A few Rose Bowl musings

[broth87]

First, Christian Mccaffrey is the real deal.
Second, wasn't the loss that bothered me as much as the effort, and I'm talking the effort of preparing and game planning on the part of the coaching staff as much as the players. Mccaffrey running unguarded on the opening play pretty much said it all and set the tone. How he goes unguarded?
Third, LOVE Stanford's offense. Same philosophy as Iowa, but far more creative in the scheming and design of what they do. I'm a David Shaw fan after watching them in person, on BOTH sides of the ball.
And last, we were exposed for what is the biggest issue with the Iowa program. A lack of elite talent at wide receiver and defensive end. We don't get receivers who can consistently separate especially against the highest level teams. We don't have ends that can get to the quarterback and disrupt consistently. We have awesome blue collar kids who work their nuts off and are pluggers, steady and disciplined, but lacking in the talent and skill level to match up with the top tier. And there's no fix coming for that on the horizon that I can see. The receivers we have coming are the same kids we recruit every year. There might be ab end in this group of recruits but they're not gonna make an impact next year.
What we have is good enough to be a good football team and win our division. It's not good enough to get us over the hump against the elites.
And one more thing, Stanford's definitely should've been in the playoff. That's a damn good football team.

 

[nastyhawk]

Every time I read one of your posts, I think to myself, "This here is one of those armchair "Schlitz-pounding" quarterbacks. Here's a guy who's probably never attended a game in his life, let alone a bowl game."

No offense, man. Just my perception.

 

[Dbq_Hawk]

Little do you know that broth has actually coached varsity football at the 4A level here in Iowa and isn't like majority of people on here who know nothing about what goes into the X's and O's of football!

 

[dciowa]

First, Christian Mccaffrey is the real deal.
Second, wasn't the loss that bothered me as much as the effort, and I'm talking the effort of preparing and game planning on the part of the coaching staff as much as the players. Mccaffrey running unguarded on the opening play pretty much said it all and set the tone. How he goes unguarded?
Third, LOVE Stanford's offense. Same philosophy as Iowa, but far more creative in the scheming and design of what they do. I'm a David Shaw fan after watching them in person, on BOTH sides of the ball.
And last, we were exposed for what is the biggest issue with the Iowa program. A lack of elite talent at wide receiver and defensive end. We don't get receivers who can consistently separate especially against the highest level teams. We don't have ends that can get to the quarterback and disrupt consistently. We have awesome blue collar kids who work their nuts off and are pluggers, steady and disciplined, but lacking in the talent and skill level to match up with the top tier. And there's no fix coming for that on the horizon that I can see. The receivers we have coming are the same kids we recruit every year. There might be ab end in this group of recruits but they're not gonna make an impact next year.
What we have is good enough to be a good football team and win our division. It's not good enough to get us over the hump against the elites.
And one more thing, Stanford's definitely should've been in the playoff. That's a damn good football team.

Stanford would get smoked by the Buckeyes.

 

[nastyhawk]

Little do you know that broth has actually coached varsity football at the 4A level here in Iowa and isn't like majority of people on here who know nothing about what goes into the X's and O's of football!

People change, but I remember in back in the 2009 season "broth87" was an absolute fking douchebag. If this guy's changed, feel free to light me up

 

[iasooner1]

broth must have been drinking his own; Stanford had 2 losses. They get in over multiple ONE loss teams ?

 

[Dbq_Hawk]

I'm not going to light anybody up. This is a message board and everyone is entitled to their opinions! In your opinion why was broth a douchebag 6 years ago? I frequent the board often but don't post much so I guess I missed something! I do know that broth knows football

 

[nastyhawk]

I'm not going to light anybody up. This is a message board and everyone is entitled to their opinions! In your opinion why was broth a douchebag 6 years ago? I frequent the board often but don't post much so I guess I missed something! I do know that broth knows football

^ "Ladies and gentlemen, Dbq Hawk is "Broth87."

 

[Dbq_Hawk]

^ "Ladies and gentlemen, Dbq Hawk is "Broth87."

Nope. Live on complete opposite sides of the state as him. As a fellow coach I repect his posts because he knows the game.

 

[millhawk]

Pretty spot on if you ask me. Except two things. If Stanford wants to be in the playoffs then don't lose two games. That's their fault. Ott, we lost our elite de to injury. Failures in recruiting above average olinemen have cost us.

 

[GPRHAWK]

Stanford is good and I think probably better than MSU and Oklahoma, but they lost two games. All the games matter. What's the point of playing them if you can disregard losses? They had some good wins, but so did Oklahoma and MSU. No way they deserved to be in the playoffs.

 

[Suterman]

Stanford smoked Iowa. We could play them 10 times and lose 9 of them. They didn't belong in the play-offs because they had 2 losses. If you can't beat Northwestern on the road, you don't deserve to play for the title.

 

[DBQ Hawk]

Nope. Live on complete opposite sides of the state as him. As a fellow coach I repect his posts because he knows the game.

I would like to add to the confusion on who is who.

Anyway, Stanford was great, but you can't drop two games in college FB and go to the playoff unless your strength of schedule is ridiculous, which Stanford's was not. Add to that the fact that the Pac-12 had very favorable bowl match-ups yet still had many of the best teams in their conference lose their bowl games (Oregon, USC, UCLA, ASU) with the wins coming against pretty weak competition, and you have me undewhelmed by Stanford having won that conference (even though they were great in the Rose Bowl).

That being said, if Stanford had beaten NW in week 1, they deserved to have been in the playoff, and they might even be in the final. But they didn't beat them, so no playoff. That's how it works in college FB.

 

[broth87]

I should've phrased what I was saying about Stanford and the playoffs better. All of you are right. You don't deserve to be in with 2 losses. I completely agree with that. What I was trying to say and didn't phrase it very well is that Stanford was one of the 4 best teams in the country. I think most would agree with that.

 

[parker01]

There is one thing that we have always had on teams elite Iowa teams. A dominate D Line that can pressure the QB with four, and keep LBs clean.

The same can pretty much be said for OLine. We were underwhelming in both areas this year. We've always "managed" without elite WR, but a stud TE and a dominating OLine overcame it.

We aren't that far away on the OLine, and we REALLY missed Ott on the DLine. Johnson is one key piece of the defensive puzzle.

 

[doughudd]

broth must have been drinking his own; Stanford had 2 losses. They get in over multiple ONE loss teams ?

No but they beat Stoops and MSU.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

yes, I think it's time to be like the nfl and put the hot teams in, the ones who are hot at the end of the year, who cares about early losses? as the season goes on, the teams change. Iowa went downhill as it went on, Stanford went uphill

 

[mvhomerj]

Stanford smoked Iowa. We could play them 10 times and lose 9 of them. They didn't belong in the play-offs because they had 2 losses. If you can't beat Northwestern on the road, you don't deserve to play for the title.

Or, if you beat Northwestern on the road, you don't deserve to be in the Rose Bowl?

 

[hawkeyeandy]

This Stanford team reminds me of USC in 2002 - a 2-loss team that did not deserve to be in the playoff (no playoff in 2002, I know) but was definitely one of the best and hottest teams at the end of the season.

 

[bouma1415]

If we are only going to take the hot teams in November, we should probably just cancel all September games, only go with conference games, not have polls until Nov 1 (because the early games don't matter). And while we are at it, let's make sure OSU, Mich, AL, OK, Tex, LSU, FL, and USC are in the playoffs... because we only want the cool teams in the playoffs. And let's let ESPN pick the teams.

 

[PhantomFlyer]

I agree Iowa doesn't have the elite players at WR. Our receivers are too slow to compete against the elite teams. However, I don't think this was the primary reason Iowa lost. Wis (under Alvarez and Bielema) didn't beat teams like Stanford because they possessed great skilled position players. They often won with avg WRs and avg/below avg QB's. What they did have was absolute beasts on both sides of the line. Iowa is never going to have a large flux of elite WR's. It's just too hard to recruit those kids when they aren't many of those types of kids in Iowa or close proximity.

I would rather Iowa coaches focus their attention in recruiting better lineman. Stanford dominated Iowa in the trenches on both sides of the ball. McCafferey was able to run so freely because he never got touched or slowed down by the D line, and once he got to the next level he was tough to stop. The Stanford QB had all day to throw the ball. Iowa couldn't throw the ball because Stanford was getting pressure with a 4 man rush. WR's might have gotten open if Stanford had to rush another man or two and they had less guys in coverage.

There's no reason Iowa shouldn't be able to recruit quality/elite O and D linemen, especially given Kirk's reputation as a line coach.

 

[broth87]

This Stanford team reminds me of USC in 2002 - a 2-loss team that did not deserve to be in the playoff (no playoff in 2002, I know) but was definitely one of the best and hottest teams at the end of the season.

Great comparison and completely agree.

 

[putt4doe]

First, Christian Mccaffrey is the real deal.
Second, wasn't the loss that bothered me as much as the effort, and I'm talking the effort of preparing and game planning on the part of the coaching staff as much as the players. Mccaffrey running unguarded on the opening play pretty much said it all and set the tone. How he goes unguarded?
Third, LOVE Stanford's offense. Same philosophy as Iowa, but far more creative in the scheming and design of what they do. I'm a David Shaw fan after watching them in person, on BOTH sides of the ball.
And last, we were exposed for what is the biggest issue with the Iowa program. A lack of elite talent at wide receiver and defensive end. We don't get receivers who can consistently separate especially against the highest level teams. We don't have ends that can get to the quarterback and disrupt consistently. We have awesome blue collar kids who work their nuts off and are pluggers, steady and disciplined, but lacking in the talent and skill level to match up with the top tier. And there's no fix coming for that on the horizon that I can see. The receivers we have coming are the same kids we recruit every year. There might be ab end in this group of recruits but they're not gonna make an impact next year.
What we have is good enough to be a good football team and win our division. It's not good enough to get us over the hump against the elites.
And one more thing, Stanford's definitely should've been in the playoff. That's a damn good football team.

I have to agree with what you have posted. McCaffery is amazing. He so instinctive, 85% of what he does is on his own. A pleasure to watch, too bad we had no answer for him. It is too bad a great season had to end in this manner, but the coaches and players must build and improve from this defeat.