Football talk: Legit Concerns that Hawkeyes should have about ISU
- Thread starter homerHAWKeye777
- Start date
Or perhaps this Michael Scott moment is more appropriate?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_GgARlPcYk]YouTube - Bro's Before Ho's[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_GgARlPcYk]YouTube - Bro's Before Ho's[/ame]
I'm sorry to hear that. There was a fight about which team you should support? My suggestion is stay the hawkroach you are.
As members of a Cyclone message board, we all come here to discuss the Cyclones. It's a common practice amongst many members to accuse visiting Hawk fans of "trolling." This thread was obviously not intended to troll, and is trying to foster productive conversation. Please do the courtesy of not trolling others to make a point or your posts will be deleted, and infractions/temporary banning may occur.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I've got a question for Hawk fans...(I guess really for anyone)
If UofI's strength is their LBs, would you think that NP would be more likely to go to a 3-3-5 rather than a nickle or dime to keep the LBs on the field? I think it makes sence. Just curious.
Also, who would you consider the best spread offense you have faced in recent years?
If UofI's strength is their LBs, would you think that NP would be more likely to go to a 3-3-5 rather than a nickle or dime to keep the LBs on the field? I think it makes sence. Just curious.
Also, who would you consider the best spread offense you have faced in recent years?
You won't get an argument from me there. ISU will either have to have a decent running game or some great WR play to score in the redzone. And IMO they will have to score in the redzone to win. The only other alternative is a great defensive effort (like they had the last two years) and I don't know if that is likely. Holding iowa to one offensive TD is probably not going to happen.
Then again, ISU's defense has matched up OK with iowa pretty well recently.
No, at best we'll see a 3-4. It makes sense, but I'm not sure I've ever seen an Iowa team run a 3-3-5. Also, for the ISU game we'll be down a CB, so that further reduces that likelihood.
The best spread? hmmmm. Penn State had a pretty good spread offense last year because they had the ability to both run and pass out of it. Northwestern with Basenez (sp?) at QB seemed to give Iowa fits as well.
I think the main reason you don't see Iowa run a 3-4 or a 3-3-5 is two-fold.
One, they are fundamental, Pro-style team...which bothers people because in D1 it's considered conservative.
Two, Iowa typically doesn't have the personnel to run a 3-front. Ideally you need a two-gap NT to run 3-man front. Michigan and Ohio State have done it at times, but even those teams don't always have the ideal bodies for it.
Not only that, but your DE's in a 3-man front typically are bigger than what Iowa has for DT talent. I think the LB talent is there for Iowa, generally, though.
Also, it'd limit how much their DC could put a LB in deep coverage. :wink:
LOL
To your other points, I'd say Iowa's DE's are big enough for the 3-4 but agree about not having that big DT that a 3 man front requires. Even Mitch King couldn't pull that off.
I also agree with you (at least I think this is what you mean) that Iowa won't run a 3-3-5 or even 3-4 because Iowa doesn't run those. I've joked before that in order to gameplan for Norm's defense you could pop in a tape from any year in the last 10. I'm pretty sure ISU won't see any surprises.
Well, you have to remember that DE's in a 3-4 are comparable to DT's in 4-3, generally. And it's relatively known that Iowa's DT's are typically a bit under-sized. Those were the knocks on Kroul and King for the NFL draft. They are more fit for 4-3. Especially in a conference that by and large still has power-running and large OL.
It's not a knock on Iowa, it's just a fact...not even Michigan and OSU always have the talent for it.
And Iowa doesn't recruit for the 3-4...that's also another huge factor. Not sure about OSU, but Michigan, under Carr, recruited for 4-3 talent and typically went 3-3-5 when we backed into having the DL and LBer's for it.
That's pretty much what I am saying, yeah...Norm is Norm. I don't expect to see too many specialty D's or even exotic blitzes out of a normal 4-3 from him. By and large, Iowa football is predicated on the fact that they believe they can line up and beat you with fundamentals.
Ballard is 6-4 284
Clayborn is 6-3 282
We're not talking about your average Iowa DE's here. These guys are the size of our usual DT's.
Yeah. OR maybe those numbers are deflated because not all regular season teams are Bowl caliber...maybe Example: UT plays Florida Altantic and hangs 52 on them....yet they only scored 24 against tOSU....weird...
Stop using logic taken from a 4th grader. You're better then that.
Big XII defense was not bad last year...or any year for that matter. The offenses were/ are just that good. How often have you seen a non conference team hang 50 on us...we do it weekly.
- Jun 20, 2006
- 38,392
- 22,763
- 113
Ugh... Big12 Defenses getting a bad rap without proof.
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum...-defenses-excellent-offenses.html#post1170247
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum...-defenses-excellent-offenses.html#post1170247
And there lies another level of complexity...it's not just about size, but skill set.
What's your take on Iowa's 3-4 then? Admittedly, Iowa just uses it situationally ... and pretty much only when they're anticipating pass ... and that's the very reason why Iowa can use it without needing a 2-gap NT.
Furthermore, with having Edds at LEO ... Iowa's 3-4 is very much just a 4-3 in disguise ... at least based on what they read. Of course, when Iowa reads run out of their 4-3 ... it's then a bit more like Iowa's old 5-2.
Anyhow, the biggest reason why Iowa tends to stick more with it's 4-3 and 3-4 is because Iowa doesn't always have the depth in the secondary to pull off nickel/dime looks that are really effective. Of course, Iowa has obviously been trying to change that (just look at how they've been recruiting).
I said it wasn't perfect. But I only used Big 12 games for the conf percentage so your example doesn't apply.
Ok I think I'm not being understood correctly. I didn't say that the ONLY reason that the offensive numbers in the Big 12 was because the defenses weren't good. The quarterback play in the Big 12 definately is a factor.
Also, I'd like to point out that all of the defenses in the Big 12 weren't bad. Generally, I'd say Texas and OU had good defenses for the most part. I think there were a few defenses in that conference that really inflated the opponents numbers. That's all I was trying to say.
