Morehouse Article on Last Possession

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

There is not one person with any semblance of football knowledge that could watch that game and think it was a good call. You should hurry up and delete that drivel.

So you are going to sit there and say that a coach who has 5 top-10 finishes at Iowa has no semblance of football knowledge?

You're either delusional or overstating your argument. I'm going to guess you're overstating your argument, to which my follow up question would be: why overstate your argument?

 

[David1979]

Coaches make mistakes. So do players. It just so happens both coaches and players made a lot of mistakes in last saturday's game. Especially in the second half.

1. Missed tackles
2. missed blocks
3. missed blitz pickups
4. failing to adjust to NDSU second half adjustments
5. failing to get Wadley more touches
6. Missed assignments and reads by the defense

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Iowa had 44 yards rushing at the start of that drive. That summarily kills every argument to run the ball like we did. Coach the game you are in, not the game you wish you were in.

There is a lot more thought that goes into it than exactly how many rushing yards you have at any given time. Yes, I understand the lack of success in the running game to that point is a big factor, but all I'm trying to do is to get some of the critics to at least acknowledge some more nuanced arguments. However, some are proving too closed-minded to do so. Additionally, I'd like to reiterate that I do not agree with last three offensive play calls, but I can at least open up my mind to try to see the possible considerations the staff contemplated when calling those last three plays.

For example, to that point our running game struggled - nobody will contest that. However, consider the fact that prior to the last drive, we had 3rd and 2 three separate times in obvious rushing downs and each time Leshun Daniels picked up the first down, gaining 3 yards, 4 yards, and 5 yards on each respective attempt. These rushes all came with our heavy formation in the game. It seems reasonable that if Daniels can at least get to the line without being touched, he could move the pile a few yards and either get a first down on two carries, or at the very least set up a 3rd and short yardage situation which could open up a lot more plays in our playbook to get a first down. Additionally, it seems reasonable that when you are in run-the-clock mode that you might say that you'll give yourself one opportunity on each set of downs to pass the ball for the first, but that you want to use at least two downs to run the ball and run the clock.

Finally, it's important to consider the alternative of what could have happened had we come out throwing. CJ had only completed 50% of his passes at that point - there's a very real chance we throw an incomplete ball on first and second down leaving us with a 3rd and long opportunity with no clock yet being run off the clock. Thus, we'd be in a passing down with an offensive line that had struggled to protect the QB. Even worse, we could have tried to pass on the first couple downs, given up a blind-side pass rusher who strips CJ or forces another interception. Since fans love to use hind-sight to rip into the coaches, then this board would be on Ferentz for leaving his injured QB exposed, or for allowing a slow and methodical offense to get the ball back with 4 minutes on the clock and one timeout when we could have forced them into passing situations by just running the clock.

I'll reiterate for a third time in this thread - I don't agree with the play calling and I too wish we would have been more aggressive. However, if anyone sits there and says that they can't understand the play calling and that only and idiot would do such a thing, you're simply being close-minded.

 

[championhawk]

So you are going to sit there and say that a coach who has 4 top-10 finishes at Iowa has no semblance of football knowledge?

You're either delusional or overstating your argument. I'm going to guess you're overstating your argument, to which my follow up question would be: why overstate your argument?

Maybe he fell and hit his head because nobody with any semblance of football knowledge would do what he did if he wanted to actually win the game.

 

[latenighter84]

I too wish we would have been more aggressive on our last possession. However, that doesn't mean I think what Kirk did was unreasonable, or that he was an idiot for running an idiot for running it on the first two plays, for a number of reasons:

• To that point, our defense had given up 14 points and our offense had given up 7. Our defense didn't play that bad.
• CJ had a pretty bad game and only completed 50% of his passes. He missed some easy throws, and we also had a few drops. Since we had misconnected on a few short throws already in the game, there was doubt that we could count on completing a short pass. An incomplete pass at that point in the game is one of the worst case scenarios.
• NDSU is not a big-play offense. Their two touchdown drives each took over 5 minutes. Running the clock puts their offense at a disadvantage because they'd have to drive 40-50 yards in 2 minutes which would put them in rather obvious passing situations. Additionally, our defense is built on not allowing big plays. The staff trusted the defense not to give up a 29 yard rush on the first play of the last possession, which seems reasonable.
• King had a good return to the 32. From there, if we net 44 yards on our punt (which we ended up doing), then NDSU has to start their drive from their own 24 yard line. This correlates with the previous point - NDSU would have needed to drive at least 46 yards to have a chance at a 47 yard field goal.
• NDSU's kicker missed badly on a 50 yard field goal already. Based on that kick, it looked like he'd struggle with anything beyond 40 yards.
• Running twice wasn't necessarily giving up on a first down. Had Daniels's first run of the second half not been called back (on a dubious holding call) then he would have been averaging 7.6 yards per carry to that point. It's true that our running game sucked outside of that long run that was called back, but it does show that Daniels at least had a chance to break loose on a long run - similar to what he did against Minnesota last year when we tried to run out the clock.
• Twice before in this game we ran play action when everyone was expecting a run - once when we were backed to our own 2 yard line, and another time when Stanley came in for CJ. Because we had done this twice before in the same game, there is a decent chance that the element of surprise might be lost. If the NDSU staff wasn't telling their defense not to bite on play action, I'd be very surprised.
• Finally, in hind-sight our worst play of the final drive was when we actually did try to pass for a first down. Had we not lost 9 yards on the sack, NDSU would have started their final drive at their own 25 instead of 34, and their 37 yard field goal might have turned into a 46 yard attempt, which I'm not sure they make.

I note the above rationales not because I agree with Kirk's/Greg's decision to be so conservative, but rather to show that while I disagree with their decision, I can at least recognize the rationale behind them. It's exhausting to see so many people rip our coaches to pieces for the decisions they make, especially since these are the same coaches that led our program to our first 12-0 start just last year. They aren't infallible, and I agree with a lot of the criticism of them in this thread, but such criticism is going overboard and relies on straw-man arguments. It would be healthy for many on this board to recognize that no decisions during a football game are easy, and we aren't smarter than the coaches just because we have the benefit of hind-sight.

None of that information even matters.
Iowa was still ahead after the missed 2 pt conversion. It's what happened after that that has meaning.
It tells me even though Iowa played like**** they still had enough to be leading and a very high % chance to win if the coaches and players do their job. The coaches were there the whole game too and still chose to ignore the teams lack of success on the EXACT plays they called anyway.
This =stupid
That said we all make mistakes but KF has made this same one so many times it's like playing a slot machine you know is going to pay out.
It's simple to correct but there is only one guy that can do it, and well, I'm not holding my breath on that happening.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Maybe he fell and hit his head because nobody with any semblance of football knowledge would do what he did if he wanted to actually win the game.

So, for the record, your best guess is that we have a football-retarded head coach roaming our sidelines with no semblance of football knowledge due to a freak accident whereby he hit his head and forgot all the knowledge he had accumulated in his 30+ years of experience as a football coach?

That's the answer you're going with instead of admitting that maybe someone who is not an idiot might choose to run the football twice in a row in the last 4 minutes of a game in an effort to run out the clock?

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

None of that information even matters.
Iowa was still ahead after the missed 2 pt conversion. It's what happened after that that has meaning.
It tells me even though Iowa played like**** they still had enough to be leading and a very high % chance to win if the coaches and players do their job. The coaches were there the whole game too and still chose to ignore the teams lack of success on the EXACT plays they called anyway.
This =stupid
That said we all make mistakes but KF has made this same one so many times it's like playing a slot machine you know is going to pay out.
It's simple to correct but there is only one guy that can do it, and well, I'm not holding my breath on that happening.

How Iowa's defense played was irrelevant? The type of offense the opponent had was irrelevant? Field possession was irrelevant? Whether the opponent may have been expecting play-action was irrelevant?

Looks like I can mark another one down for lacking the ability to open one's mind to trying to understand an opposing argument.

 

[Chewback]

And Daniels had 12 carries for 30 yards going in to that drive. How could they think he could get it done?

Well, the next one might be the big one.

 

[dbleagle1]

"Ferentz shined the light in other places, including a pair of painful drops by wide receiver Jerminic Smith and Wadley."

Yea, Kirk. Stick out your best athletes and fastest guys. It's no wonder elite speed and athleticism avoids Iowa year after year........

 

[bloodredd]

Can you imagine the blowback if we had thrown the ball incomplete and/or it was dropped again and we didn't keep the clock moving? I'm guessing there would be plenty of folks calling for his head there too......probably lots of the same folks.

 

[flaiawis]

Post the whole game or don't even try making a comparison. How many rushing yards did we have? How much time was left? How had our defense been doing? So many variables in play that making a comparison like yours is just plain retarded.

The details do not change the strategy. Trying to get a first down by being as conservative as possible, working the clock and relying on your defense to win the game for you.
I just prefer to use the cliff note version rather than spend 1/2 my day at the keyboard explaining the details.
Oh, and the retarded reference tells me everything I need to know about you.

COLLEGE FOOTBALL: Midwest; Iowa Is Upset by Ohio State, 27-26
AP
Published: November 11, 1990

• FACEBOOK
• TWITTER
• GOOGLE+
• EMAIL
• SHARE
• PRINT
• REPRINTS

IOWA CITY, Nov. 10— Greg Frey hit Bobby Olive with a 3-yard touchdown pass with 1 second to play today to give Ohio State a 27-26 victory over Iowa. The loss was the Hawkeyes' first in the Big Ten and slowed their drive toward the conference title and a Rose Bowl berth.

Iowa (7-2 over all, 5-1 in the Big Ten) needed a victory and losses by Illinois and Minnesota to clinch a tie for the conference title with two games remaining. Instead, Ohio State (6-2-1, 4-1-1) pulled to within a half-game of the Hawkeyes.

Iowa seemed in command with a 26-14 lead after a 1-yard touchdown plunge by Lew Montgomery, his second of the game, with 11 minutes remaining.

With 7:22 left, the Buckeyes' Foster Paulk blocked a Jim Hujsak punt to give Ohio State the ball at the Iowa 24. Three plays later, Frey hit Olive with a 21-yard touchdown pass to cut Iowa's lead to 26-21 with 6:34 to play.

On Iowa's next possession, Lance Price stepped in front of Alan Cross to pick off a Matt Rodgers pass, Rodgers's first interception in his last 88 throws. But Jason Olejniczak intercepted a Frey pass in the end zone on a fourth-and-6 play with 2:31 to play.

Iowa failed to move the ball on its next possession and Ohio State downed a punt on the Iowa 48 with 59 seconds left. Frey hit Olive for 23 yards over the middle, then connected with Jeff Graham to put the ball at the Iowa 19. Two plays later, Frey hit Graham again to move the Buckeyes to the Iowa 3.

After an incomplete pass, Frey hit Olive, who had beaten Merton Hanks, in the back of the end zone.

Iowa appeared to be in charge in the first half, leading by 17-7 with about two minutes left. Rodgers's first-quarter touchdown run, a 34-yard field goal and Montgomery's 1-yard run had produced the 10-point lead. The Buckeyes, who scored on Frey's 1-yard run 2 seconds into the second quarter, had the ball on their 24 with 43 seconds left before intermission.

After moving the ball to the Iowa 48, Frey threw a pass that appeared to be picked off by Hanks as the clock ran down. But the ball bounced out of Hanks's arms and into the hands of Graham, who dashed into the end zone to pull the Buckeyes within 17-14 at the half. Michigan 22, Illinois 17

 

[Rustys Dad]

I do remember leaning over to my friend right before Iowa's last possession. I said, "Just wait. We're going to run two vanilla plays and then be forced to pass on 3rd down and give the ball back with 2+ minutes left." Sadly, I was correct. We played not to lose. And giving the ball back to NDSU ... well ... they did what most of us expected. Drove down the field and kicked a winning field goal.

The back-to-back runs up the middle baffled me. I expected to see CJ role out on at least one of the first two plays. We earned the loss.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

It's not about the last drive coach.

It's about this.....

1st Downs 21 NDSU
12 Iowa

Total Yds
363 NDSU
231 Iowa

Passing
124 NDSU
197 Iowa

Rushing
239 NDSU
..34 Iowa


Time of Possession
36:40 NDSU
23;20 Iowa

The Iowa coaches were digging themselves into a hole all day.

The players helped too.

 

[herkyhawk00]

Ferentz - Our goal was to make two first downs and then bleed the clock.

My first question would've been, so you tried to accomplish that with Daniels up the gut into 8 or 9 guys, when you had 44 yards rushing on the day?

Iowa calls it the four minute drill a.k.a Old Kirk IMO

http://www.thegazette.com/subject/sports/bison-put-a-foot-on-iowas-4-minute-drill-20160917

So the goal of the 4 min drill is to get first downs by running the ball and bleed the clock. Got it. Did we not show that we couldn't execute that plan throughout the course of the game? Can one not deviate from a 4 min plan drill? They should have run the 2 min drill as it likely would have been much more successful.

 

[*hawksrock*]

Well, the next one might be the big one.

Well, that's why people keep buying lottery tickets.

 

[WWDMHawkeye]

Can you imagine the blowback if we had thrown the ball incomplete and/or it was dropped again and we didn't keep the clock moving? I'm guessing there would be plenty of folks calling for his head there too......probably lots of the same folks.

I find that highly unlikely. I'd compare throwing the ball on that last possession (on 1st and/or 2nd down) to the fake FG we ran early last season. We came up short, but the coaching staff got a standing ovation from the Kinnick crowd.

I'm a huge Ferentz fan, but there's no doubt that his instinct has always been to go conservative when the chips are down. Iowa fans realize this and will support him if he takes some chances. That said, I really don't even consider passing on 1st and 2nd down on that last drive any sort of gamble. It was highly probable that they'd stuff us if we ran it -- which they did -- so I think the call with the greater chance of success in that situation was to throw it.

I would have loved to have seen a TE throw-back there. Fake it to Daniels, roll right, have Kittle throw a block and then drag across back to the left, and loft it back to him. . . wide open, for six. Ball game. Last thing NDSU would have expected. Would have been left holding their jocks.

 

[Chewback]

Well, that's why people keep buying lottery tickets.

Well, there you have it.

 

[latenighter84]

How Iowa's defense played was irrelevant? The type of offense the opponent had was irrelevant? Field possession was irrelevant? Whether the opponent may have been expecting play-action was irrelevant?

Looks like I can mark another one down for lacking the ability to open one's mind to trying to understand an opposing argument.

Its not an opposing argument, its completely unrelated to the OP's heading concerning the last drive other than Iowa ran plays that hadnt worked all day and expected a different result.
You make many great points but they dont matter as far as the last possesion was concerned. Someone on the coaching staff went brain dead for that time frame at least.

 

[latenighter84]

I do remember leaning over to my friend right before Iowa's last possession. I said, "Just wait. We're going to run two vanilla plays and then be forced to pass on 3rd down and give the ball back with 2+ minutes left." Sadly, I was correct. We played not to lose. And giving the ball back to NDSU ... well ... they did what most of us expected. Drove down the field and kicked a winning field goal.

The back-to-back runs up the middle baffled me. I expected to see CJ role out on at least one of the first two plays. We earned the loss.

I said this exactly as they were lining up for the 2 pt conversion. If they miss this KF will go into a shell and try to run the clock and give it back too soon for a FG.

 

[WWDMHawkeye]

Even with the debacle of a final Iowa possession, the odds were still stacked against NDSU, because they couldn't throw the ball effectively all day, and it took them forever to move the ball downfield in their last TD drive. I was pretty blown away that the QB draw took us so much by surprise. Great call by them, but a horrendous job by our D in defending it. That play should't have gone for more than about 10 yards, and it went for 30! Even if we hold them to about 10 on that play, they're scrambling to try and get it into FG range.

One other subject that I haven't seen discussed at all was how darn close that FG was to a miss. Snuck it inside the right upright by about 6 inches, and the ball started outside the goalpost coming off the kicker's foot. If not for the right-to-left wind, that's a miss, and we're talking about a close call rather than an ugly loss. Game of inches.

 

[Backinthe515]

Something that I've seen in alot of threads is the "he has 4 top tens during his career at iowa" can we all agree that if your in charge of something for 17 years and have not taken the company/team/department/buisness to the next progression your actually failing? Most jobs if you don't show improvement year after year you are replaced. I'm NOT saying he should be replaced I just think it's a dumb fall back. 4 (or 5) top tens sounds great until you realize the denominator is 17.

 

[Fan In Black]

Coach the game you are in, not the game you wish you were in.

You could replace "game" with "team" and "are in/were in" with "have" and you sum up most of his career. Its just his style. My thoughts were the run game was shut down, you have a Sr. All Big Ten QB, a playmaker who is your most important offensive weapon, you put the ball in his hands. I dont care if he was off that game. So was the run game.

 

[24 so far]

Iowa had 44 yards rushing at the start of that drive. That summarily kills every argument to run the ball like we did. Coach the game you are in, not the game you wish you were in.

To say nothing about the 200 or so yards rushing they had gashed us for at that point, IN THE 2ND HALF ALONE!

Point being we got our collective asses handed to us in the 2nd half, and STILL HAD A GOOD CHANCE TO WIN THE GAME UP ONE WITH A COUPLE OF MINUTES LEFT!

We needed at least one First Down, probably 2, and THE GAME IS OVER! Geezus, people, is this really that hard? Our best running back is on the sideline for who knows what reason, and a couple of our best offensive lineman weren't in the game "because they didn't practice"! That's when you know Football MUST BE a really, really hard sport to learn to play correctly, because after playing it for the last 10-15 years of your life, all of a sudden you miss a couple of practices and you can't play in a "real" game!

Absolute failure all the way around from Iowa's Coach for Life.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Something that I've seen in alot of threads is the "he has 4 top tens during his career at iowa" can we all agree that if your in charge of something for 17 years and have not taken the company/team/department/buisness to the next progression your actually failing? Most jobs if you don't show improvement year after year you are replaced. I'm NOT saying he should be replaced I just think it's a dumb fall back. 4 (or 5) top tens sounds great until you realize the denominator is 17.

You realize I brought up his 5 top 10 finishes in response to someone who literally said Ferentz has no semblance of football knowledge, right?

Can I put you down on record as standing for the proposition that it's dumb to argue that a football coach that has coached 5 separate teams to top 10 teams actually does have some football knowledge?

I'm not against criticizing Ferentz. He has made many decisions that deserve criticism. However, the amount of hyperbole used in criticizing him is fu--ing ridiculous and tiresome.

The only point I have tried to make is that it is possible to disagree with Ferentz without labeling him as retarded. Apparently that is too much to ask from some posters.

 

[WWDMHawkeye]

Something that I've seen in alot of threads is the "he has 4 top tens during his career at iowa" can we all agree that if your in charge of something for 17 years and have not taken the company/team/department/buisness to the next progression your actually failing? Most jobs if you don't show improvement year after year you are replaced. I'm NOT saying he should be replaced I just think it's a dumb fall back. 4 (or 5) top tens sounds great until you realize the denominator is 17.

I think you're mischaracterizing those top-10 finishes relative to the context. If you put together a list of programs that have finished in the top 10 5 times in the last 17 years, that list would be darn short compared to the 116 or whatever D1 college football programs. Relative to THAT denominator, the 5 top-10 finishes is pretty dang impressive.

 

[David1979]

Something that I've seen in alot of threads is the "he has 4 top tens during his career at iowa" can we all agree that if your in charge of something for 17 years and have not taken the company/team/department/buisness to the next progression your actually failing? Most jobs if you don't show improvement year after year you are replaced. I'm NOT saying he should be replaced I just think it's a dumb fall back. 4 (or 5) top tens sounds great until you realize the denominator is 17.

Except if you look at how many schools have that many top ten finishes in that time period. Then it looks pretty good. I looked at AP and Coaches poll. If you count from from 1999 then Iowa is tied for third in the big ten with MSU for top ten finishes and is ahead of Wisconsin, Penn State and Nebraska. OSU has the most by far and has more than any other program in that time period. Michigan has 6. They also have more than Notre Dame in that time period. If you look at the programs with more top ten finishes than Iowa in that time period here is the list

Alabama
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Michigan
TCU (most of them coming as a non power 5)
LSU
Oregon
Virginia Tech
Texas
FSU
Georgia
Florida
USC

If you count from when Kirk really got the program turned around say 2001 then he has more top ten finishes than anyone in the Big Ten except for Ohio State. And you would take FSU, Florida and Michigan off that list above leaving only 10 schools that have more top ten finishes than Iowa. And look at the schools on that list and the recruiting advantages they have and the recruits they get compared to Iowa. They are also a top 20 team in amount of wins during that time period.

 

[HoundedHawk]

I was pretty blown away that the QB draw took us so much by surprise. Great call by them, but a horrendous job by our D in defending it. That play should't have gone for more than about 10 yards, and it went for 30!

I thought Jewel's knee got blown out on the play. Their Dlineman took him out low.

 

[Backinthe515]

Except if you look at how many schools have that many top ten finishes in that time period. Then it looks pretty good. I looked at AP and Coaches poll. If you count from from 1999 then Iowa is tied for third in the big ten with MSU for top ten finishes and is ahead of Wisconsin, Penn State and Nebraska. OSU has the most by far and has more than any other program in that time period. Michigan has 6. They also have more than Notre Dame in that time period. If you look at the programs with more top ten finishes than Iowa in that time period here is the list

Alabama
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Michigan
TCU (most of them coming as a non power 5)
LSU
Oregon
Virginia Tech
Texas
FSU
Georgia
Florida
USC

If you count from when Kirk really got the program turned around say 2001 then he has more top ten finishes than anyone in the Big Ten except for Ohio State. And you would take FSU, Florida and Michigan off that list above leaving only 10 schools that have more top ten finishes than Iowa. And look at the schools on that list and the recruiting advantages they have and the recruits they get compared to Iowa. They are also a top 20 team in amount of wins during that time period.

You lost me with the "if we start at 2001" in other words your saying "if we set the data so it looks good, it looks good" also how many of those programs have someone who has had 17 years to implement themselves on the program? I'm on my phone so I can't see the list and type but I'm betting the answer is 0 (unless ok is on the list) again if somone has been around 17 years they better be doing something their prior's have not. If you have 17 years and haven't taken it to the next level that's a bad thing (which again he has, I'm just saying that stat seems ALOT better than it really is)

 

[David1979]

You lost me with the "if we start at 2001" in other words your saying "if we set the data so it looks good, it looks good" also how many of those programs have someone who has had 17 years to implement themselves on the program? I'm on my phone so I can't see the list and type but I'm betting the answer is 0 (unless ok is on the list) again if somone has been around 17 years they better be doing something their prior's have not. If you have 17 years and haven't taken it to the next level that's a bad thing (which again he has, I'm just saying that stat seems ALOT better than it really is)

Umm no. I listed all the data since 99. I simply stated if you look from 2001 they are better than 3 of the teams that i listed. If you don't understand how impressive that is to do at Iowa looking at the other schools on the list I'm not sure you will ever understand.

 

[WWDMHawkeye]

You lost me with the "if we start at 2001" in other words your saying "if we set the data so it looks good, it looks good" also how many of those programs have someone who has had 17 years to implement themselves on the program? I'm on my phone so I can't see the list and type but I'm betting the answer is 0 (unless ok is on the list) again if somone has been around 17 years they better be doing something their prior's have not. If you have 17 years and haven't taken it to the next level that's a bad thing (which again he has, I'm just saying that stat seems ALOT better than it really is)

It's entirely fair to consider Kirk's record from 2001, as he took over a complete disaster with a bare cupboard. Knute Rockne couldn't have won with the roster Kirk took over in 1999.

That said, there's no need to manipulate the data. Even including those first few lean years when the cupboard was bare and Kirk was rebuilding, his total of top-10 finishes puts him in a very exclusive group. To pretend that it's unimpressive is, frankly, unfair and foolish.

 

[Backinthe515]

I'm not a fan of adjusting any data sets. Let the numbers be what they are. Yes kirk has taken the next step with iowa. As I said above, many people are using that number like it is some amazingly elite thing. It is better than any iowa coach previously but 4/17 isn't HoF ish.

 

[David1979]

I'm not a fan of adjusting any data sets. Let the numbers be what they are. Yes kirk has taken the next step with iowa. As I said above, many people are using that number like it is some amazingly elite thing. It is better than any iowa coach previously but 4/17 isn't HoF ish.

5/17 and if you do that at Iowa yes it is. I guarantee you he is going to be in the college football Hall of Fame.

I'll give you another guy whom everybody knows will be in the Hall of Fame. Bill Snyder. His teams finished in the top 10 in 6 of 22 seasons which is about the same. And most of them game from scheduling cupcakes in the non-con and then rolling through a bad big 12 north in the 90s.

 

[HobbieHawk]

Hey....hey.....amember when we were third and short late in the 4th with a slim lead against Missouri in the Insight Bowl and the whole college football-watching world knew we were going to run it up the gut and make them burn a timeout.....and then we rolled the dice and hit Reisner for the pass in the flat (that to this day Doodle still contends was a touchdown)? Huh? Amember that?! Do ya? Yeah, it's drifting further back into memory....but it actually did happen.

How hard do you think O'Keefe had to fight and scratch and claw with Captain Clench to get that play call approved?

He had to fight so hard that he figured it wasn't worth the trouble anymore

 

[WWDMHawkeye]

I'm not a fan of adjusting any data sets. Let the numbers be what they are. Yes kirk has taken the next step with iowa. As I said above, many people are using that number like it is some amazingly elite thing. It is better than any iowa coach previously but 4/17 isn't HoF ish.

Well, that depends on your definition of "amazingly elite". It's pretty darn elite when you look at how few programs have accomplished it over the last 17 years. Also, I think many would argue that it absolutely is "HoF ish", and I would bet Kirk will add some more top 10 finishes before he's done.

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

Even with the debacle of a final Iowa possession, the odds were still stacked against NDSU, because they couldn't throw the ball effectively all day, and it took them forever to move the ball downfield in their last TD drive. I was pretty blown away that the QB draw took us so much by surprise. Great call by them, but a horrendous job by our D in defending it. That play should't have gone for more than about 10 yards, and it went for 30! Even if we hold them to about 10 on that play, they're scrambling to try and get it into FG range.

One other subject that I haven't seen discussed at all was how darn close that FG was to a miss. Snuck it inside the right upright by about 6 inches, and the ball started outside the goalpost coming off the kicker's foot. If not for the right-to-left wind, that's a miss, and we're talking about a close call rather than an ugly loss. Game of inches.

That's why it was so effective...We expected them to run pass plays to conserve clock, but the run game was working better for them and they knew we wouldn't expect it. We should have run play action in the opposite situation for the same reasons.

 

[WWDMHawkeye]

Yes, that is why it was effective, but what surprised me was why we weren't expecting it. They'd shown all day that they were hardly able to move the ball through the air. Despite the clock, and especially considering that the clock stops on first downs in college, I was fully expecting them to run it in one form or another at some point. I'm sure I wasn't the only one. Was blown away that we totally sold out to stop the pass.

Agree completely that we should have gone play-action on our last possession.

 

[latenighter84]

That's why it was so effective...We expected them to run pass plays to conserve clock, but the run game was working better for them and they knew we wouldn't expect it. We should have run play action in the opposite situation for the same reasons.

KF went immediately to the prevent defense. You know the one that gives up yards at a much higher rate of speed then the standard D.

 

[Ladell-hawk]

Ferentz - Our goal was to make two first downs and then bleed the clock.

My first question would've been, so you tried to accomplish that with Daniels up the gut into 8 or 9 guys, when you had 44 yards rushing on the day?

Iowa calls it the four minute drill a.k.a Old Kirk IMO

http://www.thegazette.com/subject/sports/bison-put-a-foot-on-iowas-4-minute-drill-20160917

Actually both plays were off tackle plays, not up the middle.

 

[Oldgold51]

Against my better judgment, being a pig for punishment, tonight I listened to Kirk's radio show. It was brutal.The worst:

Q: Was Wadley limited to 4 carries because of health/injury?

A: No, he was fine. Only had 4 carries as a consequence of our running only 49 offensive plays.

Say what! He got it exactly sdrawkcab. Only ran 49 offensive plays, in large part, because Wadley only had 4 carries.

 

[IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life]

NDSU didn't need to throw the ball with 2+ minutes left the way they had been running the ball in the 4th Q