Will Iowa play like there's nothing to lose, or play "base" and learn for future?
- Thread starter Pepperman
- Start date
I know this will sound silly, but PITT quite literally didn't even try to win the game. Narduzzi played to keep the score as low as possible and succeeded in that. When they got the ball, PSU let them run for small chunks and played it safe knowing Pitt wasn't going to hurt them. Pitt took the air out of the ball and tried to run clock to save face. It was 14-0 in about 5 minutes.
You sit in that cover two and you'll be torn up by Geisicki over the middle.
If I'm Iowa I'm run blitzing the A gaps often and hoping to get pressure if it ends up being a pass.
Our linebacker must improve and get faster/quicker. The LBs are a step slow at times in coverage.
I think they'll do whatever they think gives them the best chance to win.....and yes they'll learn from this game even if they lose.
This game is a stepping stone to bigger things down the road. We may not win, but I think this is a corner-turning game for this year's group.
You do realize you match up with Michigan better because you play the same brand of football, right?
BTW, who exactly have you played thus far? Good Lord.
They sold out to stop the big play ability of Henderson with the thought they would win the war of attrition if they did. Guess what? They were right. That's despite PITT controlling the TOP by nearly a 2:1 margin.
Thats it exactly. I'm not on here, nor are most Hawk fans saying we've done anything to this point. But neither has PSU, And last year means nothing.
I think the problem with that is that we have the same scheme with basically the same players. I just think it is a nightmare matchup for Iowa.
It is about matchups for sure. You have some great great talent. But you know Wadley. He will get his. PSU might be linebacker U, but Iowa is tight end U. Remember these names, Fant and Hockenson. You have no linebackers that can hang with either.
Massey Composite has PSU beating #42, #135, and #171.
https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=6114&s=295489
Iowa beating #57, #93, #146.
https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=3540&s=295489
Which basically translates to both of us playing absolutely no one worth a damn. Thanks for proving my point.
I think you Penn St fans may want to buck up and pay attention this Saturday. Iowa has pro level talent at the key positions that we frankly didn't have last year or were injured.
LT Alaric Jackson - 6'7" 330 rFR
DE AJ Epenesa 6'5" 270 5 star - best DE prospect 2017 recruit
QB Nate Stanley 6'5" 230 10 tds 1 int this year
WRs Matt Vandeberg, Ihmir Smith Marsette
TE Noah Fant
Take a good look at these names. You're going to remember them for a long time. Forget competing with Penn St. They're gonna kick your ass
LT Alaric Jackson - 6'7" 330 rFR
DE AJ Epenesa 6'5" 270 5 star - best DE prospect 2017 recruit
QB Nate Stanley 6'5" 230 10 tds 1 int this year
WRs Matt Vandeberg, Ihmir Smith Marsette
TE Noah Fant
Take a good look at these names. You're going to remember them for a long time. Forget competing with Penn St. They're gonna kick your ass
We need to be at least plus 2 in turnovers IMO to be in this game. With a young QB and 2 freshman runningbacks that's not likely.
We also need to shine on special teams, tackle, and eliminate big plays. I have concerns about everyone of these keys. A lot will have to go well for the Hawks to have a chance, but it's college football and you never know.
We also need to shine on special teams, tackle, and eliminate big plays. I have concerns about everyone of these keys. A lot will have to go well for the Hawks to have a chance, but it's college football and you never know.
So essentially the kid has one sack when he came unblocked off the end.
I'm terrified.
This is how Iowa football works:
We play base defense, keep the ball in front, and force teams to drive methodically down the field to score. It's very hard for an offense to do that more than 2-3 times/game. This makes field position and ball security on offense critical. If we take care of the ball, and don't get beat deep, we should be in every game, even if our offense isn't particularly explosive.
We play base defense, keep the ball in front, and force teams to drive methodically down the field to score. It's very hard for an offense to do that more than 2-3 times/game. This makes field position and ball security on offense critical. If we take care of the ball, and don't get beat deep, we should be in every game, even if our offense isn't particularly explosive.
Can Jewel match up with either of them? Also, not sure why you would Spy McSorley with a DB. He's a scrambler, not a runner.
You ought to be concerned about how your linebackers are going to cover Wadley and Fant. Most elusive back and fastest TE in B1G.
Umm you do realize Jewel is one of the better linebackers in the country right? And as far as spying your QB the effect is to get in his head and react when he scrambles and crush him a couple times with an athletic DB (an extra safety maybe, look up 5-3 or 5-2 Monster ) if he leaves pocket or gets past LOS. Also if he's watching the spy he isn't looking for the DE possibly. It has the added benefit of having help in the area for the TE or Barkley once the ball leaves McSorely. Maybe it will take advantage of the QB's apparent ego and get him off script with some frustration.. I think this might make Barkley just a talented runner if you attack McSorely, because Barkley is going to get yards why not dictate how he gets them? Regardless a base 4-3 is what you will see anyway, I was just being creative.
Last edited:
That's not what I asked about Jewel. I know who he is. Doesn't mean he can cover a 4.3 guy or a 6'6 guy with extreme athleticism.
I don't think taking a DB away to spy Mc is a good idea but we will see how it plays out.
It's his job.....one he's good at (Jewel). See above schemes for ideas on stopping your super heroes millennial Barry Sanders and Gronk junior. We will probably not see what I proposed unless it's a watered down use of 5-3. Iowa's DC likes to stay pretty conventional. So yeah your guys are gonna be given room to pile up stats.. and Iowa will hope there are no big plays ... didn't work last year, which is why I was brainstorming of a 4-3 variant that would be different. I'm not a coach just having fun throwing ideas at the wall.
Last edited:
Let's not get carried away here. I didn't say we had superheroes but when you have a projected T5 NFL draft pick who runs a 4.3 and is a Heisman candidate at RB and a pre-season AA and first projected TE off the board those are some guys I feel I can legitimately ask the question I did.
My problem with the Mc part is that if you dedicate someone to spy him, you lose a defender. As I have said before, McSorley does not like to run with the ball when in the pocket. He likes to scramble until he finds the throw he wants to make.
In the RPO, I'm not sure if blowing him up every time would make sense or not. The reality is that he is already too unselfish in keeping so I really don't know.
I think that you're selling the '16 Michigan O a little short. As skill guys go, they had Butt, Darboh, Chesson, a healthy stable of talented RBs, and Peppers. Of course, it was the '16 Iowa D that had to match up with those guys. The '17 Iowa D will have to try to match-up with PSU's O. I agree that handling that match-up will be easier said than done. However, I also know that the Iowa coaches like their guys. I've seen less talented (on paper) Iowa teams surprise their "supposed" superiors before ... I have no reason to believe that it cannot happen again.
Also, I agree that Iowa's young QB hasn't faced a D as strong as PSU's yet. However, he did face off against a heated rival in an away game ... and he still responded well. Thus, it's not like he hasn't faced high-pressure situations before. Also, Iowa has TEs and RBs who pose awful tough match-ups for opposing Ds in the passing game. I've heard PSU fans be somewhat critical of their LBs thus far. Would you disagree that is possibly an exploitable match-up for the Hawks? Of course, Franklin isn't dumb ... he'll likely manipulate coverages in order to make sure that Fant receives extra attention. The implication is that Stanley will have to find another target who is in man coverage. Will Iowa be able to exploit those man-coverage match-ups? To that end ... I do not know what to expect. I know that in the past, VandeBerg was able to get open against pretty much any D he was facing ... however, that was before his foot injury and that was also with a different QB throwing him the ball. Will he be able to recapture that old "magic?" Again, I cannot say ... however, the past suggests that the ability is within him.
The final question is how the Iowa OL will respond against the PSU DL? Again, I don't know the answer to this one. I do know that the Iowa OL situation appears to finally be "settling down" a little bit. The implication here is that perhaps the group might be able to make a few more strides in terms of their level of play ... however, you simply never know until you see them do it on the field.
Thanks for proving that you havent watched any of Iowa yet this season, and have no idea.
Look for Easley, and Hock to have big days. I'd also expect to see more of Wadley and IKM in space catching the ball. BF has a lot in his bag, that hasn't been rolled out yet.
Ghost, I know I have been saying it for awhile, but it might finally be B. Smith who will get the one on one coverage and have some nice possession receptions or shots in the end zone. Their DBs are really good but Smith has the tools to win the jump ball.
The philosophy on D is to keep things simple so that the players play "fast" ... and furthermore, the philosophy is that the opposition has to play exceptionally clean ball and earn every point that they get. Of course, just as you suggested ... most teams are prone to making their own mistakes ... and consequently, those mistakes typically lead to stalled drives.
The philosophy (pre-Davis) on O is also to count on the D to make mistakes ... particularly by biting on Iowa's run tendencies ... thereby opening up the big-play that could benefit the O. If the long-ball failed ... at least the "default" mode of running the ball and passing to the TEs could eat clock (thereby keeping the D off the field AND reducing the total number of possessions for BOTH teams). The Iowa offensive strategy didn't necessarily require that the O scored every time - but it benefitted from milking the play-clock and by moving the ball well enough to at least flip the field.
In each case, both Iowa's offensive and defensive philosophy is reliant on the assumption that the opposition will make mistakes. Given that we're talking about college-ball ... against most teams, that is a pretty reasonable assumption. Of course, a successful implementation requires that the D doesn't make egregious mistakes itself. I think that this is part of the reason why Iowa focusses so much on fundamentals and keeping things relatively simple. It makes it easier for the D to execute well (and make fewer mistakes).
In contrast, on offense, Iowa is schematically much more complicated. Consequently, the level of our offensive execution rarely has achieved the same heights as our defensive execution. On the flip side, the requirements of the O are also a little more modest. The O largely has to keep down the penalties and minimized the number of negative yardage plays. Past that, the O just has to help flip the field, possess the ball, and score occasionally.
One of the untold benefits of the Iowa offense thus far is that there simply isn't much film on it yet. Thus, the PSU D has 3 games of film to study on it. In contrast, the Hawks at least now have over a whole season of film on PSU's O. Thus, I'd agree that Brian definitely does have the ability to schematically "surprise" PSU. Furthermore, from what we saw of Stanley against ISU ... he's willing to use all of his targets. Thus, if the OL can give him time ... he'll be able to complete passes.
