Game Thoughts Cincin Loss

[deadeyededric]

We have won 2 games this year scoring less than 30 points, this loss is on the defense, when they gave up 31 on the first half and never forced a punt. The way they played today changed what the offense was trying to do, because we were playing catch up from the kick off onward.

It is on the D but put it on the coaches. They had us figured out.

 

[Cyrealist]

I said it before, but I think that what the analyst said right after we went to the half was dead on. We needed to bring down a safety to help against the run. I think we've had the luxury of doing that a lot with two great corners, and now that we have neither, we're finding that we still need to do that if we want to stop the run.

I agree. Our defense has been built on preventing big plays, but if you allow 200 yards rushing in a half, you're going to lose most games. I think we should have brought the safeties up a lot sooner. The lack of safety support made our linebackers look worse than they were,
As to the OP's point about rushing 3, we don't always rush 3. The whole point of our defense is to allow flexibility to counter what the other team wants to do. We generally don't have the talent to go strength on strength against the teams we play. The defense has demonstrated success to the point that a lot of other teams have adopted it. I think the loss was due to coaches' decisions on defense, injuries, some players not playing to their potential, and Cincinnati is a pretty good team. We weren't owed a win going in there.

 

[Cloned4Life]

ISU actually outscored UC in the 2nd (15-14), 3rd (7-0) and 4th (8-7) quarters. However, that first quarter 17-0 by UC = Woof!

Big mistake (late) not kicking the FG to cut it to 6. Might not have mattered, but it also might have made the Bearcats pucker up. Either way, ISU needed two scores and should have taken the 3 when available.

Time to flush this one, get some guys healthy and off to Boulder for a good old fashioned Big 8 Game!

Well, ideally... it would have been an 8pt game instead of a 9pt game.

 

[AlaCyclone]

Well, ideally... it would have been an 8pt game instead of a 9pt game.

Or it could have been a 10 point game instead of a 9 point game if the 2 point conversion would have been missed.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

I agree. Our defense has been built on preventing big plays, but if you allow 200 yards rushing in a half, you're going to lose most games. I think we should have brought the safeties up a lot sooner. The lack of safety support made our linebackers look worse than they were,
As to the OP's point about rushing 3, we don't always rush 3. The whole point of our defense is to allow flexibility to counter what the other team wants to do. We generally don't have the talent to go strength on strength against the teams we play. The defense has demonstrated success to the point that a lot of other teams have adopted it. I think the loss was due to coaches' decisions on defense, injuries, some players not playing to their potential, and Cincinnati is a pretty good team. We weren't owed a win going in there.

A lot of teams have adapted it, but they also changed it up and blitz a lot more than we do. Generally it does a great job of shutting down the run, but today it just could not. Bringing down the safeties earlier was the play after the gashed us for a couple long runs in the first quarter. We also caught a couple of breaks on their RPOs for huge gains when their lineman went down field to far.

Whether we like it or not we were due for a game like this, and it happened today, learn from it and move on.

 

[madguy30]

Actually three, and those games were won with a much healthier defense. And one of those wins was against a G5 team. Things have changed. The defense is hurt and likely isn't going to be stifling teams any more. The offense scoring to needs to be up where the competition is. It is what it is.

To be fair I wouldn't say the defense was 'stifling' to start but was reliable and good overall at full strength.

 

[khardbored]

I said it before, but I think that what the analyst said right after we went to the half was dead on. We needed to bring down a safety to help against the run. I think we've had the luxury of doing that a lot with two great corners, and now that we have neither, we're finding that we still need to do that if we want to stop the run.

That will put more pressure on our inexperienced corners, but we might be able to mix that up to at least keep our opponents guessing, and from there, it's just trial by fire for them. I have no doubt that they'll improve as they go. Once our offense started controlling time of possession, it helped out the defense tremendously, so we'll need a lot more of that going forward.

I thought of that analyst comment, too.

Just as a fan with zero coaching experience, it sure looks like our 2 starting corners out makes it real easy on the offense. If the safteys help in the run, just throw and make the rookie CB's try to defend it. Which didn't go well.

If the safteys don't help with the run, then they gash us for an average of 11 yards per run with that 3-man front. That was the 1st half average, they said.

We're not in a good spot. I hope Heacock and co. can come up with something creative.

 

[KidSilverhair]

Or it could have been a 10 point game instead of a 9 point game if the 2 point conversion would have been missed.

Once ISU decided to kick the XP in the third quarter, an eventual FG was certainly on the table. Even if they’d gone for 2 and failed, a FG was on the table. You skip the FG try and go for it on 4th because you don’t trust your kicker to make it, full stop.

 

[ClonerJams]

Once ISU decided to kick the XP in the third quarter, an eventual FG was certainly on the table. Even if they’d gone for 2 and failed, a FG was on the table. You skip the FG try and go for it on 4th because you don’t trust your kicker to make it, full stop.

Chase Smiths job at this point is just to kick XP's, and he's been good at that. Its hard to ask anymore of a guy that kicked 9 FG's in high school. Just gotta go for it most of the time while Konrardy is out.

 

[AlaCyclone]

Once ISU decided to kick the XP in the third quarter, an eventual FG was certainly on the table. Even if they’d gone for 2 and failed, a FG was on the table. You skip the FG try and go for it on 4th because you don’t trust your kicker to make it, full stop.

Yep, but down 9, the FG is for the win and down 10, the FG is for a tie and OT. Point is, the decision was made due to how much time was left in the game. I think if ISU scores that TD in the 4th instead of of on the first possession of the 3rd quarter, they go for two. Either way, that decision didn't cost ISU the game. If ISU had gone for two and made it, they lose by 7 instead of 8. Still a loss.

 

[Peter]

Orange got pushed around a lot today which makes me think he is not 100%

 

[frackincygy]

Gee, I dunno. The Giants, Patriots, Steelers come immediately to mind. Belichick loves him some 3-4.

Denver too in 2016

 

[cyclone1209]

Gee, I dunno. The Giants, Patriots, Steelers come immediately to mind. Belichick loves him some 3-4.

Right, but we run a 3 down linemen front with 3 lb's. Many times we only have 5 guys in the box which is a joke. The Giants and Steelers system usually has 4 LBs and 3 defensive linemen we have NEVER done that.

My point is, if you look at the best college defenses of all time: Miami early 2000s, Ohio State 2010 to now, Bama 2012 to 2020, Georgia - they all use a 4 down front.
The best NFL defenses of all time: Eagles and Chiefs D's last 5 years, Ravens of early 2000s, Bears and Eagles of 80s/90s = also 4 down defensive line fronts.

I don't subscribe to the idea that we are smarter than everyone else (drop 8 and rush nobody). We have had some nice seasons but I think if the goal is a Big 12 championship, this defense will not elevate us there. It is going to be harder to recruit Defensive Ends in this scheme. Who wants to attack a double team on EVERY play.

 

[IceCyIce]

Not hqving a kicker changes your whole gameplan. Add we cant kick the ball in the end zpne on TD's so giving up 40 yards there. Punt Returns were near bad. It seems like at this point n hte season were going to have to outscore the ohter teams. WEre going to give up more points at least for now than we did the fisrst 5 games. There were a ton of things we should have done better but still had a chance at the end.

I'm ok with being 5-1!!! need to win next week, get to a bye an hope were as healthy as we can get.

 

[psycln11]

I tend to think the defense will not play like they did the first half, so they will be better. The offense is what it is, Becht had a C+ game today, he threw a lot of passes behind or high, not giving the receivers the ability to catch and run with the ball.

Becht was probably seeing three receivers after that cheap shot. He just wasn't hitting the one in the middle.

 

[CYEATHAWK]

Right, but we run a 3 down linemen front with 3 lb's. Many times we only have 5 guys in the box which is a joke. The Giants and Steelers system usually has 4 LBs and 3 defensive linemen we have NEVER done that.

My point is, if you look at the best college defenses of all time: Miami early 2000s, Ohio State 2010 to now, Bama 2012 to 2020, Georgia - they all use a 4 down front.
The best NFL defenses of all time: Eagles and Chiefs D's last 5 years, Ravens of early 2000s, Bears and Eagles of 80s/90s = also 4 down defensive line fronts.

I don't subscribe to the idea that we are smarter than everyone else (drop 8 and rush nobody). We have had some nice seasons but I think if the goal is a Big 12 championship, this defense will not elevate us there. It is going to be harder to recruit Defensive Ends in this scheme. Who wants to attack a double team on EVERY play.

Agree. And in addition, we were told the reason they went to this type of defense was because ISU didn't have the horses to keep up with Texas and OU's of the Big 12 and their air raid offenses. And it allowed them to have the best athletes on the field at one time to give ISU a chance.

With both those schools gone and the Big 12 far from being an air raid conference anymore, is the talent gap between ISU and the remaining Big 12 still that wide?

 

[1SEIACLONE]

Orange got pushed around a lot today which makes me think he is not 100%

Both him and the big guy in on the Cincy defense were both non factors. I am sure injuries to both really hurt their production.

 

[CyValley2]

For me, it's life. Just life. I'm delighted about the 5-0 start. Let's see if we're good at regrouping and making another charge. I am not disheartened; I will be if we don't recover and mightily charge ahead.

I haven't thought we're very good. I have thought we're good. The key element for me, though, is Grit. Our Cyclones are a damn well Gritty team. Today, it appears we lost a portion of our Grit. Human endeavors are not horizontal, we have ups and downs (or am I wrong?)

I believe. The Cyclones will reflect, work to perfect their miscues, and march into Boulder with a character that will not be denied. I believe.

 

[dafarmer]

Was combining and missed the game, but injuries continue to be the main problem. Just don’t have the backups to match other teams.

 

[harimad]

Right, but we run a 3 down linemen front with 3 lb's. Many times we only have 5 guys in the box which is a joke. The Giants and Steelers system usually has 4 LBs and 3 defensive linemen we have NEVER done that.

My point is, if you look at the best college defenses of all time: Miami early 2000s, Ohio State 2010 to now, Bama 2012 to 2020, Georgia - they all use a 4 down front.
The best NFL defenses of all time: Eagles and Chiefs D's last 5 years, Ravens of early 2000s, Bears and Eagles of 80s/90s = also 4 down defensive line fronts.

I don't subscribe to the idea that we are smarter than everyone else (drop 8 and rush nobody). We have had some nice seasons but I think if the goal is a Big 12 championship, this defense will not elevate us there. It is going to be harder to recruit Defensive Ends in this scheme. Who wants to attack a double team on EVERY play.

Ravens were a 3-4 also. Thanks, I forgot about them.