ADVERTISEMENT

Colorado State recap

NCHawkeye24

HR MVP
Apr 19, 2021
1,033
2,913
113
Colorado State had a great game plan and executed it fairly well for a half. It was obvious that it was to:
- Control the clock and keep Iowa's offense off the field. In the first half, Iowa ran 23 plays and had the ball for 11:43 while CSU ran 41 plays and had the ball for 18:17
- The took the ball and had the wind to start the game. They wanted to out-Iowa Iowa, and play the field position game. CSU's punter is every bit as good as Taylor and he proved it. In the first half, our starting field position was just shy of the 20, while theirs was just shy of the 40.
- Take advantage of mistakes. The shanked punt may as well be a turnover, and the interception that was returned a long ways is what they were looking for, and scored touchdowns off of each.
- Don't make mistakes of their own. And they didn't. No turnovers.
- Take advantage of the mismatch they have with their TE. He is the best we will see all season and is very very good.
- Stop our run. And they did, the entire game, and that was at a cost to many times leaving their corners on an island. But at all cost, to not let Goodson get going.
- Make Petras beat them by putting us in 2nd and 3rd and long situations. Aside from the first possession, first play throwing a pass off bootleg action and then TD to Johnson, we ran on every first down except one which was a shallow cross.

Now, on the flip side of this, I think the game plan of the Iowa coaches was to:

- establish the run
- not turn the ball over
- let special teams continue to give us an advantage in field position
- Not have to be in a position to take risks with Petras. That means no second level throws over a linebacker or corner, especially the always available second level out route.
- Then the wind at the beginning of the game dictated the play calling to where they were not going to do anything on the outside, then wait for the 2nd quarter to strike.
- And I don't think there was any part of the game plan to score a specific number of points, or gain an amount of yards. However they have to get the win is fine by them as long as they are able to get game reps for this offense. They know this offense has to improve, but it didn't need to be great to win this game. That was because CSU was going to play tight end football, which can shorten a game, control the clock, but hard to score.

We won 24-14. I was interested at the start of this game if CSU would even score, and I doubt they would have had there not been the interception or the shanked punt. Also, I counted 6 passes that the CSU quarterback threw that could have been picked off by either putting it in the wrong place or having it tipped. They got very lucky here. Petras only had the one, and I don't know if he has even had a pass tipped this year. But at the end of the day, it was a really good win against an opponent who tried to attack us in specific areas, we faced adversity after some mistakes, and we got to see some looks that are going to help us in the next couple of games.

Offensively

- The offensive line as a whole, especially the tackles, need to sustain their blocks better. They are blocking but then disengaging too often which allows backside penetration or a free tackler. The tackles need to set the edge better.
- Goodson and the running backs need to hit the holes quicker. There is a lot of lateral running going on, which they are trying to see what opens up, but it just allows for too much penetration by an overloaded defense.
- What are we now at wide receiver? We went twice to Johnson when he had man coverage, once to Jones, but I have yet to see us go to Tracy when he is manned up. I think this room needs to get solidified. Personally, I think Tracy is better in the slot, and if Johnson is going to be the man-beater, then line him up on the outside. I just don't know right now what Tracy is.
- We don't know how Petras is coached and what his progressions are, as well as how much freedom he has, but he often times turns his head and body at the snap in one direction and does not waver from that.
- If we are truly going to try to take what the defense gives us, then are we going to be prepared to take advantage of these 1 on 1 matchups. I didn't see Petras audible one time, so I don't know if that is just something they werent going to do because it was CSU or if they can do it at all.
- I think we all need to embrace the fact that the pass game and the run game in this offense are one in the same. By that I mean this offense is going to be all about setting up the make-ables. We are showing multiple formations and propensity to run and throw out of them in both 12 and 22 personnel packages, and if they set up 3 or 4 a game it may be enough.

Defensively

- There was a lot of experimentation with personnel changes with Merriweather and Benson. I think this game shows that our defense is much more active with Benson in the lineup vs Merriweather. Merriweather is a good player, but Benson can do many things on the line as well as showing how he can cover normal tight ends and spy the quarterback on his side.
- I am glad to see CSU go empty and beat us with the QB run, because that will definitely be a thing we have to stop in the next 3 weeks.
- Our defensive line depth really shows up in the second half, and it definitely did here as well. This defense is built to have a lead and suffocate 1 dimensional offenses in the second half.
- Jacobs played really well and is a fixture now, but has a lot of film study to do after covering that tight end.

Special Teams

- Jones played really well. Huge asset.
- Taylor's shanked punt cost us, but we will still take him. Probably the only game that Taylor gets out-punted.

Oh, one more thing. I don't think all the blame on the failed tunnel screen should go on Petras. I don't think he should have thrown it until Tracy was clear of our tackle, but saying that, it isn't like Tracy was putting forth 100% effort here to gain position. And Brian deserves a lot of blame here because of its risk with the corner pressing so much on that side anyway.

On to Maryland.
 
This post is far too reasonable, tempered, and aware of general football knowledge to be on this board. I mean, not one call for Brian Ferentz to be fired or Petras to be benched? Come on.

On a side note, this is probably the best analysis of the game I've read. Thanks.
 
Good post OP! Thanks!

I think that Iowa's game-plan was to see if we could beat Colorado State ... all while holding our cards as close to the vest as possible.

Unfortunately, Colorado State ... game-planned with that in mind ... and, just as the OP rightly noted ... they tried to see if they could "out-Iowa" the Hawks. They wanted to see if they could jump out early, try to control the clock, and limit the number possession the Hawks had. Furthermore, in KNOWING that the Hawks would try to play vanilla ball ... they tried to make things really hard on us on early downs. In getting us behind the chains ... not only would they be trying to limit our number of possessions ... but also try to ensure that we didn't score when we had the ball.

I'm quite certain that Colorado State wouldn't have scored had they not benefited from the short fields.

I'm happy that Colorado State exposed our 3rd down defense in the 1st half. Also, I agree with the OP that it was important that the CSU QB was able to gash us with the run ... that was an important experience for the D. Being able to contain QBs who can hurt you with their legs is critical for a D like ours.

It's been pretty interesting watching Iowa's games and how we've responded to playing talented TEs. IU's Hendershot is a really talented receiving threat. Obviously, ISU's Kolar is pretty highly regarded. Lastly, CSU's McBride is probably the best of the trio ... and that's pretty darn fine company. In the future ... one of the best remaining TEs we face is Wisconsin's Ferguson ... of course, PSU generally develops really good TEs too.

I gotta admit, I was a bit surprised that Jacobs didn't do a better job or running with McBride in coverage. I'll need to go back and watch the game and see what the deal was there. Maybe McBride was winning at the LOS ... or maybe he was just given too clean of a release?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HAWKSRK and haightt
Good post OP! Thanks!

I think that Iowa's game-plan was to see if we could beat Colorado State ... all while holding our cards as close to the vest as possible.

Unfortunately, Colorado State ... game-planned with that in mind ... and, just as the OP rightly noted ... they tried to see if they could "out-Iowa" the Hawks. They wanted to see if they could jump out early, try to control the clock, and limit the number possession the Hawks had. Furthermore, in KNOWING that the Hawks would try to play vanilla ball ... they tried to make things really hard on us on early downs. In getting us behind the chains ... not only would they be trying to limit our number of possessions ... but also try to ensure that we didn't score when we had the ball.

I'm quite certain that Colorado State wouldn't have scored had they not benefited from the short fields.

I'm happy that Colorado State exposed our 3rd down defense in the 1st half. Also, I agree with the OP that it was important that the CSU QB was able to gash us with the run ... that was an important experience for the D. Being able to contain QBs who can hurt you with their legs is critical for a D like ours.

It's been pretty interesting watching Iowa's games and how we've responded to playing talented TEs. IU's Hendershot is a really talented receiving threat. Obviously, ISU's Kolar is pretty highly regarded. Lastly, CSU's McBride is probably the best of the trio ... and that's pretty darn fine company. In the future ... one of the best remaining TEs we face is Wisconsin's Ferguson ... of course, PSU generally develops really good TEs too.

I gotta admit, I was a bit surprised that Jacobs didn't do a better job or running with McBride in coverage. I'll need to go back and watch the game and see what the deal was there. Maybe McBride was winning at the LOS ... or maybe he was just given too clean of a release?

McBride got away with a few push offs. That was part of his success. I noticed Kolar did that too. I wonder if being a blocker on the line some of the time makes it easier for TE's to get away with that....
 
  • Like
Reactions: haightt
I have had a sneaking suspicion that Iowa tried to "plain vanilla" this game so as not to show our cards for the big games coming up; just am not sure I am right or not. sure hope so, because frankly, we have not looked impressive the last two weeks against subpar opposition. So I really hope and pray that that is the reason why.
 
Good post OP! Thanks!

I think that Iowa's game-plan was to see if we could beat Colorado State ... all while holding our cards as close to the vest as possible.

Unfortunately, Colorado State ... game-planned with that in mind ... and, just as the OP rightly noted ... they tried to see if they could "out-Iowa" the Hawks. They wanted to see if they could jump out early, try to control the clock, and limit the number possession the Hawks had. Furthermore, in KNOWING that the Hawks would try to play vanilla ball ... they tried to make things really hard on us on early downs. In getting us behind the chains ... not only would they be trying to limit our number of possessions ... but also try to ensure that we didn't score when we had the ball.

I'm quite certain that Colorado State wouldn't have scored had they not benefited from the short fields.

I'm happy that Colorado State exposed our 3rd down defense in the 1st half. Also, I agree with the OP that it was important that the CSU QB was able to gash us with the run ... that was an important experience for the D. Being able to contain QBs who can hurt you with their legs is critical for a D like ours.

It's been pretty interesting watching Iowa's games and how we've responded to playing talented TEs. IU's Hendershot is a really talented receiving threat. Obviously, ISU's Kolar is pretty highly regarded. Lastly, CSU's McBride is probably the best of the trio ... and that's pretty darn fine company. In the future ... one of the best remaining TEs we face is Wisconsin's Ferguson ... of course, PSU generally develops really good TEs too.

I gotta admit, I was a bit surprised that Jacobs didn't do a better job or running with McBride in coverage. I'll need to go back and watch the game and see what the deal was there. Maybe McBride was winning at the LOS ... or maybe he was just given too clean of a release?

Jacobs was right on top of the TE on that sideline completion. Great throw and catch. The other guys win plays during every game. Hawks won more plays and won the game.
 
I do think this game was needed for Iowa. Colorado State had a game plan that could win, but they couldn't maintain it the second half. Hopefully the coaches learn from this and know how to react when another team tries to do the same thing again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haightt
I do think this game was needed for Iowa. Colorado State had a game plan that could win, but they couldn't maintain it the second half. Hopefully the coaches learn from this and know how to react when another team tries to do the same thing again.
Colorado State's coach wants to play like Iowa/KF does. He was the coach at BC for the Pinstripe Bowl. Wants to play physical, zone blocking, sturdy defense, etc. Couldn't win enough at BC to stay there. But he had his team ready for how Iowa wants to play. CSU was terrible against South Dakota State, but were coming off a 22-6 win over Toledo, who almost beat Notre Dame. Transitive scores get you in trouble, but CSU came in ready to play and not be a pushover.

To Iowa's credit, no one in the postgame was talking about overlooking CSU. That diminishes the effort of your opponent, even if true. It's human nature to not quite have the emotional edge after the first 2 games where most of the punditry were picking against you and the next two games (Maryland and Penn State) where again that will be the case. Winning by 10 after being behind by 7 probably did more for Iowa than being ahead 24-3 at halftime. Team had to not panic and make some plays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haightt
Colorado State had a great game plan and executed it fairly well for a half. It was obvious that it was to:
- Control the clock and keep Iowa's offense off the field. In the first half, Iowa ran 23 plays and had the ball for 11:43 while CSU ran 41 plays and had the ball for 18:17
- The took the ball and had the wind to start the game. They wanted to out-Iowa Iowa, and play the field position game. CSU's punter is every bit as good as Taylor and he proved it. In the first half, our starting field position was just shy of the 20, while theirs was just shy of the 40.
- Take advantage of mistakes. The shanked punt may as well be a turnover, and the interception that was returned a long ways is what they were looking for, and scored touchdowns off of each.
- Don't make mistakes of their own. And they didn't. No turnovers.
- Take advantage of the mismatch they have with their TE. He is the best we will see all season and is very very good.
- Stop our run. And they did, the entire game, and that was at a cost to many times leaving their corners on an island. But at all cost, to not let Goodson get going.
- Make Petras beat them by putting us in 2nd and 3rd and long situations. Aside from the first possession, first play throwing a pass off bootleg action and then TD to Johnson, we ran on every first down except one which was a shallow cross.

Now, on the flip side of this, I think the game plan of the Iowa coaches was to:

- establish the run
- not turn the ball over
- let special teams continue to give us an advantage in field position
- Not have to be in a position to take risks with Petras. That means no second level throws over a linebacker or corner, especially the always available second level out route.
- Then the wind at the beginning of the game dictated the play calling to where they were not going to do anything on the outside, then wait for the 2nd quarter to strike.
- And I don't think there was any part of the game plan to score a specific number of points, or gain an amount of yards. However they have to get the win is fine by them as long as they are able to get game reps for this offense. They know this offense has to improve, but it didn't need to be great to win this game. That was because CSU was going to play tight end football, which can shorten a game, control the clock, but hard to score.

We won 24-14. I was interested at the start of this game if CSU would even score, and I doubt they would have had there not been the interception or the shanked punt. Also, I counted 6 passes that the CSU quarterback threw that could have been picked off by either putting it in the wrong place or having it tipped. They got very lucky here. Petras only had the one, and I don't know if he has even had a pass tipped this year. But at the end of the day, it was a really good win against an opponent who tried to attack us in specific areas, we faced adversity after some mistakes, and we got to see some looks that are going to help us in the next couple of games.

Offensively

- The offensive line as a whole, especially the tackles, need to sustain their blocks better. They are blocking but then disengaging too often which allows backside penetration or a free tackler. The tackles need to set the edge better.
- Goodson and the running backs need to hit the holes quicker. There is a lot of lateral running going on, which they are trying to see what opens up, but it just allows for too much penetration by an overloaded defense.
- What are we now at wide receiver? We went twice to Johnson when he had man coverage, once to Jones, but I have yet to see us go to Tracy when he is manned up. I think this room needs to get solidified. Personally, I think Tracy is better in the slot, and if Johnson is going to be the man-beater, then line him up on the outside. I just don't know right now what Tracy is.
- We don't know how Petras is coached and what his progressions are, as well as how much freedom he has, but he often times turns his head and body at the snap in one direction and does not waver from that.
- If we are truly going to try to take what the defense gives us, then are we going to be prepared to take advantage of these 1 on 1 matchups. I didn't see Petras audible one time, so I don't know if that is just something they werent going to do because it was CSU or if they can do it at all.
- I think we all need to embrace the fact that the pass game and the run game in this offense are one in the same. By that I mean this offense is going to be all about setting up the make-ables. We are showing multiple formations and propensity to run and throw out of them in both 12 and 22 personnel packages, and if they set up 3 or 4 a game it may be enough.

Defensively

- There was a lot of experimentation with personnel changes with Merriweather and Benson. I think this game shows that our defense is much more active with Benson in the lineup vs Merriweather. Merriweather is a good player, but Benson can do many things on the line as well as showing how he can cover normal tight ends and spy the quarterback on his side.
- I am glad to see CSU go empty and beat us with the QB run, because that will definitely be a thing we have to stop in the next 3 weeks.
- Our defensive line depth really shows up in the second half, and it definitely did here as well. This defense is built to have a lead and suffocate 1 dimensional offenses in the second half.
- Jacobs played really well and is a fixture now, but has a lot of film study to do after covering that tight end.

Special Teams

- Jones played really well. Huge asset.
- Taylor's shanked punt cost us, but we will still take him. Probably the only game that Taylor gets out-punted.

Oh, one more thing. I don't think all the blame on the failed tunnel screen should go on Petras. I don't think he should have thrown it until Tracy was clear of our tackle, but saying that, it isn't like Tracy was putting forth 100% effort here to gain position. And Brian deserves a lot of blame here because of its risk with the corner pressing so much on that side anyway.

On to Maryland.
Great recap! Thanks!
 
On the passing game I saw some reason to get a bit more excited. Johnson has the makings of a star. Those were two really nice over the shoulder catches. Petras really threw 4 beautiful long balls today, more than we've seen in a single game in many years. The 2 aforementioned catches by Johnson, a great catch by Ragaini, and a missed pass interference call on a sideline route by Jones. The ball was dropped right in the basket by Petras and Jones would have caught it had the defender not had ahold of his left arm. Jones still almost made a spectacular one handed catch.

The one big throwing mistake that I thought Petras missed on the long pass over the middle to Jones wasn't on him. His arm was hit during the pass resulting in the short hop into the turf. It will be interesting to see if this long ball becomes more of a fixture in the coming weeks to keep defending safeties more honest than they've been to date.
 
Last edited:
Colorado State had a great game plan and executed it fairly well for a half. It was obvious that it was to:
- Control the clock and keep Iowa's offense off the field. In the first half, Iowa ran 23 plays and had the ball for 11:43 while CSU ran 41 plays and had the ball for 18:17
- The took the ball and had the wind to start the game. They wanted to out-Iowa Iowa, and play the field position game. CSU's punter is every bit as good as Taylor and he proved it. In the first half, our starting field position was just shy of the 20, while theirs was just shy of the 40.
- Take advantage of mistakes. The shanked punt may as well be a turnover, and the interception that was returned a long ways is what they were looking for, and scored touchdowns off of each.
- Don't make mistakes of their own. And they didn't. No turnovers.
- Take advantage of the mismatch they have with their TE. He is the best we will see all season and is very very good.
- Stop our run. And they did, the entire game, and that was at a cost to many times leaving their corners on an island. But at all cost, to not let Goodson get going.
- Make Petras beat them by putting us in 2nd and 3rd and long situations. Aside from the first possession, first play throwing a pass off bootleg action and then TD to Johnson, we ran on every first down except one which was a shallow cross.

Now, on the flip side of this, I think the game plan of the Iowa coaches was to:

- establish the run
- not turn the ball over
- let special teams continue to give us an advantage in field position
- Not have to be in a position to take risks with Petras. That means no second level throws over a linebacker or corner, especially the always available second level out route.
- Then the wind at the beginning of the game dictated the play calling to where they were not going to do anything on the outside, then wait for the 2nd quarter to strike.
- And I don't think there was any part of the game plan to score a specific number of points, or gain an amount of yards. However they have to get the win is fine by them as long as they are able to get game reps for this offense. They know this offense has to improve, but it didn't need to be great to win this game. That was because CSU was going to play tight end football, which can shorten a game, control the clock, but hard to score.

We won 24-14. I was interested at the start of this game if CSU would even score, and I doubt they would have had there not been the interception or the shanked punt. Also, I counted 6 passes that the CSU quarterback threw that could have been picked off by either putting it in the wrong place or having it tipped. They got very lucky here. Petras only had the one, and I don't know if he has even had a pass tipped this year. But at the end of the day, it was a really good win against an opponent who tried to attack us in specific areas, we faced adversity after some mistakes, and we got to see some looks that are going to help us in the next couple of games.

Offensively

- The offensive line as a whole, especially the tackles, need to sustain their blocks better. They are blocking but then disengaging too often which allows backside penetration or a free tackler. The tackles need to set the edge better.
- Goodson and the running backs need to hit the holes quicker. There is a lot of lateral running going on, which they are trying to see what opens up, but it just allows for too much penetration by an overloaded defense.
- What are we now at wide receiver? We went twice to Johnson when he had man coverage, once to Jones, but I have yet to see us go to Tracy when he is manned up. I think this room needs to get solidified. Personally, I think Tracy is better in the slot, and if Johnson is going to be the man-beater, then line him up on the outside. I just don't know right now what Tracy is.
- We don't know how Petras is coached and what his progressions are, as well as how much freedom he has, but he often times turns his head and body at the snap in one direction and does not waver from that.
- If we are truly going to try to take what the defense gives us, then are we going to be prepared to take advantage of these 1 on 1 matchups. I didn't see Petras audible one time, so I don't know if that is just something they werent going to do because it was CSU or if they can do it at all.
- I think we all need to embrace the fact that the pass game and the run game in this offense are one in the same. By that I mean this offense is going to be all about setting up the make-ables. We are showing multiple formations and propensity to run and throw out of them in both 12 and 22 personnel packages, and if they set up 3 or 4 a game it may be enough.

Defensively

- There was a lot of experimentation with personnel changes with Merriweather and Benson. I think this game shows that our defense is much more active with Benson in the lineup vs Merriweather. Merriweather is a good player, but Benson can do many things on the line as well as showing how he can cover normal tight ends and spy the quarterback on his side.
- I am glad to see CSU go empty and beat us with the QB run, because that will definitely be a thing we have to stop in the next 3 weeks.
- Our defensive line depth really shows up in the second half, and it definitely did here as well. This defense is built to have a lead and suffocate 1 dimensional offenses in the second half.
- Jacobs played really well and is a fixture now, but has a lot of film study to do after covering that tight end.

Special Teams

- Jones played really well. Huge asset.
- Taylor's shanked punt cost us, but we will still take him. Probably the only game that Taylor gets out-punted.

Oh, one more thing. I don't think all the blame on the failed tunnel screen should go on Petras. I don't think he should have thrown it until Tracy was clear of our tackle, but saying that, it isn't like Tracy was putting forth 100% effort here to gain position. And Brian deserves a lot of blame here because of its risk with the corner pressing so much on that side anyway.

On to Maryland.
Great post. Totally agree. I’m glad Taylor got some mistakes out of his system. And he will only go for the draft once he is #1 in CFB and that will take another couple years. Love to have him longer.
 
On the passing game I saw some reason to get a bit more excited. Johnson has the makings of a star. Those were two really nice catches with the one a great reaction to the ball turning him around. Petras really threw 3 beautiful long balls today, more than we've seen in a single game in many years. The 2 aforementioned catches by Johnson and a missed pass interference call on a sideline route by Jones. The ball was dropped right in the basket by Petras and Jones would have caught it has the defender not had ahold of his left arm. Jones still almost made a spectacular one handed catch.

The one big throwing mistake that I thought Petras missed on the long pass over the middle to Jones wasn't on him. His arm was hit during the pass resulting in the short hop into the turf. It will be interesting to see if this long ball becomes more of a fixture in the coming weeks to keep defending safeties more honest than they've been to date.
And the emergence of Bruce!

hope to see Brecht sometime too. He can be a game changer, like Bell at Purdue. So much height and vertical and athleticism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WWDMHawkeye
Great analysis! This game shows the importance of playing complimentary football, especially at Iowa. Iowa's defense is set up to keep the ball in front of them and force the offense to move the ball down the field methodically without making a mistake. They are more aggressive when they have the other team's offense pinned deep in their own end. Turning the ball over on offense and giving the other team a short field and leads to points for the other team. There are definitely things Iowa can take from this game to work on, but it is better to have this happen during a win than a loss. On to Maryland!
 
Loved Keagan Johnson’s catches, especially as a former Omaha guy whose brothers have all been incredibly underrated - the guy is going to be a player.

The catch of the game though has to be Ragaini’s over the shoulder catch on his corner route that went for about 34 yards. He had to turn his head like twice to adjust to the ball placement and ended up making an incredibly difficult catch on a ball that couldn’t have been placed much better. That was cool to see
 
Think CSU came in and challenged their guys to being physical against IA. Couple that with a pretty clean game - minus the fumble at their own five. CSU controlled the clock and was unreal on 3rd down conversions and that kept the game tight.
 
I do think this game was needed for Iowa. Colorado State had a game plan that could win, but they couldn't maintain it the second half. Hopefully the coaches learn from this and know how to react when another team tries to do the same thing again.
 
Think CSU came in and challenged their guys to being physical against IA. Couple that with a pretty clean game - minus the fumble at their own five. CSU controlled the clock and was unreal on 3rd down conversions and that kept the game tight.
The third down conversions by the Rams were quite frustrating to watch. Otherwise, the defense played quite well.

I really don't think Petras had a bad game at all. The interception was doomed from the start: poor play call, poor route by Tracy, lack of effort by Tracy, and it also would've been nice had Petras audibled out of the play; c'est la vie. I'd like to see him scramble more, too. He's not a great athlete, but if he did it a couple times each game, just to give the other team something to look for in the future I think it would help.

I keep reading/hearing the offensive line is talented but young and that's the reason for their poor play. That may well be true, but why is it so young? I've said it before but this is a unit that should be rock solid year in year out from the start of each season.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: owenhawk
I do think this game was needed for Iowa. Colorado State had a game plan that could win, but they couldn't maintain it the second half. Hopefully the coaches learn from this and know how to react when another team tries to do the same thing again.
I totally agree. A blowout usually comes back to bite you somewhere down the the road. (Other than an opportunity to get other players some reps). We needed these last 2 games to iron out some deficiencies. Still have a long way to go. We will need to play a full 60 minutes to win at Maryland though. If they jump on us early, could be a long night. Maryland did not play well defeating Illinois, but very similar to the Hawks, they found a way to win. Force them into long field positions, and we need to establish some long drives (which the Hawks have shown) but it is still a weakness for us. Offense needs to get it together….looking for Petras and Goodson to have stellar performances.
 
Oh, one more thing. I don't think all the blame on the failed tunnel screen should go on Petras. I don't think he should have thrown it until Tracy was clear of our tackle, but saying that, it isn't like Tracy was putting forth 100% effort here to gain position.
The tackle completely whiffed on blocking that DB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mstp1992
Jacobs was right on top of the TE on that sideline completion. Great throw and catch. The other guys win plays during every game. Hawks won more plays and won the game.
The one where the TE got to like the three on a crossing route, Jacob's was picked. The WR was looking for him and just got in the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grayhair81
Very nice write up. I agree that the rb’s especially Goodson needs to plant the foot and go. He’s dancing and stopping far too much.

As to Petras coaching, it’s not very good. I have yet to see him look off a safety. He stares at his primary receiver and then dumps it to the safety valve. There are other receivers open but his field vision and reading is just awful.
 
Very nice write up. I agree that the rb’s especially Goodson needs to plant the foot and go. He’s dancing and stopping far too much.

As to Petras coaching, it’s not very good. I have yet to see him look off a safety. He stares at his primary receiver and then dumps it to the safety valve. There are other receivers open but his field vision and reading is just awful.
As far as Petras goes, I just dont think we know how much of that is by design by the coaches. If I was guessing, I would say that for 10 of our 12 games, the coaching staff thinks that the other team will win the game for us, and so they don't need Petras to win it, but he can certainly lose it. So I would think that Petras has a tight leash with 1 progression routes. By that I mean that the coaches call a play and Petras has a primary target, and if he sees the right post snap key he throws it, but if he doesn't, he checks it down. Its not like we have seen Petras come to the line, identify the defensive alignment and see that a corner is in man, change the play and wing it. I don't know if I have seen him audible at all. Nate would. CJ would. Drew would. Stanzi would. But just because we haven't seen it much if at all doesn't mean he cant do it, we just dont know. And if you really think about it, the formula is working. You could make a case that not only could Petras have won every start of his, you could say that he should have and won them all very handily without much drama. In the 2 games he lost, we had a lead and the defense couldn't close it out while the offense gave the ball away.

Do I love the fact that our QB is limited like that? No, I don't. But it is what it is and I don't think we will know what we have until the PSU game.
 
Very nice write up. I agree that the rb’s especially Goodson needs to plant the foot and go. He’s dancing and stopping far too much.
This is very true. Goodson just needs to go forward; go ahead and get that 2-3 yards instead of trying to dance around the opposition when he gets tackled at or behind the line. There are some running backs who have an innate ability to get 'something' when 'nothing' is there. Even if it's just a couple yards it's still a positive.
 
I love Goodson, don't get me wrong. He is a great back and what he can do in the passing game is so valuable and under-rated. But he is not a hammer, and I think right now a hammer in the running game that would be one-cut-go and then run with power would help this offense to get in more manageable 2nd and 3rd downs. The 1st down no gain runs are so hard to overcome over the course of a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bowlhawk
I love Goodson, don't get me wrong. He is a great back and what he can do in the passing game is so valuable and under-rated. But he is not a hammer, and I think right now a hammer in the running game that would be one-cut-go and then run with power would help this offense to get in more manageable 2nd and 3rd downs. The 1st down no gain runs are so hard to overcome over the course of a game.
Think the Hawks will work Williams into the rotation a bit more in the upcoming weeks, just as a counter to Goodson? I like Kelly-Martin, especially as a person, but the fumbles are starting to become concerning. Plus, he doesn't really offer much different than Goodson -- just as a way of giving Goodson a break from time to time. But, perhaps Williams will become that guy who can spell Goodson, while offering a somewhat different style.
 
Think the Hawks will work Williams into the rotation a bit more in the upcoming weeks, just as a counter to Goodson? I like Kelly-Martin, especially as a person, but the fumbles are starting to become concerning. Plus, he doesn't really offer much different than Goodson -- just as a way of giving Goodson a break from time to time. But, perhaps Williams will become that guy who can spell Goodson, while offering a somewhat different style.
That is a great question. I really like his running style, and, he showed he can catch it out of the backfield too. It probably comes down to blitz pickup as what would keep him from more PT, because there is no way the coaches trust IKM more than Williams to protect the ball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mstp1992
Colorado State's coach wants to play like Iowa/KF does. He was the coach at BC for the Pinstripe Bowl. Wants to play physical, zone blocking, sturdy defense, etc. Couldn't win enough at BC to stay there. But he had his team ready for how Iowa wants to play. CSU was terrible against South Dakota State, but were coming off a 22-6 win over Toledo, who almost beat Notre Dame. Transitive scores get you in trouble, but CSU came in ready to play and not be a pushover.

To Iowa's credit, no one in the postgame was talking about overlooking CSU. That diminishes the effort of your opponent, even if true. It's human nature to not quite have the emotional edge after the first 2 games where most of the punditry were picking against you and the next two games (Maryland and Penn State) where again that will be the case. Winning by 10 after being behind by 7 probably did more for Iowa than being ahead 24-3 at halftime. Team had to not panic and make some plays.
I honestly don't think Iowa overlooked CSU. I think CSU had a smart game plan and outcoached Iowa the first half. Maybe outcoached is too strong of a word, but they had a game plan that was working. It just happened to be the exact same gameplan Iowa uses. Anyway, Iowa made adjustments at halftime and those things worked. It's what good teams do. Actually, you could argue they made adjustments at the end of the first quarter as they were moving the ball far better, but they made some mistakes which set them back.
 
I'd have to watch the replay but it isn't like there is a second option on the bubble screen. Did the CB start in an off position and move up to press at the snap? There should be a pre snap read to call it off if the look isn't right.
 
Colorado State had a great game plan and executed it fairly well for a half. It was obvious that it was to:
- Control the clock and keep Iowa's offense off the field. In the first half, Iowa ran 23 plays and had the ball for 11:43 while CSU ran 41 plays and had the ball for 18:17
- The took the ball and had the wind to start the game. They wanted to out-Iowa Iowa, and play the field position game. CSU's punter is every bit as good as Taylor and he proved it. In the first half, our starting field position was just shy of the 20, while theirs was just shy of the 40.
- Take advantage of mistakes. The shanked punt may as well be a turnover, and the interception that was returned a long ways is what they were looking for, and scored touchdowns off of each.
- Don't make mistakes of their own. And they didn't. No turnovers.
- Take advantage of the mismatch they have with their TE. He is the best we will see all season and is very very good.
- Stop our run. And they did, the entire game, and that was at a cost to many times leaving their corners on an island. But at all cost, to not let Goodson get going.
- Make Petras beat them by putting us in 2nd and 3rd and long situations. Aside from the first possession, first play throwing a pass off bootleg action and then TD to Johnson, we ran on every first down except one which was a shallow cross.

Now, on the flip side of this, I think the game plan of the Iowa coaches was to:

- establish the run
- not turn the ball over
- let special teams continue to give us an advantage in field position
- Not have to be in a position to take risks with Petras. That means no second level throws over a linebacker or corner, especially the always available second level out route.
- Then the wind at the beginning of the game dictated the play calling to where they were not going to do anything on the outside, then wait for the 2nd quarter to strike.
- And I don't think there was any part of the game plan to score a specific number of points, or gain an amount of yards. However they have to get the win is fine by them as long as they are able to get game reps for this offense. They know this offense has to improve, but it didn't need to be great to win this game. That was because CSU was going to play tight end football, which can shorten a game, control the clock, but hard to score.

We won 24-14. I was interested at the start of this game if CSU would even score, and I doubt they would have had there not been the interception or the shanked punt. Also, I counted 6 passes that the CSU quarterback threw that could have been picked off by either putting it in the wrong place or having it tipped. They got very lucky here. Petras only had the one, and I don't know if he has even had a pass tipped this year. But at the end of the day, it was a really good win against an opponent who tried to attack us in specific areas, we faced adversity after some mistakes, and we got to see some looks that are going to help us in the next couple of games.

Offensively

- The offensive line as a whole, especially the tackles, need to sustain their blocks better. They are blocking but then disengaging too often which allows backside penetration or a free tackler. The tackles need to set the edge better.
- Goodson and the running backs need to hit the holes quicker. There is a lot of lateral running going on, which they are trying to see what opens up, but it just allows for too much penetration by an overloaded defense.
- What are we now at wide receiver? We went twice to Johnson when he had man coverage, once to Jones, but I have yet to see us go to Tracy when he is manned up. I think this room needs to get solidified. Personally, I think Tracy is better in the slot, and if Johnson is going to be the man-beater, then line him up on the outside. I just don't know right now what Tracy is.
- We don't know how Petras is coached and what his progressions are, as well as how much freedom he has, but he often times turns his head and body at the snap in one direction and does not waver from that.
- If we are truly going to try to take what the defense gives us, then are we going to be prepared to take advantage of these 1 on 1 matchups. I didn't see Petras audible one time, so I don't know if that is just something they werent going to do because it was CSU or if they can do it at all.
- I think we all need to embrace the fact that the pass game and the run game in this offense are one in the same. By that I mean this offense is going to be all about setting up the make-ables. We are showing multiple formations and propensity to run and throw out of them in both 12 and 22 personnel packages, and if they set up 3 or 4 a game it may be enough.

Defensively

- There was a lot of experimentation with personnel changes with Merriweather and Benson. I think this game shows that our defense is much more active with Benson in the lineup vs Merriweather. Merriweather is a good player, but Benson can do many things on the line as well as showing how he can cover normal tight ends and spy the quarterback on his side.
- I am glad to see CSU go empty and beat us with the QB run, because that will definitely be a thing we have to stop in the next 3 weeks.
- Our defensive line depth really shows up in the second half, and it definitely did here as well. This defense is built to have a lead and suffocate 1 dimensional offenses in the second half.
- Jacobs played really well and is a fixture now, but has a lot of film study to do after covering that tight end.

Special Teams

- Jones played really well. Huge asset.
- Taylor's shanked punt cost us, but we will still take him. Probably the only game that Taylor gets out-punted.

Oh, one more thing. I don't think all the blame on the failed tunnel screen should go on Petras. I don't think he should have thrown it until Tracy was clear of our tackle, but saying that, it isn't like Tracy was putting forth 100% effort here to gain position. And Brian deserves a lot of blame here because of its risk with the corner pressing so much on that side anyway.

On to Maryland.

They did turn the ball over on their own 6 yd line which Iowa quickly turned into points. It didnt count as a defensive score but it might as well have.
 
The third down conversions by the Rams were quite frustrating to watch. Otherwise, the defense played quite well.

I really don't think Petras had a bad game at all. The interception was doomed from the start: poor play call, poor route by Tracy, lack of effort by Tracy, and it also would've been nice had Petras audibled out of the play; c'est la vie. I'd like to see him scramble more, too. He's not a great athlete, but if he did it a couple times each game, just to give the other team something to look for in the future I think it would help.

I keep reading/hearing the offensive line is talented but young and that's the reason for their poor play. That may well be true, but why is it so young? I've said it before but this is a unit that should be rock solid year in year out from the start of each season.
The Kallenberger retirement has been a killer.
 
The tackle completely whiffed on blocking that DB.

The tackle was tasked with blocking the end before he released to get out to the flat. Tracy was supposed to use footwork to get the corner outside before he crashed inside. That didn't happen and the corner beat Tracy to the ball. Richman didn't have a chance. It was picked before he got there.
 
I have had a sneaking suspicion that Iowa tried to "plain vanilla" this game so as not to show our cards for the big games coming up; just am not sure I am right or not. sure hope so, because frankly, we have not looked impressive the last two weeks against subpar opposition. So I really hope and pray that that is the reason why.
Yeah, our offense is such a well oiled machine that we played vanilla as not to show anyone anything lol. It was all we could do to move the ball against a very bad team, we aren't Alabama where we are so good we can half ass it and still score points, this offense we have is seriously challenged.
 
I'd have to watch the replay but it isn't like there is a second option on the bubble screen. Did the CB start in an off position and move up to press at the snap? There should be a pre snap read to call it off if the look isn't right.
We didn’t run a bubble screen the entire game.
 
The tackle was tasked with blocking the end before he released to get out to the flat. Tracy was supposed to use footwork to get the corner outside before he crashed inside. That didn't happen and the corner beat Tracy to the ball. Richman didn't have a chance. It was picked before he got there.
It appeared to me his left hand was on the shoulder of the corner as he caught it. He just whiffed on the angle, imo.
 
ADVERTISEMENT