Interesting fact about the defense

[ICHawk2440]

Iowa held Michigan to less total yards and point than any other team they played. (Besides vs PSU with only 24 points) They played the 2nd ranked team. 5th ranked team. 10th ranked team and 13th ranked team. The defense from that game is almost completely returning…

If iowa can make even a mild improvement on offense we should still have a good record and make these tough games more respectable.
I think that most fans would have respected a 10-11 win season where we scored even 20 points in those 3 games and a win vs Minnesota.
That’s what this team could be if we had even a half decent offense. I would be ok with that.

 

[93hawkeye]

We need to be MUCH improved at WR, QB and OL and scheme. That's a big ask

 

[KFsdisciple]

Iowa held Michigan to less total yards and point than any other team they played. (Besides vs PSU with only 24 points) They played the 2nd ranked team. 5th ranked team. 10th ranked team and 13th ranked team. The defense from that game is almost completely returning…

If iowa can make even a mild improvement on offense we should still have a good record and make these tough games more respectable.
I think that most fans would have respected a 10-11 win season where we scored even 20 points in those 3 games and a win vs Minnesota.
That’s what this team could be if we had even a half decent offense. I would be ok with that.

I'm not saying Michigan wasn't trying, they certainly were, but I'm not sure we saw the best of the Michigan offense. Once they got up a couple of scores they knew a comeback wasn't coming from Iowa. Credit to the Iowa defense, they absolutely played their butts off and if not for the punt return and turnovers from the offense, the score likely would have been much closer. I do wonder how things might have played out differently if Iowa could have mustered 10 points throughout the game and kept the game within reach, would Michigan have puckered or would they have turned it up a notch?

 

[GunnerHawk]

I'm not saying Michigan wasn't trying, they certainly were, but I'm not sure we saw the best of the Michigan offense. Once they got up a couple of scores they knew a comeback wasn't coming from Iowa. Credit to the Iowa defense, they absolutely played their butts off and if not for the punt return and turnovers from the offense, the score likely would have been much closer. I do wonder how things might have played out differently if Iowa could have mustered 10 points throughout the game and kept the game within reach, would Michigan have puckered or would they have turned it up a notch?

Then you don't know Harbaugh very well. He will run up the score on anybody. Out forty plus on us the year before.

 

[ellobo]

I'm not saying Michigan wasn't trying, they certainly were, but I'm not sure we saw the best of the Michigan offense. Once they got up a couple of scores they knew a comeback wasn't coming from Iowa. Credit to the Iowa defense, they absolutely played their butts off and if not for the punt return and turnovers from the offense, the score likely would have been much closer. I do wonder how things might have played out differently if Iowa could have mustered 10 points throughout the game and kept the game within reach, would Michigan have puckered or would they have turned it up a notch?

You are correct...

Before I go on, I want to be clear that I think Iowa's D is amazing...I'm not saying it isn't

With that said, Michigan knew the only way they could lose is if we fd something up...moreover meaning if we allowed your D to score points. All we had to do is move the ball a little bit, play our D (against a terrible O) and we go to the playoff.

We didn't have to do anything besides put up 10+ points and we knew it

Now if your O was a threat Michigan plays that game differently. They probably put up significantly more yards and was capable of scoring more...but also runs the risk of your D scoring while doing so...which is the point...Iowa is the best in the nation at doing that so why take the risk when you can easily beat them being vanilla ×2

 

[mvhomerl]

Michigan knew they didn't have to anything fancy to beat Iowa. Don't give the defense a chance to score, the game won't be close. The 40 plus on Iowa the game before was not running up the score. Defense was spent from being on the field all night..

 

[bradaf]

We need to be MUCH improved at WR, QB and OL and scheme. That's a big ask

We won many close games so that doesn't happen every year but just improving our turnover margin could help. We were 111 in TO margin which is not how Iowa usually plays. Hill was a turnover machine with many fumbles and interceptions. We were -4 in TO at PSU, -3 against Michigan and -3 against Minnesota. Winning games when you are -3 in TOs is difficult. This was also a year when our defense did not create many TOs like they usually do.

 

[MAXIMUSHAWKEYE]

I'm not saying Michigan wasn't trying, they certainly were, but I'm not sure we saw the best of the Michigan offense. Once they got up a couple of scores they knew a comeback wasn't coming from Iowa. Credit to the Iowa defense, they absolutely played their butts off and if not for the punt return and turnovers from the offense, the score likely would have been much closer. I do wonder how things might have played out differently if Iowa could have mustered 10 points throughout the game and kept the game within reach, would Michigan have puckered or would they have turned it up a notch?

I don't agree with this. Michigan had every reason to want to boat race us. They were playing for seeding in CFP.

 

[StallmanCurse]

You don't create a mantra of "Michigan vs Everybody" and then go play rope-a-dope vs a tomato can when you're trying to secure the #1 seed.

 

[MAXIMUSHAWKEYE]

We won many close games so that doesn't happen every year but just improving our turnover margin could help. We were 111 in TO margin which is not how Iowa usually plays. Hill was a turnover machine with many fumbles and interceptions. We were -4 in TO at PSU, -3 against Michigan and -3 against Minnesota. Winning games when you are -3 in TOs is difficult. This was also a year when our defense did not create many TOs like they usually do.

And consider all the 3 and outs. Our defense barely caught their breath and they were back out there. Sometimes we would have been better off just punting when we got the ball rather than have Deacon turn it over deep in our territory. Just mind boggling how KF treats the QB position. All he asks is the QB not turn the ball over,yet he did it time after time. I don't care if Labas smoked a doobie during practice. He had to have been a better option than Hill.

 

[toddhawkwi]

When I look back at this year's defense, I remember listening to Madison radio about 3 years a go and they were talking to a couple of players from the 2004 team that was in the drivers seat for the RoseBowl but lost their last 2 conference games to Michigan and Iowa. The commentator noted that the defense had played tough all year but there were too many 3 and outs and by those last 2 games, injuries and "just too many snaps for the defense" costed them the title. I think we Iowa fans have a different view of that but my point is that it is amazing our defense didn't completely run out of steam down the stretch. We do a great job of rotating DLs but we don't do that at all in the back 7. Hopefully we don't ever have to rely on them that much again.

 

[Titanhawk2]

I'm not saying Michigan wasn't trying, they certainly were, but I'm not sure we saw the best of the Michigan offense. Once they got up a couple of scores they knew a comeback wasn't coming from Iowa. Credit to the Iowa defense, they absolutely played their butts off and if not for the punt return and turnovers from the offense, the score likely would have been much closer. I do wonder how things might have played out differently if Iowa could have mustered 10 points throughout the game and kept the game within reach, would Michigan have puckered or would they have turned it up a notch?

They scored their two touchdowns on drives that totaled 9 yards. In the NC game, their touchdowns came on big running plays they couldn't do against Iowa

 

[ellobo]

I don't agree with this. Michigan had every reason to want to boat race us. They were playing for seeding in CFP.

No we weren't...we were going to be the #2 or #1 seed...period...which one had to do with UGA...not us...UGA wins and they would have been #1 even if we beat Iowa by a 100

 

[BurgHawk87]

We won many close games so that doesn't happen every year but just improving our turnover margin could help. We were 111 in TO margin which is not how Iowa usually plays. Hill was a turnover machine with many fumbles and interceptions. We were -4 in TO at PSU, -3 against Michigan and -3 against Minnesota. Winning games when you are -3 in TOs is difficult. This was also a year when our defense did not create many TOs like they usually do.

It was extremely hard for the defense to create turnovers when opposing teams also knew their best bet was to let the Iowa offense shoot itself in the foot.

 

[MAXIMUSHAWKEYE]

No we weren't...we were going to be the #2 or #1 seed...period...which one had to do with UGA...not us...UGA wins and they would have been #1 even if we beat Iowa by a 100

If you lost to us or barely won how do you think you'd be seeded?

 

[StanzByMe]

No we weren't...we were going to be the #2 or #1 seed...period...which one had to do with UGA...not us...UGA wins and they would have been #1 even if we beat Iowa by a 100

They may not really have been playing for seeding but I don’t believe they shut it down the whole time either. More pass attempts vs Iowa than vs OSU and PSU combined. They certainly didn’t run it 30 straight times like they did vs PSU

 

[BrotherHawkeye]

Yes, Iowa got beat 92-0 in the three games this year, but that number in no way is a reflection on the defense. I've listened to some talking heads and read stuff that called into question how good was the defense.

But at halftime of each of those games the scores were, in order 10-0, 10-0, and 14-0. And the offense had opportunities in the PSU and Tennessee game to score some points that would have made those games closer, and the punt return in the Michigan game virtually gave Michigan a touchdown. No, those games were in no way a reflection on a weakness or shortcoming of the defense. Every shortcoming of Iowa this past fall was squarely and completely on the offense.

 

[IIowaFarmBoy]

Iowa held Michigan to less total yards and point than any other team they played. (Besides vs PSU with only 24 points) They played the 2nd ranked team. 5th ranked team. 10th ranked team and 13th ranked team. The defense from that game is almost completely returning…

If iowa can make even a mild improvement on offense we should still have a good record and make these tough games more respectable.
I think that most fans would have respected a 10-11 win season where we scored even 20 points in those 3 games and a win vs Minnesota.
That’s what this team could be if we had even a half decent offense. I would be ok with that.

Michigan was playing it safe. But the feat was incredible all things considering.

 

[Slappy Pappy]

They may not really have been playing for seeding but I don’t believe they shut it down the whole time either. More pass attempts vs Iowa than vs OSU and PSU combined. They certainly didn’t run it 30 straight times like they did vs PSU

Because McCorum could only run for 52 yards against the Iowa D. Michigan had 66 total yards rushing for the game against Iowa. Hardly the numbers you'd see for a team "playing it safe."

 

[sober_teacher]

You don't create a mantra of "Michigan vs Everybody" and then go play rope-a-dope vs a tomato can when you're trying to secure the #1 seed.

Michigan was playing it safe. But the feat was incredible all things considering.

To an extent I agree that Michigan wasn't running a conservative game plan. They didn't need to. But they ran all over Washington, and was effective against Alabama; with ~ 800 yards of total offense combined in the two playoff games.

They barely got a quarter of that against Iowa. If not for the punt return setting up a short field, and a stripsack inside the 10 for 2 easy touchdowns; that game was theoretically stealable by Iowa. It's not like Michigan jumped out 21-0 and coasted from there; they had to work for everything.

 

[TheGuy9]

I'm not saying Michigan wasn't trying, they certainly were, but I'm not sure we saw the best of the Michigan offense. Once they got up a couple of scores they knew a comeback wasn't coming from Iowa. Credit to the Iowa defense, they absolutely played their butts off and if not for the punt return and turnovers from the offense, the score likely would have been much closer. I do wonder how things might have played out differently if Iowa could have mustered 10 points throughout the game and kept the game within reach, would Michigan have puckered or would they have turned it up a notch?

Really. I watched the game and that's not what I saw. Nice rhetoric but very little other than your word to support it.

 

[ellobo]

They may not really have been playing for seeding but I don’t believe they shut it down the whole time either. More pass attempts vs Iowa than vs OSU and PSU combined. They certainly didn’t run it 30 straight times like they did vs PSU

I'm guessing you didn't watch either of those other games (or in not in entirety)....which is fine because you are an Iowa fan and I'm sure you had better things to do...so let me explain to you what happened:

VS PSU Michigan actually came out aggressive with an intent to fling the ball around. However, our RT was getting flat out abused by Chop Robinson on the speed rush...could hardly get a finger nail on him. Thus we changed our game plan on the fly and went heavy packages running up the middle. We were just trying to get out of there with a W and not get JJ killed in the process...so if you had a Chop Robinson (we didn't have one either...not criticizing) maybe we employ a similar strategy...

VS OSU...first let's get this out of the way...we had something like 15-20 more O plays against you than we did tOSU. That can happen when the other team is able to move the ball a bit. But you are still correct that we passed more against Iowa than them. But here is the stat you should pay attention to: Michigan averaged 8.7yds in the air per play (tOSU) VS 4. 6 (Iowa).

Now before you say that is a testament to how you defended us...it wasn't. Michigan was taking more chances down field and also pulled out some trick plays (one that almost blew up in our face)...because we had to...we weren't beating tOSU by being completely vanilla.

Look man...you guys know exactly who you are...I don't have to explain it to you but will repeat it...you are an outstanding D (and ST) with a historically bad O. It shouldn't offend you that teams play to that...in fact, it is a sign of respect for your D...if you don't let the D beat you (score points) you are going to win (meaning for a team a top the B10)

 

[Heathen Raider]

If I was endowed like John Holmes I would be grinning at a fluffer and not on a message board trying to reason away why Iowa's Offense is dreadful and how the Defense for Years has been wasted, well established to the entire Country sadly .

 

[SI_NYC]

You are correct...

Before I go on, I want to be clear that I think Iowa's D is amazing...I'm not saying it isn't

With that said, Michigan knew the only way they could lose is if we fd something up...moreover meaning if we allowed your D to score points. All we had to do is move the ball a little bit, play our D (against a terrible O) and we go to the playoff.

We didn't have to do anything besides put up 10+ points and we knew it

Now if your O was a threat Michigan plays that game differently. They probably put up significantly more yards and was capable of scoring more...but also runs the risk of your D scoring while doing so...which is the point...Iowa is the best in the nation at doing that so why take the risk when you can easily beat them being vanilla ×2

Agreed and we’ve seen Kirk operate the same way. When Kirk doesn’t think his defense can win the game itself, he allows a more aggressive approach, ie 2017 OSU.

 

[kzoohawk80]

I don't agree with this. Michigan had every reason to want to boat race us. They were playing for seeding in CFP.

What's their seed if they would have lost? Michigan had more reasons not to lose the game then to boat race Iowa.

 

[littlez]

Iowa held Michigan to less total yards and point than any other team they played. (Besides vs PSU with only 24 points) They played the 2nd ranked team. 5th ranked team. 10th ranked team and 13th ranked team. The defense from that game is almost completely returning…

If iowa can make even a mild improvement on offense we should still have a good record and make these tough games more respectable.
I think that most fans would have respected a 10-11 win season where we scored even 20 points in those 3 games and a win vs Minnesota.
That’s what this team could be if we had even a half decent offense. I would be ok with that.

Man I don’t think anyone knew that. We have a good defense and bad offense?

 

[littlez]

Agreed and we’ve seen Kirk operate the same way. When Kirk doesn’t think his defense can win the game itself, he allows a more aggressive approach, ie 2017 OSU.

So 7 years ago?

 

[HawkLogic]

I'm not saying Michigan wasn't trying, they certainly were, but I'm not sure we saw the best of the Michigan offense. Once they got up a couple of scores they knew a comeback wasn't coming from Iowa. Credit to the Iowa defense, they absolutely played their butts off and if not for the punt return and turnovers from the offense, the score likely would have been much closer. I do wonder how things might have played out differently if Iowa could have mustered 10 points throughout the game and kept the game within reach, would Michigan have puckered or would they have turned it up a notch?

Last year's defense with Moss, Campbell, and Van Ness was better---but it didn't always show up in scoreboard. I would say this year's defense over achieved and it is hard to say how they would have done vs Michigan if the offense had a pulse. I do think Michigan took conservative approach because it was obvious early that Iowa couldn't score. The iowa defense without Cooper was down quite a bit.

 

[MilleGinja]

It was extremely hard for the defense to create turnovers when opposing teams also knew their best bet was to let the Iowa offense shoot itself in the foot.

Yep. Michigan and Penn State pretty much played the same kind of game vs Iowa. Don’t take unnecessary risks on offense, take what Iowa gives you, and let the Iowa offense lose the game.

 

[Dr.PhilSuess]

Iowa held Michigan to less total yards and point than any other team they played. (Besides vs PSU with only 24 points) They played the 2nd ranked team. 5th ranked team. 10th ranked team and 13th ranked team. The defense from that game is almost completely returning…

If iowa can make even a mild improvement on offense we should still have a good record and make these tough games more respectable.
I think that most fans would have respected a 10-11 win season where we scored even 20 points in those 3 games and a win vs Minnesota.
That’s what this team could be if we had even a half decent offense. I would be ok with that.

Hahaha ...keep kidding yourself.
Explain the Tennessee mess.
0-92 will soon be 0-152 with new teams coming. Don’t watch 1st game at Eugene. That might be 63-0.

 

[KFsdisciple]

Last year's defense with Moss, Campbell, and Van Ness was better---but it didn't always show up in scoreboard. I would say this year's defense over achieved and it is hard to say how they would have done vs Michigan if the offense had a pulse. I do think Michigan took conservative approach because it was obvious early that Iowa couldn't score. The iowa defense without Cooper was down quite a bit.

Worth noting as far as the overall quality of the defense, not only was the offense BAD, they were also turnover machines. This year's defense while very stout was unable to create turnovers, a big reason why is because when you're playing a team that struggles to score you don't have to take a lot of risks and don't ever really have to panic.

 

[Kinnick.At.Night]

I thought Iowa's defense was a "paper tiger?"