battle, of which turnovers factor in.

3) This is the most Ferentz-like win ever. Navy football is absolutely the type Kirk would admire. And I’m totally okay with this.

Yep, a very KF type win. I honestly thought the Iowa mistakes were going to do them in on the road.

But this is the way I look at it:

2 big Iowa Mistakes: Two easy TDs were given up by the Iowa D. This hurt Iowa tremendously, resulting in 14 of ISU's 17 pts. That's a LOT to overcome.

2 big ISU Mistakes: The two ISU turnovers, yes, were obviously big. The 2-0 margin in turnovers obviously hurt the Clowns. But, unlike the Iowa mistakes, the Purdy fumble only resulted in an Iowa FG, not a TD. The ISU turnover in the end obviously sealed the deal.

So, the 2 big mistakes on both sides evened out, with the exception that ISU got TDs (14 points) off the Iowa mistakes and Iowa only got a FG (3 points) off the ISU mistakes.

Which gets us back to the original post.

In the last 10 years in College Football, teams that had gained 7.7 yards per play or more and allowed 4.3 yards per play or less were 498-1.

So, statistically and historically (10 years of data) speaking, ISU had a 99.8% (498 of 499) chance of winning the game.

Yet the Clowns still found a way to lose.

 

[DodgerHawki]

Yep, a very KF type win. I honestly thought the Iowa mistakes were going to do them in on the road.

But this is the way I look at it:

2 big Iowa Mistakes: Two easy TDs were given up by the Iowa D. This hurt Iowa tremendously, resulting in 14 of ISU's 17 pts. That's a LOT to overcome.

2 big ISU Mistakes: The two ISU turnovers, yes, were obviously big. The 2-0 margin in turnovers obviously hurt the Clowns. But, unlike the Iowa mistakes, the Purdy fumble only resulted in an Iowa FG, not a TD. The ISU turnover in the end obviously sealed the deal.

So, the 2 big mistakes on both sides evened out, with the exception that ISU got TDs (14 points) off the Iowa mistakes and Iowa only got a FG (3 points) off the ISU mistakes.

Which gets us back to the original post.

In the last 10 years in College Football, teams that had gained 7.7 yards per play or more and allowed 4.3 yards per play or less were 498-1.

So, statistically and historically (10 years of data) speaking, ISU had a 99.8% (498 of 499) chance of winning the game.

Yet the Clowns still found a way to lose.

It was a weird game. I wouldn't necessarily call the long ISU TD's Iowa "mistakes" at least not in the same context as the fumble that sealed the game when two guys run into each other. It was a good job by the ISU staff as they had all off-season and a bye week to scheme some big play opportunities. They did so and those plays worked to perfection. It would be akin to calling the long ISM TD against Rutgers a "mistake" by Rutgers. Sometimes the opponent gets the best of you based on scheme and tendency and execution.

I thought the Purdy fumble in the second quarter was the biggest play in the game other than the punt fumble. ISU led 7-3 at that time, was on the doorstep of going ahead 10-3 or 14-3 at that point. Stone makes a great play to poke it out, Koerner makes a great play to recover it and Iowa takes the rest of the half, kicks a FG and it's 7-6 at halftime instead of 10-3 or 14-3.

Iowa State's plan for attacking Iowa on early downs was brilliant. Holy cow did they carve up the Iowa defense with all of the fakes/backfield action and then the ball was out of Purdy's hand so quickly. I thought the Iowa pass rush was not bad, there were a few times Iowa hit Purdy as he was throwing when the ball was out of his hand in under 2 seconds.

Leistikow mentioned it in his Hawk Central article but Iowa started to somewhat slow ISU by bringing pressure. It didn't always work, but enough that it finally allowed Iowa to get ISU in some 2nd and 3rd and long situations. ISU was only 3 of 9 on third downs. This was just a program win, plain and simple. Down 4 starters by my count (LT, DT, FS, CB) plus two of the backup corners. Get out-gained by a ton. Opponent coming off a bye who really wants to beat you. Team won just by continuing to play hard and didn't make very many mistakes. Sometimes winning is accomplished by not making dumb mistakes. Iowa will likely have to play much better to win at Michigan or Wisconsin. The good news is that is possible if the team gets healthy.

 

[TheHawkeyeDudeAbides]

The first ISU turnover killed their drive for at least 3 points and Iowa got 3 in exchange before halftime. The last turnover killed any hope of a walk-off FG against a tired Iowa defense which was bending.

Rewatching the game, Iowa State got away with a lot of holds but Stanley cannot rollout and make throws on the run. Stanley is a better than average QB but he locks on to his main target and misses so many more wide open receivers. Then he hestitate and DBs react quickly so any receiver seperation is minimized. I hope the next Iowa QBs will be an improvement. Iowa did not have to win be a slim margin but NS keeps some opponents in the game. Stanley like he has a big windup in his throws because he seems to carry the ball low at times.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

This statistic is about a few things:

1) Iowa State’s two long TD strikes we blew it on (as was mentioned).

2) Iowa’s usual winning of the TOP battle, of which turnovers factor in.

3) This is the most Ferentz-like win ever. Navy football is absolutely the type Kirk would admire. And I’m totally okay with this.

Hit the nail on the head there. Probably top 5 in KF's book of wins. I don't think anything will top the 6-4 win vs PSU after his Dad died.

 

[grayhair81]

Did not feel like a victory. Merely ISU losing.

You do remember Iowa coming back and taking the lead BEFORE the punt episode, right?