I'm not arguing with you. In fact, it's entirely possible that a major reason Rhoads let Mangino go was the latter's reluctance to concentrate more on the running game -- at least, this is one of the more common rumors.No, but the gameplan described works a lot better against teams that have a talent advantage. Minnesota gave TCU a very tough game and Boykin vs Leidner is a mismatch of monumental proportions. Playing arena ball against superior athletes is not what I would do. Texas put 24 on Oklahoma, they do have some good players, the ISU game plan just kicked their azz. Lanning is a SO, your RB's are FR and SO and you have 4 of your 5 top WR back next year. If the coaching is up to snuff, they could be solid next year. Also, I have no idea how TX doesn't have better QB's
I have defended ISU's defense for a couple of years. Not that they were all that great, but people would look at the numbers and conclude the defense was the whole problem. In fact, the defense was spending far too much time on the field, often in horrid field position, because the offense wasn't producing. Look at the second half of the Iowa game for an example. Or the last three quarters of the TCU game.
The most significant statistic from last night's game may be this one: ISU went three-and-out on its first possession (receiver dropped a pass on second down). That was the only three-and-out for ISU the entire game.
You are right about ISU getting a lot from underclassmen this year.