This is one of the dumbest takes there is. Coaches play to win the game. They're calling the plays they think will assist them in winning. Ferentz and Co aren't just watching the UNI game...they're pulling tendencies from the last couple years and video. Do they potentially have some limitations on the playbook with new players? Yes. Are they playing a base defense and only certain formations so Iowa can't prepare for them? Maybe in REALLY special cases (gadget plays) but otherwise anything that's been done during Campbell's tenure with any kind of regularity will be discussed in meetings this week
Rankings Drop?
- Thread starter isu5000
- Start date
You’re right and you’re wrong, IMO.
Are they going to do anything radically different from one week to the next? Or radically different than what they’ve don’t over the past several years? No.
Does the staff have some wrinkles up their sleeve for this year? I’d hope so.
Are some of those wrinkles going to be held back for specific teams? Probably.
The coaches aren’t going to open up 100% of the playbook to game plan against UNI, and there not going to open up the whole playbook during that game outside of a desperate situation. I’d fully expect there’s a few things that are kept in the bag for some of the bigger games.
Two things you can always count on when ISU plays UNI.
1. it will almost always be a close game.
2 people telling you that it was because ISU didn’t open the playbook.
It has been the same story since I went to ISU in the early 90s.
I made this mistake earlier too. QBR is a proprietary ESPN metric that, most importantly, is "opponent adjusted" (though they don't tell you how it's calculated). In QBR, a perfect score is 100. Purdy v UNI = 49.6, Petras v IU = 79.1.
QB Rating is the "old" rating used more universally. It's not opponent adjusted, and is weighted mostly on completion percentage and turnovers. Purdy v UNI = 143, Petras v IU = 93.
Why do we even play UNI? What is the point? If you play a tough FCS opponent, you have nothing to gain and everything to lose.
I am just grasping at straws, but in wonder if Campbell limits the playbook, or calls a conservative game specifically to make it close and essentially throw the team into the fire against a somewhat lesser team to prepare them for the many close games to come? The fire is just a little less hot against UNI than it will be against TOE.
Because it fills the stadium and 90% of the common fanbase likes seeing us play in state schools. CF posters really aren't the common fan.
I have no issue opening with UNI every year. Nice to keep the $$ in state, and a decent, tough opponent. We should just do better.
But hell, we lost opener last year, so I guess we are trending in right direction.
Those wishing for a 45-10 blowout in game 1 under CMC just are not realistic.
I think this is part of it, but not necessarily keeping it close on purpose. I think there are very specific things the coaches are looking for in game 1 that they want on film to improve for the season to be the best it can be. This leads to the conservative play calling and less likely to blow out a team.
How come OU and Bama and FSU/ND can score 35+ points and we score 16 if coaches all do this?
I don’t think FSU/ND were going vanilla. Also, Alabama can do whatever it wants. It’s practically a pro team at this point.
Lol. If that’s true then he should be fired immediately. That would go for any coach.
I'm with you. I just don't buy this idea that there's a "first game" playbook and then there's a "rest of the year" playbook. I mean UNI had the ball with a chance to win late in the game. That game was very much in doubt throughout the entire second half. We have the history of Louisiana and past first game clunkers in the not-so-distant past. So this idea that we were content to just sweat out a victory in the name of not showing Iowa our true offense is laughable to me. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
I think it was just a poorly called game with a team that was just a little bit off timing wise. They just couldn't get rolling. And that's fine and not altogether unexpected. I expect a big jump between last week and this week, but I wouldn't attribute it to some withholding of all the good plays last Saturday.
ISU is past needing visiting fans to help fill the stadium. Playing UNI is very foolish for ISU simply due to the amount of focus they put on winning this game, and the added motivation for UNI players for being overlooked by ISU. There is no added value with a victory.
ISU would actually be better off playing interesting neighboring teams or MAC foes.
RJ Young is an OU / Texas guy. That's what his YouTube channel was all about before he got hitched to Fox Sports. It's not surprising that he went the way he did.
No we aren't. Didn't the UNI game just sell out game week?
Regardless of whether it's a MAC team or UNI we should be crushing them. We don't gain anything no matter who we beat in the buy games. We have to take care of business and we have no issues. It's like people think the MAC or whoever are automatic wins. Have you not seen ISU Football history?
In the grand scheme money matters...and UNI is likely the cheapest option we have in scheduling a game. When you have to maximize every dollar in your budget that's how it goes.
I think I'm going to bookmark this for next year after Iowa State blasts a bad SEMO team and the complaining about needing more of a challenge to get ready for the rest of the schedule.
He is an idiot. Here is his preseason. ISU falls from #6 to #15 by winning? Roaches go from #21 to #9 in one week? Texas from #22 to #6?
