Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Final drive vs KU

DaddyMac said:
ISU really isn't near good enough to dictate how we score points and in what exact manner we do so. Run the plays you think work best, get the points you can, and let the chips fall as they may.
Click to expand...
How quickly we go from "lucky to be in the game" to "****** at the coaches" that got us there.

DaddyMac has it right, I take the points no matter how much time is left. You don't know if that would force Reesing to push throws into traffic, a RB to drive for extra yarddage whatever.
 
ISUonthemove said:
My biggest beef was going to the endzone with 1:30 left. Why would you WANT to score and give KU 1:30 to operate? I agree run the ball, get inside the 10 with less than :30 and see what happens.
Click to expand...

We're not good enough to be dictating when we are going to score a TD. If the coaches saw something that looked open for a TD with 1:30 left, they would be morons for not taking the shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaddyMac
Gotta be honest, the overall play calling was the best I've seen at ISU since...Earle Bruce. The final drive was well managed for the most part...we needed to focus on throwing the ball but still managed to sneak in a nice 17 yard run by Arob. Had we run a few more times and gotten nothing...people here would be screaming about it.
 
I think the reason we run the plays we run is simple. We are a spread team that takes what the def gives us. I don't blame Herman for the plays he called.....frankly I was so impressed with the adjustments he made in the second half. We really had there def on the run.

On the other side of the coin, I liked alot of the defensive schemes I saw. We effectively blitzed to the qb blind side on many occassion and just could not get to the qb. Thats a credit to there oline and Reesing is fairly elusive getting away from the rush as well. When they did throw it deep against man to man coverage it was against our best db in LJ.....again, can't fault Wally for that logic. Makes perfect sense to me. I don't know how we will be able to get to the qb this year, but that is obviously problem numero uno.
 
I love that some of you are talking about how we were trying to score too early. Time is irrelevant if we don't score. If we have a shot to score we need to do it. Let the defense win the game then. I realize that our defense played poorly, I do, but you NEVER pass up chances to score when you are behind. It is ridiculous to even say that.

I thought our defensive schemes was just fine. We lack the players to create pressure and Wally knows that. If you can't get pressure with four, it is very hard to get enough pressure with 5 or 6. There is no one on our line that needs to be double teamed therefor leaving at least one lineman to pick up a blitz. I believe a blitz can only be as effective as the front four. A blitz is intended to create quick pressure, not basic pressure. I also believe, without a doubt, Benton is our most effective blitzer. It was very hard to blitz him because then you put one of our linebackers in man coverage are leave an openning in a zone and Reesing is too good for that.
 
CTTB78 said:
Onthemove, you hit the nail on the head. The deep ball on first down with 1:30 to go was the killer. Too much time left, not our most succesful type of play.
Click to expand...

Yeah not very successful except the touchdown we scored on it and the time got inside the five with it. Other than that it didn't work very well. It was the correct throw. I would guess that it was a pre snap read as there was tight coverage and no safety over the top. If you can't or don't attack that every time, you are not playing it correctly. Like I said it worked twice, why not try it again? We needed points, I don't care how much time is left. If there is 1:30 from the 1 yard line that may be a little different, but we were by no means in gimme range.
 
jbhtexas said:
What would be the odds of ISU scoring from inside the 10 with 0:30 left? You need those points first...
Click to expand...

Who said it had to be inside the 10? If I remember correctly, we were around the 40. More than likely, they would have been somewhere between the 15 and the 20 yard line under 30 seconds - more than enough room to open things up.

As I said earlier, without knowing what Herman called, it's irrelevant. It was just what I was thinking at the time. They hadn't done much to stop us in the 4th quarter.
 
yaman3 said:
I love that some of you are talking about how we were trying to score too early. Time is irrelevant if we don't score. If we have a shot to score we need to do it. Let the defense win the game then. I realize that our defense played poorly, I do, but you NEVER pass up chances to score when you are behind. It is ridiculous to even say that.

I thought our defensive schemes was just fine. We lack the players to create pressure and Wally knows that. If you can't get pressure with four, it is very hard to get enough pressure with 5 or 6. There is no one on our line that needs to be double teamed therefor leaving at least one lineman to pick up a blitz. I believe a blitz can only be as effective as the front four. A blitz is intended to create quick pressure, not basic pressure. I also believe, without a doubt, Benton is our most effective blitzer. It was very hard to blitz him because then you put one of our linebackers in man coverage are leave an openning in a zone and Reesing is too good for that.
Click to expand...

The time factor became irrelevant because we didn't score. Considering the amount of time left on the clock, the risk/reward of a 40 yd pass on first down didn't seem worth it at the time. However, if it was a matter of what the defense decided to give us, then I understand why we did it.

As I said earlier, without knowing what Herman's plan was, it's nothing more than speculation.

And I agree with you about Wally. He's been calling some very good games. Wait until he gets some more talent. :smile:
 
Last edited:
usedcarguy said:
The time factor became irrelevant because we didn't score. Considering the amount of time left on the clock, the risk/reward of a 40 yd pass on first down didn't seem worth it at the time. However, if it was a matter of what the defense decided to give us, then I understand why we did it.

As I said earlier, without knowing what Herman's plan was, it's nothing more than speculation.

And I agree with you about Wally. He's been calling some very good games. Wait until he gets some more talent. :smile:
Click to expand...

I possibly would agree if the play had not worked twice earlier in the game. If you want to criticize the play itself, that is fine, I really get your point. My point is that we have to get points when we can. We have not been consistent enough to pass up opportunities.
 
Mesaclone1 said:
Gotta be honest, the overall play calling was the best I've seen at ISU since...Earle Bruce. The final drive was well managed for the most part...we needed to focus on throwing the ball but still managed to sneak in a nice 17 yard run by Arob. Had we run a few more times and gotten nothing...people here would be screaming about it.
Click to expand...

I agree!
 
Clones85' said:
A screen pass to AROB would have been a great call as they started bringing pressure up the middle.

The worst call was the screen to Jake Williams. Jake decided that he didn't want to run around the defender but rather right into him. It was an easy 7 yard gain and he turned it into a no gain.

Oh and the slant pass was a bad call too. We hadn't run a slant all game and our passing game looked solid. Our WR's are not quick enough to beat their guy to the inside and AA isn't good at throwing a slant. We were lucky that it was not picked off
Click to expand...

The worst call is on first down we took a shot at the end zone, we needed to give the ball to A-Rob, then call a timeout. They couldn't stop him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom