NICKLE D

[ukiddinme]

Any concerns/wonders that after the "Tax Slayer" drubbing and then "Rose Bowl" that our DC hasnt realized we don't have the speed at LB or SS to cover 3rd & 4th receivers or McCaffery's or David Johnson's (UNI game a couple years ago). We are VERY vulnerable in space, vs. spread etc. We "shoulda, woulda coulda" noticed that you can't let a McCaffery off the LOS contact free covered by a Slow SS or LB. It happened vs Tn too and UNI & we almost let a game or 2 get away because of it. Anyway, I know it's spring, "basics", practice but it continues I noticed on Friday. Bo Bower (love him) shouldnt have the responsibility of covering even OUR inside/3rd receiver. Kind of disappointing witnessing this insanity. Rose Bowl was a road map for all of our opponents this season. We need pressure on QB and "press man", nickel even dime D or we will be exploited.
I expect the "that's kirk" response but has anybody had any conversations w coaches, friends, players, wives etc that may allude to a slight change in philosophy?

 

[cmhawks99]

Any concerns/wonders that after the "Tax Slayer" drubbing and then "Rose Bowl" that our DC hasnt realized we don't have the speed at LB or SS to cover 3rd & 4th receivers or McCaffery's or David Johnson's (UNI game a couple years ago). We are VERY vulnerable in space, vs. spread etc. We "shoulda, woulda coulda" noticed that you can't let a McCaffery off the LOS contact free covered by a Slow SS or LB. It happened vs Tn too and UNI & we almost let a game or 2 get away because of it. Anyway, I know it's spring, "basics", practice but it continues I noticed on Friday. Bo Bower (love him) shouldnt have the responsibility of covering even OUR inside/3rd receiver. Kind of disappointing witnessing this insanity. Rose Bowl was a road map for all of our opponents this season. We need pressure on QB and "press man", nickel even dime D or we will be exploited.
I expect the "that's kirk" response but has anybody had any conversations w coaches, friends, players, wives etc that may allude to a slight change in philosophy?

Has nothing to do with speed or philosophy in that tax slayer bowl we flat got ran over & the linebackers miss identified plays over and over and over again. Fans all talk about speed and scheme but it always come down to players making plays.

I followed every Iowa player into the NFL over the last 12+ years their linebackers safeties and cornerbacks always have plenty of speed the problem is are they any good and are they paying attention..... players players players guys

 

[ukiddinme]

Has nothing to do with speed or philosophy in that tax slayer bowl we flat got ran over & the linebackers miss identified plays over and over and over again. Fans all talk about speed and scheme but it always come down to players making plays.

I followed every Iowa player into the NFL over the last 12+ years their linebackers safeties and cornerbacks always have plenty of speed the problem is are they any good and are they paying attention..... players players players guys

So, you dont think that was a game planned 1st play of the game to get McCaffery vs a LB or Lomax playing 12 yards off los on a "choice" route. Im all for the style of football we play to an extent. I think we HAVE to adjust to personnel more. We can't just constantly think were gonna line up "mano y mano" & beat our opponent. It was clear Stanford, UT & again, even UNI had something for us and we didnt adjust. They took advantage of our lack of cover ability & speed and killed us on match ups. Im saying we need to be less stubborn and adjust to 'match ups".

 

[cmhawks99]

So, you dont think that was a game planned 1st play of the game to get McCaffery vs a LB or Lomax playing 12 yards off los on a "choice" route. Im all for the style of football we play to an extent. I think we HAVE to adjust to personnel more. We can't just constantly think were gonna line up "mano y mano" & beat our opponent. It was clear Stanford, UT & again, even UNI had something for us and we didnt adjust. They took advantage of our lack of cover ability & speed and killed us on match ups. Im saying we need to be less stubborn and adjust to 'match ups".

Well you nailed it all in one nice eloquent post of course it was game planned and we missed it. It was a blown play on our point that affected the whole entire rest of the game missed tackles over running plays bad football not scheme bad bad football

 

[cmhawks99]

Honestly I'm truly baffled at the control people seem to think our coaches or any coach has scheming can't correct bad tackling over running plays slipping on the turf missing your reads etc. That game was an almagamation of a lot of things but bad scheme wasn't one of them?

I assume you think Mark Dantonio had a bad scheme and was stubborn against Alabama too, right?

 

[cmhawks99]

By the way you did see how piss poor Tennessee played on again off again last season didn't you…their fans are questioning their coach too.

And I suppose you probably saw David Johnson torch the NFL? I assume you were probably thinking their coaches werent adjusting either?

Not trying to be a jerk here but it's a simple concept. An offense wants to force you to go to matchups so they can go back to what they really like to do the goal is to try not to get out of match ups and quite frankly we did not play well. We didn't get out "schemed"!

Hell we completely whiffed on McCaffrey we were way over aggressive they expected it and they dumped it to McCaffrey. We ran by him it had nothing to do with speed the Tennessee game had nothing to do with speed we got flat ran over!

Be mad because we had the wrong cleats be mad because we looked like we were asleep be mad because we missed tackles be mad because we didn't have the team ready but speed or scheme didn't come into play

 

[cmhawks99]

I thought I should add something on a little softer note because truly I'm not trying to be a butt head. That's actually the number one reason why I don't get on Iowa message boards LOL...

We haven't been losing games the last several years because Kirk Ferentz is stubborn. We have been losing games because we just really weren't very good as a team. Our Chemistry blew our leadership blew & we just didn't deserve to win.

With that said we actually blitzed a little more last year we definitely played more nickel and we even played dime & as everyone on here knows we played some raider package....we've changed quite a bit actually.

But just like a spread offense, there are certain things that we arent, like a spread offense cannot effectively lineup inside the five and pound the ball it's one of number one reasons I've never like spread offenses I think it's a huge part of the game.

The point is you can't be all things and honestly we're really not very unusual that's why speedy linebackers are so imperative in the NFL they don't want to have to sub out a lot. And since I happen to know we played more reserves last year than I ever remember us playing especially in the defensive backfield... I think we probably did more swapping than you realize and back to the original point it did not matter we played piss poor!

It's also why we recruit so many 6-1, 6-2 200 to 215 pound linebackers we want them to be quick and athletic in space and then we build them up, but you can't fix missing the play or over running the play or just flat not noticing the play with speed you Gotta have your head on

 

[mikesright]

We got creamed at the line of scrimmage in the Rose Bowl. McCaffrey is a tremendous athlete who can take advantage of that and they did. If you didn't notice we were playing basically a couple freshman out there after Ott and Meier both got hurt and they were going up against a couple of guys who will be high draft picks. We had no help with depth either.

It's imperative that we develop some defensive line depth this year and if its meant to be a special season we will need a difference maker or two to emerge.

 

[ukiddinme]

I thought I should add something on a little softer note because truly I'm not trying to be a butt head. That's actually the number one reason why I don't get on Iowa message boards LOL...

We haven't been losing games the last several years because Kirk Ferentz is stubborn. We have been losing games because we just really weren't very good as a team. Our Chemistry blew our leadership blew & we just didn't deserve to win.

With that said we actually blitzed a little more last year we definitely played more nickel and we even played dime & as everyone on here knows we played some raider package....we've changed quite a bit actually.

But just like a spread offense, there are certain things that we arent, like a spread offense cannot effectively lineup inside the five and pound the ball it's one of number one reasons I've never like spread offenses I think it's a huge part of the game.

The point is you can't be all things and honestly we're really not very unusual that's why speedy linebackers are so imperative in the NFL they don't want to have to sub out a lot. And since I happen to know we played more reserves last year than I ever remember us playing especially in the defensive backfield... I think we probably did more swapping than you realize and back to the original point it did not matter we played piss poor!

It's also why we recruit so many 6-1, 6-2 200 to 215 pound linebackers we want them to be quick and athletic in space and then we build them up, but you can't fix missing the play or over running the play or just flat not noticing the play with speed you Gotta have your head on

Just saying, it's not Bo bowers or Jordan Lomax fault for being "smoked" by speed & explosive athleticism it's coaches fault for putting them in those situations. Guess what? Were gonna play more future nfl players too. Should we just throw up our hands? You can't say "our players just played bad games" every time we lose to more athletic teams. Shoot, we had weeks to prepare for those games get some speed ready for personnel match ups. At least hold em on Los for a second.
It's a scheming problem when you ask Bo or JL to cover the elite types 12 yds off the ball. Film study would suggest, I would hope, "we need to find a way to slow this kid down". Alabama has extreme talent & depth. IMO MSU blew some early opportunities to keep the game close. So, if we would have gotten into play off, should we have forfeited? Hell no, we gotta find ways to compete. Get guys ready match up wise @ least for 1 game. Honestly, Stanford wasn't that much better. They were better prepared. Exploited our weaknesses. It's not like we didn't know they had a few "big timers" out there, we just thought our same play that got us there will win. Every game is different. I'm just saying we should scheme differently for each elite athlete.
The patriots have way less talent, but they run crossing patterns w multiple looks to get guys open on offense & they "take away" a strength on D each game.

 

[cmhawks99]

Just saying, it's not Bo bowers or Jordan Lomax fault for being "smoked" by speed & explosive athleticism it's coaches fault for putting them in those situations. Guess what? Were gonna play more future nfl players too. Should we just throw up our hands? You can't say "our players just played bad games" every time we lose to more athletic teams. Shoot, we had weeks to prepare for those games get some speed ready for personnel match ups. At least hold em on Los for a second.
It's a scheming problem when you ask Bo or JL to cover the elite types 12 yds off the ball. Film study would suggest, I would hope, "we need to find a way to slow this kid down". Alabama has extreme talent & depth. IMO MSU blew some early opportunities to keep the game close. So, if we would have gotten into play off, should we have forfeited? Hell no, we gotta find ways to compete. Get guys ready match up wise @ least for 1 game. Honestly, Stanford wasn't that much better. They were better prepared. Exploited our weaknesses. It's not like we didn't know they had a few "big timers" out there, we just thought our same play that got us there will win. Every game is different. I'm just saying we should scheme differently for each elite athlete.
The patriots have way less talent, but they run crossing patterns w multiple looks to get guys open on offense & they "take away" a strength on D each game.

My Lord I give up, Christian McCaffrey is going to play against a ton of safeties & Lbers in the NFL that are similar speed to Jordan Lomax and Bo Bower and quite frankly I'll wager Ben Nieman will be one of the faster linebackers he'll play against.

Stanford isn't known as a really athletic team, by they are known to be really really physical!

I guess I don't know where you're going here can I assume that you think every single team that has ever lost a football game it's because they didn't play the match ups right? Is that a fair assumption?

 

[cmhawks99]

We got creamed at the line of scrimmage in the Rose Bowl. McCaffrey is a tremendous athlete who can take advantage of that and they did. If you didn't notice we were playing basically a couple freshman out there after Ott and Meier both got hurt and they were going up against a couple of guys who will be high draft picks. We had no help with depth either.

It's imperative that we develop some defensive line depth this year and if its meant to be a special season we will need a difference maker or two to emerge.

You pretty much nailed it, both lines got mauled. Even looking back to the Tennessee tax slayer game. That bozo Rod Gilmore kept talking about speed and all I kept seeing was our D lineman and linebackers heading backwards like they were on skates. Pretty hard to look fast when you're on your back

 

[cmhawks99]

Just saying, it's not Bo bowers or Jordan Lomax fault for being "smoked" by speed & explosive athleticism it's coaches fault for putting them in those situations. Guess what? Were gonna play more future nfl players too. Should we just throw up our hands? You can't say "our players just played bad games" every time we lose to more athletic teams. Shoot, we had weeks to prepare for those games get some speed ready for personnel match ups. At least hold em on Los for a second.
It's a scheming problem when you ask Bo or JL to cover the elite types 12 yds off the ball. Film study would suggest, I would hope, "we need to find a way to slow this kid down". Alabama has extreme talent & depth. IMO MSU blew some early opportunities to keep the game close. So, if we would have gotten into play off, should we have forfeited? Hell no, we gotta find ways to compete. Get guys ready match up wise @ least for 1 game. Honestly, Stanford wasn't that much better. They were better prepared. Exploited our weaknesses. It's not like we didn't know they had a few "big timers" out there, we just thought our same play that got us there will win. Every game is different. I'm just saying we should scheme differently for each elite athlete.
The patriots have way less talent, but they run crossing patterns w multiple looks to get guys open on offense & they "take away"he a strength on D each game.

By the way how'd The Patties scheme that Denver game? Honestly you know what's a better question? In the games that Denver lost especially that ugly Pittsburgh game what happened their was it scheme, bad matchups? I mean Tomlin is a hall of fame coach, how'd he blow it?! I do know he's stubborn… LOL. Or how about the games that New England lost?! Was that bad scheming or bad matchup playing help me here?

I mean after all like you said Iowa lost because of their inability to look outside the box and "match up" that has to be good for everybody right? I mean we had a month to get ready so clearly the team was ready it's just those dumb coaches who didnt match everything up right? Didn't have anything to do with the fact that they ran by McCaffrey nobody jammed him & nobody even eye-balled him while they let him sneak by & sprint up the field on a 75 yard touchdown catch?! Hell he only had three more catches the rest of the game for 30 yards. None of the safeties or linebackers had to play him out in space. Based on the information you're giving me I have to question Stanford's coaches for not exploiting the match up. Although to be fair they didn't have to because they were caving in the ends of our line and blasting holes so big a Sherman tank could've got through them. Quite frankly he got to the second level so fast in which case we were missing tackles and over pursuing plays, anything else?

 

[Freyvet]

My Lord I give up, Christian McCaffrey is going to play against a ton of safeties & Lbers in the NFL that are similar speed to Jordan Lomax and Bo Bower and quite frankly I'll wager Ben Nieman will be one of the faster linebackers he'll play against.

Stanford isn't known as a really athletic team, by they are known to be really really physical!

I guess I don't know where you're going here can I assume that you think every single team that has ever lost a football game it's because they didn't play the match ups right? Is that a fair assumption?

Don't give up, don't ever give up! Eradicating ignorance from this board will take perseverance!

 

[gilligan19]

lets look at that mauling by Stanford
QB Hogan was 12-21 for 223 total awe inspiring yards, 115 yards came on 2 playes 75 yards on the 1st play, then 40 more on a pass play with 1 minute 40 seconds to play, hmmm their 1st play netted 75 yards and their last play netted 40, that mean the 95% of the rest of the game their QB sliced and diced IA defense for 108 yards on 10-19. also IA intercepted their QB once.

not exactly a mauling by my standard. in fact if you take those 2 plays out of the equation Stanford racked up a mauling total of 314 total yards, these plays were the difference in the game
1st play 75 yard TD Pass
2nd play 85 yard PR TD
3rd play 66 pic 6 by CJ
these happened in the 1st 7 minutes 40 seconds of the game. if CJ does not throw that pic 6 its a totally different game as IA was in FG range at the worst and IA had just got a 1st down and was marching..

 

[icu81222]

I've never seen anyone type more words without saying a thing

 

[gilligan19]

I've never seen anyone type more words without saying a thing

that's truly funny, its straightforward and to the point and the best thing those are the facts something you can't/won't accept.

 

[cidhawkeye]

I've never seen anyone type more words without saying a thing

Are you new here? Lol it's his thing.

 

[hawkeye122671]

Gilligan = Complete Moron

 

[icu81222]

that's truly funny, its straightforward and to the point and the best thing those are the facts something you can't/won't accept.

Straight forward and to the point?

I don't think those words mean what you think they mean. Your posts are about as far from straightforward and to the point as anything could be.


You are always saying people won't accept the facts and the truth that you seem to be the only one who knows.

You derail and distract every single thread on here. You're just a cancer that's all you are

 

[nu2u]

I've never seen anyone type more words without saying a thing

You have to hand it to Kilroy...... he is back with a new username for the umpteenth time. But this time he returns with a new strategy - he registers as a premium member...... this time I'll pay you to let me continue to wreak havoc on the message boards. Kilroy seems to be testing the proposition that tolerance can be bought.

 

[ukiddinme]

By the way how'd The Patties scheme that Denver game? Honestly you know what's a better question? In the games that Denver lost especially that ugly Pittsburgh game what happened their was it scheme, bad matchups? I mean Tomlin is a hall of fame coach, how'd he blow it?! I do know he's stubborn… LOL. Or how about the games that New England lost?! Was that bad scheming or bad matchup playing help me here?

I mean after all like you said Iowa lost because of their inability to look outside the box and "match up" that has to be good for everybody right? I mean we had a month to get ready so clearly the team was ready it's just those dumb coaches who didnt match everything up right? Didn't have anything to do with the fact that they ran by McCaffrey nobody jammed him & nobody even eye-balled him while they let him sneak by & sprint up the field on a 75 yard touchdown catch?! Hell he only had three more catches the rest of the game for 30 yards. None of the safeties or linebackers had to play him out in space. Based on the information you're giving me I have to question Stanford's coaches for not exploiting the match up. Although to be fair they didn't have to because they were caving in the ends of our line and blasting holes so big a Sherman tank could've got through them. Quite frankly he got to the second level so fast in which case we were missing tackles and over pursuing plays, anything else?

In other words we should just

My Lord I give up, Christian McCaffrey is going to play against a ton of safeties & Lbers in the NFL that are similar speed to Jordan Lomax and Bo Bower and quite frankly I'll wager Ben Nieman will be one of the faster linebackers he'll play against.

Stanford isn't known as a really athletic team, by they are known to be really really physical!

I guess I don't know where you're going here can I assume that you think every single team that has ever lost a football game it's because they didn't play the match ups right? Is that a fair assumption?

I'm saying when we play Alabama or Stanford or Tn we should watch film (that's legal, to study) because we don't match up with our base personnel. Those teams flat out have more depth & athleticism. So we should take those FREAKS into account and scheme some how someway for THAT game to beat em. You are saying do what we do no matter what each game. NOT smart.
FYI Stanford went into "we got this" mode after 1st qrtr or it might have been 60-? We tried to so the same ol' on O & they took it as a challenge & whooped our ass vs run @ Los.
Not everybody is gonna play Big 10 ball against us. NFL is so close talent wise it REQUIRES major scheming & game planning. Denver's thinking "they can't block our DE" & no one could. Carolina thought "no need to double team, we've been winnin all year, let's do what we do". I'm done, I appreciate your "just do what we do" mentality, but sometimes, maybe sometimes we should adjust to the personnel & teams we play. We remain predictable.

 

[The_Gent]

So, you dont think that was a game planned 1st play of the game to get McCaffery vs a LB or Lomax playing 12 yards off los on a "choice" route. Im all for the style of football we play to an extent. I think we HAVE to adjust to personnel more. We can't just constantly think were gonna line up "mano y mano" & beat our opponent. It was clear Stanford, UT & again, even UNI had something for us and we didnt adjust. They took advantage of our lack of cover ability & speed and killed us on match ups. Im saying we need to be less stubborn and adjust to 'match ups".

This. A lot of it is scheme. Look at the Pitt game from last year as an example. I was loosing my mind that we would consistently let Boyd line up against Mabin after the first two drives for basically the rest of the game and abuse him over and over again. He was their only receiving threat and they avoided putting him against King after he got his second pick and we just let it happen. That game wouldn't have been nearly that close if we put King on Boyd wherever he would have lined up, imo.

 

[cmhawks99]

OK here's the thing we did watch the film we did match up I'm sorry you're unable to see it but all that makes you is just a basic football fan. Nothing more nothing less you just don't know what you're seeing.

Second Tyler Boyd caught 10 balls for 130 or so yards the longest of which is 36. Now I don't know this for certain but since it seems I have a better gauge on reality than I guess it seems most people. Not saying that to be an ass I'm just saying it based on the shocking crap people post. Back on point there is absolutely no way 2 or three or four of those 10 catches were not in front of Desmond King.

Not to mention I fully predict Greg Mabin is going to be an NFL defensive back.

Here's the problem and I've witnessed this on radio show after radio show were all manners of "intellectuals" like to give their opinion on football. They really don't know what they're seeing & they don't understand the nuances of how a person got out of position so they just assume it's because the coach played the wrong people.

It's very weak minded but here's the interesting thing for every coach that "You" think is awesome their fans are saying the same dumb crap you guys are saying about our coach....so truly according to YOU the "fan" these coaches all suck... that's what makes it so funny.

So in essence we have hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of the best coaches in the world that are consistently getting out schemed and making bad personnel decisions?! It's truly hilarious when you step back and look at it for what it is.

Yet every message board hero or call in radio specialist who thinks they know what they're talking about in reality they couldn't teach a one-year-old how to lay down and not move...lol

 

[cmhawks99]

n't

In other words we should just

I'm saying when we play Alabama or Stanford or Tn we should watch film (that's legal, to study) because we don't match up with our base personnel. Those teams flat out have more depth & athleticism. So we should take those FREAKS into account and scheme some how someway for THAT game to beat em. You are saying do what we do no matter what each game. NOT smart.
FYI Stanford went into "we got this" mode after 1st qrtr or it might have been 60-? We tried to so the same ol' on O & they took it as a challenge & whooped our ass vs run @ Los.
Not everybody is gonna play Big 10 ball against us. NFL is so close talent wise it REQUIRES major scheming & game planning. Denver's thinking "they can't block our DE" & no one could. Carolina thought "no need to double team, we've been winnin all year, let's do what we do". I'm done, I appreciate your "just do what we do" mentality, but sometimes, maybe sometimes we should adjust to the personnel & teams we play. We remain predictable.

Never once did I say "its what we do"....not once. That's your presupposition and to tell you the Truth you are not a very savy football fan. Not that that is all that surprising. Seemingly most aren't including me (the key to life is to be honest with yourself) but I am a very good problem solver and I do know how to cut down an argument. I also know how to fact check....which clearly you don't

I decided not to let one of you crap stirrers off the hook so I went and found the game....

1st play McCaffery scraped out right and stepped up field, we ALL stepped up/down however you look at it and I'm not sure why because they were in shotgun and they went empty immediately. Lomax even came down and then looked left, (Stanford's right), even took a false step left, while CM ran inside him. The rest of our D outside of Mabin out wide, played everything to Stanford's left, Fisher looked right (Stanford's left) and came back left when he saw CM, he slipped went to his hands and it was over.

Not bad scheme...bad play. A good football fan would know this or go look it up like I did. AGAIN NOT Scheme, bad FOOTBALL, is that loud enough? In fact you might ask how in the hell did they play it that badly but they did. Football 101....and you guys are talking about scheme...lol

Also until Gilligan reminded me (I'd shut that game out of my head) I'd forgot about the pick 6 and the PR, that we had covered and we let him out of jail. It was sick, super bad tackling, coverage. Very sad but again, poor play.

Finally, the two pass plays....

The 31 yard touchdown pass once again it was a poor play by us. Incidentally Lomax did not have a very good game in the Rose Bowl. To be fair I do think he was hurt. But this is the play where Hogan "fakes" the fumble. So Lomax played run, stepped up & got caught in a hole and Desmond King had released his guy inside thinking he had safety help. So I'm not sure whether you blame him or not but I do know this...he trailed the play all the way into the end zone & never could get back on top of it and that's our best player right there.

On the 42 yard play we were in a heavy blitz including a corner-back blitz by King, he let his guy go and the play was wide. The WR froze Lomax with a stop and go & he didn't get clear outside to pick the guy up. Not a scheme problem a player problem.

Now I'd tell you I'm sorry about being such an ass but quite frankly I am more than sick and tired of people making crap up to be mad about. Furthermore since I know how you critics think. Before you complain about Lomax, King had a pretty miserable game in the one he got suspended first half and yet we left him in. You play your best players and quite frankly Josie didn't have a great game nor did King nor did anyone for that matter..

Incidentally you should see the mistakes Stanford made on our TD's but no one cares because they won. I even get that but they were there all the same.

So in review WE PLAYED VERY BAD.

When I get freed up I'll attack this Pittsburgh game so I can get this other fellow on the ropes.

 

[cmhawks99]

This. A lot of it is scheme. Look at the Pitt game from last year as an example. I was loosing my mind that we would consistently let Boyd line up against Mabin after the first two drives for basically the rest of the game and abuse him over and over again. He was their only receiving threat and they avoided putting him against King after he got his second pick and we just let it happen. That game wouldn't have been nearly that close if we put King on Boyd wherever he would have lined up, imo.

Okay here we go....

I fast forwarded through the whole game though I did miss 2 catches so it seems, but they would have been for minuscule yards. By the by they did swap King on to him much of the game AND King gave up 2 BIG catches for 1st downs.

1st catch over Mabin 5 yards for a 1st down, good coverage...

1 for 36 over Mabin, great coverage better catch..

1 for 20 yds over King to 5, 3 plays before King picked them in the end zone...GOT TURNED AROUND, EASY CATCH. Side note 1 play before the King Pick Mabin had awesome coverage for no catch.

1 for 5 yards or so mostly over Niemann, Mabin was further out.

He was mostly not consequential until the 1:50 mark of the 3rd quarter when he caught a 5 yard curl route inside the Lber for a 1st down.

16 yarder over King when king jump outside and missed the jam in the slot and Boyd made him pay for a 1st down...

1 for 20 over Mabin and Sft Taylor on "the drive", long time developing and they couldn't keep him covered no one could have...not enough pressure.

On this drive King and again Taylor gave up a 20 yard pass where king couldn't tackle # 19 Ford I think who had 2 catches for 33yds all game, this one was for 22 yards. Hmmmm, should have put someone else on him...LOL

Next 5 yds on crossing routed in front of Lbers...

5 or 8 yard TD over Mabin, again not enough pressure and Mabin finally lost him....

So as you can see, again the critics are smokin rope. I seriously question if they watch the game at all.

By the by and just because I'm on a roll, I read something recently somewhere else where one of "our fans" was complaining we didn't throw down field enough. Might have been in the BHGP combine thread, You know because Smith ran a 4.33 and we didn't "utilize" him enough because that is the key to throwing down field...lol

Some guy started posting pictures of us throwing down field and I was laughing my arse off. Truly fans just don';t pay attention and then go running their mouths.

I counted in this game...5 times we threw down field 30 plus yards, Once we completed it, one other time should have been PI and 3 other times we missed. At least 2 other times it looked like we were trying to and the pressure got us. I know it will escape you brilliant football types, but that's pretty typical from what I've seen from teams that try to get it down field.

I have no doubt the casual fan thinks we threw it down field ONE time on the catch that Smith caught but they'd be wrong...

 

[ukiddinme]

n't


Never once did I say "its what we do"....not once. That's your presupposition and to tell you the Truth you are not a very savy football fan. Not that that is all that surprising. Seemingly most aren't including me (the key to life is to be honest with yourself) but I am a very good problem solver and I do know how to cut down an argument. I also know how to fact check....which clearly you don't

I decided not to let one of you crap stirrers off the hook so I went and found the game....

1st play McCaffery scraped out right and stepped up field, we ALL stepped up/down however you look at it and I'm not sure why because they were in shotgun and they went empty immediately. Lomax even came down and then looked left, (Stanford's right), even took a false step left, while CM ran inside him. The rest of our D outside of Mabin out wide, played everything to Stanford's left, Fisher looked right (Stanford's left) and came back left when he saw CM, he slipped went to his hands and it was over.

Not bad scheme...bad play. A good football fan would know this or go look it up like I did. AGAIN NOT Scheme, bad FOOTBALL, is that loud enough? In fact you might ask how in the hell did they play it that badly but they did. Football 101....and you guys are talking about scheme...lol

Also until Gilligan reminded me (I'd shut that game out of my head) I'd forgot about the pick 6 and the PR, that we had covered and we let him out of jail. It was sick, super bad tackling, coverage. Very sad but again, poor play.

Finally, the two pass plays....

The 31 yard touchdown pass once again it was a poor play by us. Incidentally Lomax did not have a very good game in the Rose Bowl. To be fair I do think he was hurt. But this is the play where Hogan "fakes" the fumble. So Lomax played run, stepped up & got caught in a hole and Desmond King had released his guy inside thinking he had safety help. So I'm not sure whether you blame him or not but I do know this...he trailed the play all the way into the end zone & never could get back on top of it and that's our best player right there.

On the 42 yard play we were in a heavy blitz including a corner-back blitz by King, he let his guy go and the play was wide. The WR froze Lomax with a stop and go & he didn't get clear outside to pick the guy up. Not a scheme problem a player problem.

Now I'd tell you I'm sorry about being such an ass but quite frankly I am more than sick and tired of people making crap up to be mad about. Furthermore since I know how you critics think. Before you complain about Lomax, King had a pretty miserable game in the one he got suspended first half and yet we left him in. You play your best players and quite frankly Josie didn't have a great game nor did King nor did anyone for that matter..

Incidentally you should see the mistakes Stanford made on our TD's but no one cares because they won. I even get that but they were there all the same.

So in review WE PLAYED VERY BAD.

When I get freed up I'll attack this Pittsburgh game so I can get this other fellow on the ropes.

I completely agree that players, good ones too, can play poorly and make mistakes. For example actually, in the case of the 1st td, Lomax should have NEVER let CM inside. His help was outside with mabin & the boundary. Lomax got juked, shook whatever & the rest is history. I would put my money on that happening most of the time. HENCE... EXACTLY WHY STANFORD SCHEMED (go empty) CM 1 ON 1 VS LB OR SS. Theyve done it before & maybe we had a plan to stop it, but lomax just let the kid inside. My point is vs those kinds of "difference makers" (CM, D. Johnson, Boyd etc) should be checked by a King or a nickel corner who is able to run with and not get juked in space by.
If you think Bowers or JL can cover CM you are crazy. Stanford knew it, went empty to get us in vulnerable situation and capitalized. That's called scheming. Pitt knew or found out that iowa does not change the corners sides so they adjusted, schemed. We did not. We did not/would not adjust or change our scheme when D. Johnson caught 500 yds worth of balls on us vs a linebacker. We did not go nickel when Tn. spread us out w 4 fast WR. I in fact was sitting next to an ex pro WR during the Tax Slayer & all he kept saying was "why don't y'all go nickle or dime". I thought through that season and said I dont think we ever have this year. AGAIN, I think we are stubbornly predictable and we shouldnt be if we want to win the big games.

 

[cmhawks99]

I completely agree that players, good ones too, can play poorly and make mistakes. For example actually, in the case of the 1st td, Lomax should have NEVER let CM inside. His help was outside with mabin & the boundary. Lomax got juked, shook whatever & the rest is history. I would put my money on that happening most of the time. HENCE... EXACTLY WHY STANFORD SCHEMED (go empty) CM 1 ON 1 VS LB OR SS. Theyve done it before & maybe we had a plan to stop it, but lomax just let the kid inside. My point is vs those kinds of "difference makers" (CM, D. Johnson, Boyd etc) should be checked by a King or a nickel corner who is able to run with and not get juked in space by.
If you think Bowers or JL can cover CM you are crazy. Stanford knew it, went empty to get us in vulnerable situation and capitalized. That's called scheming. Pitt knew or found out that iowa does not change the corners sides so they adjusted, schemed. We did not. We did not/would not adjust or change our scheme when D. Johnson caught 500 yds worth of balls on us vs a linebacker. We did not go nickel when Tn. spread us out w 4 fast WR. I in fact was sitting next to an ex pro WR during the Tax Slayer & all he kept saying was "why don't y'all go nickle or dime". I thought through that season and said I dont think we ever have this year. AGAIN, I think we are stubbornly predictable and we shouldnt be if we want to win the big games.

Got to tell you the truth I don't give a shit what some X NFL wide receiver had to say....you ever listen any of those guys on ESPN? I'm know you have and I know you also think they're morons? We make fun of some of those guys constantly and I know damn good and well you do too.

And there is no way in hell that we never played nickel in the Tennessee game no way...:.you're pretty much losing all your credibility.

Second Lomax had an awesome game for the most part in the Pittsburgh game he didn't in the Stanford game you are 100% correct he played that play completely wrong and it is 100% on him 100%.

By the by Bower wasn't playing and it was also the first play of the game no team in the world, again no team would have started that game in nickel and if they had Stanford runs...you are reaching so far I don't think it even makes sense for me to keep talking to you.

If he hadn't taken the false step the play doesn't happen friend do you not understand that? If he linebacker hadnt slipped and fell on his hands that play goes for six or 7 yards why will you not acknowledge this?

 

[cmhawks99]

Holy crap I just went back and read again what you said. You are insufferable we did swap corners in the Pitt game I said that in another post and listen forget it you're too clueless.....

So when we lose it's because we don't adjust and people game plan for us but in the games we won they just didn't game plan for us?! My God I can't believe you don't see how stupid that sounds...

I wish I could sell you something, you'd be easy to trick...

 

[cmhawks99]

My Lord I'm just gonna say it you are really stupid dude I'm so sorry I can't help myself we played nickel and dime multiple times this year my God Maurice Fleming was our nickel cornerback and he played a ton I just read an article about Joshua Jackson being our nickel cornerback this year holy shit dude please stop watching football

 

[cmhawks99]

You know I've realized clearly I'm not meant to be on these boards. I'm way out of line here and there's no excuse for me to call people stupid I'm sorry and that is unacceptable. I may be frustrated and I am but that's out of line, please accept my apology?

I'm gonna end my conversation with you by saying.....Marc Morehouse said over at the Gazette keeps a lot of funky football stats and he had a post this football season about how often Iowa played nickel, dime and raider and they certainly weren't predictable and they certainly weren't stubborn.

Now I know fans like you seem to need to blame the coach for everything in the world and seemingly have this mantra that old conservative/stubborn Kirk Ferentz is losing games for us but that is 100% inaccurate. Clearly you're going to think what you want but all you need to do is sit down with somebody that knows what the hell they're seeing and watch a football game.

For the record I'm not offended for KF or the Iowa football team it's offensive to my logic! The things you guys say literally...?!?!...they're crazy therefore I'm just gonna have to avoid you. Again I'm sorry for being an arse!

 

[The_Gent]

I don't think they're stubborn I just think they stick to their base defense. They run a quarter/quarter/half the vast majority of the time...and it works very well.

 

[cmhawks99]

Yep that is their base defense and they do run it a lot. But they've been running press coverage quite a bit over the last couple seasons and they played nickel defense and dime this year more than ever have. And the cool thing is they played so well and with enough covert sneakiness most of our fans never even noticed LOL

 

[Rocket98]

Niemann not playing hurt really bad, and Lomax playing on a 2nd degree MCL was a killer. If those two were healthy and we had a healthy Drew Ott that could put pressure from our front four we would have had a chance.

 

[ukiddinme]

My Lord I'm just gonna say it you are really stupid dude I'm so sorry I can't help myself we played nickel and dime multiple times this year my God Maurice Fleming was our nickel cornerback and he played a ton I just read an article about Joshua Jackson being our nickel cornerback this year holy shit dude please stop watching football

Take a deep breath & re read what I said. The Tax Slayer bowl was 2 years ago. Try to count back 2 years. That would be not this last season, but the 1 prior, or I'm sorry, prior means before, to to last season. "That season" we did not run nickel. And because of "that season" they must have learned a lesson and incorporated it more this year. Good for the coaches. Lastly, listen to you..."this guy was hurt, this other guy couldnt run, he was on crutches, he was allergic to pig skin"..whatever dude thats called liabilities....these are not excuses at this level. Put someone in capable or find a way. Be coaches and find someone else or scheme for our lack of healthy player. BTW. Love KF and the entire organization and everything they continue to accomplish. Gonna keep goin' to games and cheering and bi!#ing sometimes and laughing and celebrating and speaking the "truth" even when it hurts sometimes and even though the coaches aint gonna read or listen to me. I agree with tons of your points too, but I just know a little bit more football than you.

 

[HawkLogic]

I doubt scheme could have made up for those two last two bowl performances. We need more talent and the injuries did catch up to us in Stanford game.