Run the ball. You have four shots at scoring a TD. You run the clock down so PSU has a short time with ball to beat you. This was not a smart play by players or coaches! Iowa has beaten themselves again! I love the Hawks but this was very bad loss. To move this program to the next level year in and year out, YOU MUST MAKE THESE PLAYS! How about a Time-out!
How do not run the ball 1st and goal at 3 yd line with 3:23 left?
- Thread starter mpfeiler
- Start date
Maybe trying to break tendencies or lack of confidence in OL's ability to get a push for Toren Young or Mehki Sargent.
Stanley saw the play clock was down to 2 and decided to have Render snap the ball and threw it even though none of the WR's were ready for a pass. Why didn't NS or Kirk call a TO? They still had their TO's, because they used them after the INT just to get the ball back.
Fant and the WR left of him were still moving. Why didn't that get a fall start flag, stopping the play before the INT? Things that make you go HHHMMMMM....
Yep, I would try at least one run play, and if that fails, try the FB releasing. That seems to work quite often.
Just for the record, our staff was trying to call TO. Video in other threads actually shows the back judge starting to blow the play dead, presumably for a TO (or possibly delay of game, although that call usually made by the white hat, if I'm not mistaken), but he doesn't follow through with it, for whatever reason.
All of that said, though, you have to get it in the end zone in those 4 downs. If you run it twice and get stuffed, you've killed some clock but your margin for error drops and they start expecting pass. I'm sure the priority was to score however possible, as killing clock doesn't help if you can't put it in the end zone.
I think Brian has done a nice job of mixing up his play calling, and it's hard to fault him for making that call, IMO.
It was absolutely the worst play call at that point in the game. Our QB play was a fvcking dumpster fire. FFS, you run the ball 4 straight times if you have to.
Life on the road, in the rain. I agree. Score on 1st down if your can, kick the PAT and put the pressure back on the PSU with time winding down. Instead of executing, they got executed.
I don't know maybe the 1.6 yards per rush we were getting and having a monster TE.
As many penalties as we had why risk a false start on three runs and really screw the pooch.
As many penalties as we had why risk a false start on three runs and really screw the pooch.
So true regarding going form conservative to reckless.
Calling a pass at that time is not necessarily a mistake.
Having a QB that has issues with situational awareness at key moments in games is the bigger problem.
Having a QB that has issues with situational awareness at key moments in games is the bigger problem.
So, calling a pass play knowing that your qb couldn’t hit water if he fell out of a fvcking boat isnt a mistake? Huh.
He is inconsistent, clearly. But he had looked better in the 4th qtr up to that point. So, while I agree in that I would have liked to see a run there, calling a pass play is not on its face a bad move.
I had zero problem throwing on first down. If Fant goes out on a route, we score. The LBer was trailing our RB. He walks in. I just wish Stanley wouldn't of panicked and called a timeout. I just hope we rebound Saturday against Purdue. We have everything to play for in the last 4 weeks. Could end up 10-2 and in Indy or 7-5. Lots to play for, don't give up on this team yet! I was disappointed in the outcome Saturday too, but everything is in front of us!
GO HAWKS!
GO HAWKS!
A
anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba
Guest
That first-down play call wasn't black or white. But here are a few facts that should have informed that call:
* Last year, PSU went nearly the length of the field in only about 1:40 to beat Iowa with a last-play TD pass.
* Wisconsin drove the length of the field earlier this season to beat Iowa with a TD in the final minutes.
* PSU, given 40-some seconds from about midfield, managed to kick a 40-some yard FG to tie the game at the end of the first half.
* If Iowa scores with about 3 minutes left and takes a 1-point lead, all PSU has to do is kick a FG to win.
* Iowa's best rushing offense of the day had come on that drive. Mekhi Sargent and the O-line were outstanding.
* The most important point of all is that Iowa MUST score the touchdown in that situation.
So, given those facts, as soon as the play reached the three, Iowa's coaches should have told the officials they wanted to call a TO with one second left on the play clock. Then Iowa has plenty of time to think things over, and Stanley has plenty of time to gather his wits.
Usually, I would like the pass play Iowa tried to run on first down. But, given the amount of time left and the success Sargent had on that drive, I think a running play--perhaps the fake to Sargent and a give to the fullback--might have been a good idea. With four downs to get three yards, I would prefer to run as much clock as possible.
On the other hand, I think PSU had at least 2 timeouts left and, if Iowa had run the ball and didn't score, it could have called time, and Iowa would have taken no more time off the clock than an incomplete pass would have. But would PSU have used its TOs in that situation, or would it have saved them for offense, knowing it was likely Iowa would score?
Because there are so many things to consider is why BF said earlier this season that the coaches have already made those decisions before the game begins. So I presume this scenario--down by six, a few minutes to go, first down inside the five--was pondered during the week and play calls determined at that time.
So all things considered, I liked the call, but with the game on the line and a QB with a history of erratic decision-making in such situations, the biggest mistake Iowa made was that the coaches didn't call timeout and get everyone on the same page BEFORE going out for that first-down play.
What a way to lose . . .
* Last year, PSU went nearly the length of the field in only about 1:40 to beat Iowa with a last-play TD pass.
* Wisconsin drove the length of the field earlier this season to beat Iowa with a TD in the final minutes.
* PSU, given 40-some seconds from about midfield, managed to kick a 40-some yard FG to tie the game at the end of the first half.
* If Iowa scores with about 3 minutes left and takes a 1-point lead, all PSU has to do is kick a FG to win.
* Iowa's best rushing offense of the day had come on that drive. Mekhi Sargent and the O-line were outstanding.
* The most important point of all is that Iowa MUST score the touchdown in that situation.
So, given those facts, as soon as the play reached the three, Iowa's coaches should have told the officials they wanted to call a TO with one second left on the play clock. Then Iowa has plenty of time to think things over, and Stanley has plenty of time to gather his wits.
Usually, I would like the pass play Iowa tried to run on first down. But, given the amount of time left and the success Sargent had on that drive, I think a running play--perhaps the fake to Sargent and a give to the fullback--might have been a good idea. With four downs to get three yards, I would prefer to run as much clock as possible.
On the other hand, I think PSU had at least 2 timeouts left and, if Iowa had run the ball and didn't score, it could have called time, and Iowa would have taken no more time off the clock than an incomplete pass would have. But would PSU have used its TOs in that situation, or would it have saved them for offense, knowing it was likely Iowa would score?
Because there are so many things to consider is why BF said earlier this season that the coaches have already made those decisions before the game begins. So I presume this scenario--down by six, a few minutes to go, first down inside the five--was pondered during the week and play calls determined at that time.
So all things considered, I liked the call, but with the game on the line and a QB with a history of erratic decision-making in such situations, the biggest mistake Iowa made was that the coaches didn't call timeout and get everyone on the same page BEFORE going out for that first-down play.
What a way to lose . . .
Great post, we all would of felt better no matter the call coming out of a timeout and 1st and goal to go at the 3.
If KF did signal a timeout before the play why didn’t he complain to the referee immediately after the interception and before PSU started the next play? Am I missing something?
The Iowa bench was loudly complaining but the officials weren't having it.....
Looked like it was an overthrow by Stanley to Toren, even if Fant does take his guy out of the play.
Scoring fast to give PSU 3 min to get a FG doesn't seem like great idea. Also using all that motion at the 6 yard line, we were getting too cute on the road. It only takes another OT false start/ illegal procedure call to go from 1st and goal from 6 to 1st and goal from 11 and be behind the chains.
I think they should have ran the ball and maybe get cute on 3rd down or a 4th down.
Which begs the question: If you have the right call, but the wrong player to execute it . . . should you change the call to fit the player, or change the player to fit the call? Neither of those happened.
I personally like that Brian is breaking tendencies. My fear is that yesterday will cause Kirk to sit down with Brian and say, "Son I love you. And I'm proud of you for thinking outside the box. But I've decided we're gonna climb back inside that very small, very predictable, very boring box."
Understand your point, but scoring "too fast' is the dumbest way of thinking possible! You score when you can and you play defense, especially when both teams have time outs! You are going to have to stop them at some point to win the game. PSU can make the last 3 minutes take as long as they want or as short as they want, considering they had time outs left. You score as fast as you can and try to hold them. If you don't then you start playing the save some time game with your time outs.
I don't have an issue about throwing there on first down. Like I said earlier, we all would of felt better of them coming out of a time out!
Hind sight is always 20/20. Can you imagine this board if Iowa doesn't score on the fake FG? I can hear it now, "why in the H#LL are we throwing to a DLman?" "If we're going to go for it, I want Stanley out there!" The fake fg worked, so there isn't a word being said about the play!
I don't have an issue about throwing there on first down. Like I said earlier, we all would of felt better of them coming out of a time out!
Hind sight is always 20/20. Can you imagine this board if Iowa doesn't score on the fake FG? I can hear it now, "why in the H#LL are we throwing to a DLman?" "If we're going to go for it, I want Stanley out there!" The fake fg worked, so there isn't a word being said about the play!
The play call was not bad, execution was horrible
A few things:
1. I'm guessing you didn't have a problem with that gimmick play to Sam Brincks for their first touchdown because it worked. Well, I did. That pass was a lollipop and could have easily been incomplete or picked off. I would have kicked the field goal. Irrelevant.
2. Brian Ferentz overall has done an outstanding job of calling plays this year. Outstanding. Do I disagree with a few play calls? Sure. Who cares.
3. In that situation, it's tempting to try to just punch it in running the football. Lol, though, you never call plays with the intention of having two or three not work to burn clock unless you're in victory formation. So, running the football in would work the same as throwing a touchdown pass. The clock stops on a score whether it's a run or pass. Regardless, the point is you need to score. Usually, the best times to throw in a goal line-type situation are 1st and 2nd Down. Had Iowa run the ball three plays in a row and gotten stuffed then threw an incompletion or pick on 4th Down, the same "they should have run it" crowd would be griping they didn't pass it. In other words, the issue wasn't the decision to pass, the issue was the result.
In short, none of you armchair OCs are smarter than Brian Ferentz.
1. I'm guessing you didn't have a problem with that gimmick play to Sam Brincks for their first touchdown because it worked. Well, I did. That pass was a lollipop and could have easily been incomplete or picked off. I would have kicked the field goal. Irrelevant.
2. Brian Ferentz overall has done an outstanding job of calling plays this year. Outstanding. Do I disagree with a few play calls? Sure. Who cares.
3. In that situation, it's tempting to try to just punch it in running the football. Lol, though, you never call plays with the intention of having two or three not work to burn clock unless you're in victory formation. So, running the football in would work the same as throwing a touchdown pass. The clock stops on a score whether it's a run or pass. Regardless, the point is you need to score. Usually, the best times to throw in a goal line-type situation are 1st and 2nd Down. Had Iowa run the ball three plays in a row and gotten stuffed then threw an incompletion or pick on 4th Down, the same "they should have run it" crowd would be griping they didn't pass it. In other words, the issue wasn't the decision to pass, the issue was the result.
In short, none of you armchair OCs are smarter than Brian Ferentz.
Yep and that D was on the ropes. Slam TY up in there a few times and Iowa grabs the lead. I didn’t like the formation either. No reason to be in the gun 1st and goal from the 3. Spread out the D with receivers and TEs, even out the box and run TY.
Last edited:
Stanley couldn't hit the broad side of a barn and Iowa was running well on the drive, You absolutely have to take the ball and all guessing away from Stanley, look back the last 1 + seasons and outside of the OSU game (where the defense put Iowa out front early and settled Stanley into the game flow) Stanley shrivels up like a penis at -40 when He is against top teams and there is pressure , not running the ball on at least 1st and 2nd downs to run clock and force PSU to possibly use time outs was gross negligence worthy of a job termination.
Stanley should have never tried to audible at that point. Either call a TO or stick with the play that was called. There wasn't enough time to audible and it made the play too hectic. Once it was snapped, he should have realized this and just airmailed the throw out of the back of the end zone and live for 2nd down. Don't just lazily flutter a pass into the teeth of the PSU defense. That play was 100% on Stanley.
I don’t disagree. Just didn’t like being in the gun on 1st and goal from the 3. It was loud on that end of the field. Even out the numbers in the box formation wise and run TY with Stanley under center.
Pretty sure running was the plan. Stanely tried to kill the run play and check into a pass which obviously went the way it went. Meanwhile KF trying to call TO and didn't get it. Shitstorm
Execution aside....that dude choked on his whistle.
Maybe I am missing something ... but Stanley is the one who changed the play with the 40-second play clock down to 3 seconds ... It looked to me like Iowa was set up to run the ball but Stanley changed it at the last second and Fant and the receiver didn't have time to react ... This is on Stanley ... He's a junior ... he needed to be more aware of the situation (i.e. clock) ...
Honestly, it's a tough call.
It's just too bad a timeout wasn't called or granted to get organized.
Latest posts
-
-
Fran Zoom Availability, 2/27 -- Expects Drew Thelwell to Play on Friday- Latest: Carolina. Hawk
-
-
