Desmond King to line up against Lazard every play
- Thread starter His Hawkness
- Start date
In my opinion I would guess King plays more snaps on Lazard then he might otherwise play , but I don't see him exclusively following him all over the field the entire game.
Even so this could be either a brilliant or a risky move for both the game and for Kings national status and legend.
It definitely has perked everybody's ears up though. What a great matchup
Even so this could be either a brilliant or a risky move for both the game and for Kings national status and legend.
It definitely has perked everybody's ears up though. What a great matchup
King and Lazard is a unique match-up. I would give the overall nod to King, of course, but I think Lazard will have one or two big catches on him potentially and could surprise King. And I think King will have a handful of awesome break ups, potentially picks, on Lazard. In the end, it will make both players that much better.
The goal line fade or back shoulder fade/throw is the hardest route to defend in football and I'm sure ISU will try it no less than 4 or 5 times.
There is no shame in giving up that type of completion. Its extremely difficult to hit the QB and even harder to defend the pass on that play.
In the end, Iowas ability to stop the run and make the ISU offense one dimensional will be the key but ISU should still be able to complete some deep balls by default.
There is no shame in giving up that type of completion. Its extremely difficult to hit the QB and even harder to defend the pass on that play.
In the end, Iowas ability to stop the run and make the ISU offense one dimensional will be the key but ISU should still be able to complete some deep balls by default.
Why be such a dick ? The guy merely said he didn't see it? Not everyone has time to google everything all the time, need a job bro?
IMO it's not a bad thing no matter how you look at it. I would think Iowa would spend more time in a nickel coverage than not just because it's better against what ISU has as their best weapon. JJ is at worst a whisker worse than Main so I am comfortable that with a little pressure there will be some picks available.
Personally I do not think Lazard is as good as the boogeyman everyone is making him out to be.
If he is lined up on King, King shuts him down completely.
If he is lined up on King, King shuts him down completely.
Iowa's base defense is Cover 6 (Cover 2 on one side and Cover 4 or Quarters on the other side). Pretend the LB standing up has his hand on the ground and this picture is essentially Iowa's base D with a 4-3 Cover 6. The LEO is lined up outside the TE.
Iowa's base defense is Cover 6 (Cover 2 on one side and Cover 4 or Quarters on the other side). Pretend the LB standing up has his hand on the ground and this picture is essentially Iowa's base D with a 4-3 Cover 6. The LEO is lined up outside the TE.
If mabin is the left CB, he has no help for an out route in that pic, correct?
It's so much more complex than most can imagine but based on the picture, if Mabin is the left corner in Iowa's defense......he's essentially man to man on the WR he's lined up against unless the WR goes inside the numbers.
Its become pretty common on this board to make Mabin out like he's the worst CB in college football. I was frustrated watching him and also was not happy with how he played on Saturday either. But after watching the game a 2nd time, many of the plays he gave up were 'back shoulder fades'. If thrown correctly (as Miami of Ohio did) they are tough to cover. I have always believed that perfect offense beats perfect defense on an individual play, and the back shoulder fade is very evident of this. I feel that Mabin was in good position on many of those throws, but the back shoulder fade when done correctly is nearly impossible to cover, and I would wager that even King would have given up catches on some of those throws last Saturday.
With all that said, obviously I would rather that King be on Lazzard. But I'm not ready to kick Mabin off the team just yet either.
With all that said, obviously I would rather that King be on Lazzard. But I'm not ready to kick Mabin off the team just yet either.
Last edited:
No he won't. You are really underestimating Lazard. Look at the numbers he puts up for a crappy team with an ok QB. He is big strong and can go up and get the ball and has surprising quickness for his size
Good grief. I was reading this thread, expecting somebody to point out that it was a joke, and haven't seen that yet, so I guess maybe some of the posters think it hasn't occurred to the ISU staff that Iowa might put it's best defender on ISU's best receiver, and the tweet betrayed the surprise strategy.
Iowa will make Lazard a priority. ISU will make avoiding King a priority. Two plus two is four.
For the record, Lazard is not ISU's only offensive threat. Cyclones have several above-average receivers in addition to him. They also have an RB who was a freshman all-America last season and gained over 1,300 yards, aveaging 6 per carry, despite hardly playing in the first three games. UNI stacked the box and bottled him up Saturday, but allowed three TD passes in the process.
But this is all moot if ISU's offensive line doesn't improve drastically. And given the lack of depth and lack of experience at the position, that is unlikely in only a week's time, IMHO.
Puts up good numbers for a team routinely down by 30 in the Big 12 where defenses are non existent. Yep, stud.
Ok you obviously haven't watched him play or are just hating because he went to ISU. Either way you are wrong.And he only had 11 of his catches last year when the team was down by more than two scores. And they wouldn't be having King shadow him if he sucked. Iowa never does stuff like that.
I don't think anyone on here is claiming that it's a new strategy to put your best player on the other team's best player.
I understand it's your schtick to come to this board and try to make Iowa fan's look bad, but I think you are ignoring the fact that coaching staffs (Iowa's, and ISU's) have routinely done things that fly in the face of conventional 'two plus two is four" wisdom. This is the genesis of many Iowa fans casting aspersions on the proclamation that King will be shadowing Lazard on Saturday.
Iowa has traditionally been a defense predicated around people playing their positions in a Belichek "do your job" motif. I can think of countless times during Big Ten play over the years when Iowa didn't shadow future NFL All-Pro receivers, with varying levels of success. So on the outset it seems like a no brainer, but that doesn't always mean that's what will happen. Especially when the program history/tradition points in a different direction.
Last edited:
Yeah, LC, I wasn't buying it either.
I have stated multiple times on here Iowa State has good skill position players and that Lanning has a fairly high ceiling. I've seen Lanning a couple times last season and he showed flashes of brilliance in addition to the bone headed stuff he did that you could likely chalk up to youth and the fact he is a human being who puts his pants on one leg at a time.
I've also stated there have been years in which the talent gap between Iowa State and Iowa was not as pronounced as some would like to believe--and of course I got raked over the coals for it. Look, I think it would be a huge mistake for Iowa to overlook the talent Iowa State has on the field, and if Iowa isn't prepared for a war they could easily get beat Saturday. Even last year, Iowa State showed signs of being a good football team--their performance against Iowa, Texas, and Oklahoma State are proof enough of that. To me, I think the biggest issue for Iowa State is they have a culture of losing right now and find ways to lose close games. At least, that's what I saw last year-- and of course that's a gross oversimplification of their issues, and they were certainly outmatched in many games, but the greater point is from a purely talent stand point Iowa State is not as bad as some would like to believe--it's just the difference between winning and losing in college football is often times paper thin.
In terms of this year, obviously Iowa State has some major issues--the most glaring, which you pointed out, is offensive line play. As far as what I expect to see Saturday, I do think Iowa is just quite a bit better than Iowa State and should win the game by double digits. While I expect Iowa State to perform better than they did against UNI, I also expect Iowa to be significantly better as well--at least on the defensive side of the ball--and therefore, as stated, I'm expecting a big Hawkeye victory Saturday. But of course, I might be a tad bit biased.
Haha. But seriously, Iowa is going to put a beat down on Iowa State Saturday that's going to make Jim Walden and Hayden Fry blush. Lol. Anyway, as far as the future of Iowa State football under Matt Campbell is concerned, as stated before, the jury will be out for a couple years. But to me, you can talk about increasing the talent, getting better offensive line play, etc. all you want, but it's quite possible the biggest obstacle Campbell faces is changing the culture of losing at Iowa State and getting kids to buy into his system and believe Iowa State can be a winning program. Of course, it should also be stated that we just don't know if Matt Campbell will be able to hack it at a P5 school. It's all conjecture and speculation at this point. But hey, at the very least, it would be pretty difficult for him to do much worse than his last two predecessors, right?
All pretty much true, or at least defensible.Yeah, LC, I wasn't buying it either.
I have stated multiple times on here Iowa State has good skill position players and that Lanning has a fairly high ceiling. I've seen Lanning a couple times last season and he showed flashes of brilliance in addition to the bone headed stuff he did that you could likely chalk up to youth and the fact he is a human being who puts his pants on one leg at a time.
I've also stated there have been years in which the talent gap between Iowa State and Iowa was not as pronounced as some would like to believe--and of course I got raked over the coals for it. Look, I think it would be a huge mistake for Iowa to overlook the talent Iowa State has on the field, and if Iowa isn't prepared for a war they could easily get beat Saturday. Even last year, Iowa State showed signs of being a good football team--their performance against Iowa, Texas, and Oklahoma State are proof enough of that. To me, I think the biggest issue for Iowa State is they have a culture of losing right now and find ways to lose close games. At least, that's what I saw last year-- and of course that's a gross oversimplification of their issues, and they were certainly outmatched in many games, but the greater point is from a purely talent stand point Iowa State is not as bad as some would like to believe--it's just the difference between winning and losing in college football is often times paper thin.
In terms of this year, obviously Iowa State has some major issues--the most glaring, which you pointed out, is offensive line play. As far as what I expect to see Saturday, I do think Iowa is just quite a bit better than Iowa State and should win the game by double digits. While I expect Iowa State to perform better than they did against UNI, I also expect Iowa to be significantly better as well--at least on the defensive side of the ball--and therefore, as stated, I'm expecting a big Hawkeye victory Saturday. But of course, I might be a tad bit biased.
Lol. Anyway, as far as the future of Iowa State football under Matt Campbell is concerned, as stated before, the jury will be out for a couple years. But to me, you can talk about increasing the talent, getting better offensive line play, etc. all you want, but it's quite possible the biggest obstacle Campbell faces is changing the culture of losing at Iowa State and getting kids to buy into his system and believe Iowa State can be a winning program. Of course, it should also be stated that we just don't know if Matt Campbell will be able to hack it at a P5 school. It's all conjecture and speculation at this point. But hey, at the very least, it would be pretty difficult for him to do much worse than his last two predecessors, right?
The single most disappointing aspect of Saturday night's game -- other than losing, of course -- was what appeared to be a lack of organization. I had never bought into the concept of Campbell taking the team to a bowl this season, but I HAD bought into the idea that he was an extremely organized type of coach whose teams were not likely to make stupid mistakes....kinda on the order of Bill Snyder, maybe. What I saw was just the opposite. Wasted timeout....12 men on the field on a kickoff....ill-timed timeout that gave Farley a chance to realize he was making a mistake trying a FG on the last play of the first half....two backs colliding in the backfield....and really, really stupid penalties. The effects of these cannot be overestimated. Three, maybe four, penalties negated gains of 15 or more yards, resulting in a net yardage loss of more than 30 yards. Another wiped out a nice punt return and put ISU inside its 10 instead of at midfield (and set up a safety). Almost all of them were penalties that had no effect whatever on the play -- occurred far from the action, or long after it was relevant.
Not bitching about the calls, which were correct. It's just that you can defend, for instance, a holding call if the alternative is letting your QB get sacked. You can't defend a half-hearted push in the back on a punt return after the returner is already 20 yards downfield.
Nine true freshmen played, which certainly was part of the problem. But I expected more.
That's how i saw it too. The Miami QB can sling it. Hard to put that on Mabin. The OL did a good job of protecting him too. That gave him time to make those throws accurately. Better pressure on the QBs will help the secondary going forward.
