Thoughts on Mizzou-Iowa
- Thread starter Clark
- Start date
It is amazing huh? Illinois controlled time of possession, won the turnover battle, rushing accounted for over 50% of their total yards gained, converted a higher percentage on 3rd downs, etc....
Looks like Baylor's turnovers and the Fighting Illini offense had far more to do with the outcome of the game then their defense did. Just looking at the stats one should be able to pick up on how this game played out. Baylor rushing yards only accounted for a little over 25% of their total yards gained, they only converted twice all game long on 3rd downs. That tells me that Baylor was throwing quite a few passes on first and 2nd down leaving them with 3rd & long situations which they were not able to convert. Crazy.... that sounds very similar to what happened to Mizzou against Iowa except Gabbert was able to convert on some ridiculous 3rd & long situations time and time again. Are you starting to get it yet?
The pro style offense is a far more simplistic offense. You smash the football at the defense on the ground and then you can run play action on the defense anytime you want. If a defense can effectively limit the running game without having to stack the box then a pro style offense struggles.
On the other side a spread offense is much more complicated and is much more dependent on timing and precise execution. A defense built to stop the run has a much better chance of being effective against a spread team because they are typically bigger, stronger, and although probably less athletic at certain positions they usually can control the line of scrimmage which makes the spread team focus almost entirely on throwing the football. This creates an advantage for the defense as they don't have to stop the offense on every play as long as they can disrupt their timing, and the offense doesn't execute with precision.
More things have to go right for a spread team to move the ball then a pro style offense.
Last edited:
Lot of cheap shots on rival type boards . . so ban it all right? Grow up and step boldly into the world of adult conversation.
I think every fanbase does that, especially for close losses. Fans are hypocrites. Iowa wasn't better than Missouri but they weren't worse either. They just made bigger plays in this game.
huh? I don't even know what the heck he's talking about...
Arizona has just fallen off a cliff the last couple of months. OSU is a good football team and Arizona isn't at this point. I'm not sure what happened to them.
Their schedule got substantially tougher at the end of the year. Pretty sure 3 of their last 4 games were against USC, Stanford, and Oregon.
Just off the top of my head, it would seem you are either over-simplifying your argument for the people you are talking to, or your advertised football knowledge is far less impressive than you have been leading on throughout the thread.
If your description is correct there is no idiot on the planet who would adopt a spread style offense... let alone half of the country... right? One works every time, doesn't require strategy, skill, or precision and the other other requires a complicated system, enormous amounts of talent and is easily confused and disrupted due to the precision it requires...
I hope you can clarify this for me, because I was under the impression that the pro-style systems require just as much talent, but in different places like TE and OL as opposed to QB and WR. Right? Wrong?
To give you the proper point of reference it is in regards to Big XII vs. Big Ten matchups.
Look at Wisconsin and Oklahoma State and try to imagine that matchup.
Wisconsin being in the Big 10 plays more of a power game. They play defenses week in and week out in the Big 10 that are put together to stop the run. These defenses typically have larger d-lines, linebackers with a bit more size to fill gaps, and defensive backs that are usually a bit bigger because they need them to be able to be active in stopping the run. Wisconsin thus recruits bigger and stronger offensive lineman because speed on the o-line isn't at a premium. They need big strong guys on the line to be able to run the ball between the tackles. Notice how they recruit a variety of RB's... Clay is a monster of a RB, Ball has decent size and weight to be able to smash the ball inside, and White is more of a speed back who can break runs to the outside if need be. They have more of a game manager at QB because they aren't going to ask him to throw the ball 50 times a game. They have solid WR's and usually a very high caliber TE so they can run play action passes off of their succesful running game.
Oklahoma State being in the Big XII plays a spread game. They play against defenses week in and week out in the Big XII that are put together to stop the spread. These defenses usually have smaller and quicker defensive lineman, linebackers that are a bit undersized but have more speed to be able to cover the entire width of the field, and defensive backs with a skill set that is focused more on pass coverage then stopping the run since they face teams going 5 wide on a regular basis. Okie State thus recruits offensive lineman that are big and excel in pass blocking but may struggle as run blockers a bit more. Spread teams typically bring in RB's that are a bit more of the scat back type. They are smaller, quicker, excel in changing direction and cutting, catching passes out of the backfield or even lining up in the slot as a WR. These guys are a bit more versatile. Obviously they get some very talented WR's because they are a pass first team and what great WR wouldn't want to get the ball thrown to them as often as they do? They might use a TE a bit more depending on if they can land a really talented TE but that isn't always the case for a spread team. Quite a bit of their offense is 4 or 5 wr sets. They usually have a very solid QB that is going to be able to throw sit in the shotgun and throw the ball 50 times or more if they need to.
The way an offense like Wisconsin gives them an advantage. They are huge up front, have powerful running backs, good TE's, and WR's that are solid. Their offense can usually take advantage of their size and power advantage at the line of scrimmage and especially against a smaller defensive front like what most Big XII schools have. This isn't to say that Wisconsin doesn't have great players but they definitely can overpower a smaller defense running the football which forces that smaller D to load up the box a bit more to stop them. That sets up the play action pass when they need it and if mixed in well they can hit that D at anytime with it.
Okie State could very well struggle on the offensive line with a much bigger d-line then they are used to playing against. Obviously they will have a speed advantage with their skill players but timing and precision are big keys for them. They can't just line up and run the ball right at the D because that isn't how their offense is built. It will be tougher for them to work their running game into the mix and for them to have any success running the ball at all they will need to be having success throwing the football first.
To your comment on why would anybody want to run a spread offense then? Simple. Big XII teams are going to recruit and run the spread offense because they are playing 8 teams per year and soon to be 9 that run similar styles of offense. They are going to recruit defensive players that are smaller and faster so they can defend better against the spread they face 8 and soon to be 9 times in the Big XII. They aren't going to recruit players to build a bigger and slightly slower defense in order to have success 1 game out of the season in their bowl game when that won't serve them well in the conference they play in. That doesn't make sense.
A great example is Nebraska. Nebraska played a more Big 10 style brand of ball with a power running game and they had a great amount of success. Then Callahan came in and they tried switching to a more passing offense, west coast style, spread out a bit more and they struggled for years. The last couple seasons they have gone back to a more power running style and their level of success has dramatically improved. Nebraska's D last season was very similar particularly on the D-line to that of a Big 10 D as well. Their D faired very well against spread offenses that season.
No, Illinois just had more talent and speed than Baylor.. Baylor is nothing w/o Griffin
There is a lack of talent and speed in the Big 12 north this season. Kansas is rebuilding and lacks legitimate BCS caliber players at certain positions. KSU is very mediocre and their star is their overhyped RB. Colorado has issues and is a program that needs to be torn down and rebuilt. ISU showed their lack of depth when Arnaud went down. ISU's defense was not built to stop anyone..Power or spread. I never understood the Arnaud haters. The difference between him and Tiller is night and day. Nebraska got by with having a stout defense to protect the offense..Nebraska's offense is devoid of any real difference makers other than a one dimensional Taylor Martinez.
Missouri? Soft against the run...would be a very, very mediocre team w/o Gabbert
Texas? Lost a ton of players and a 4 year starter at QB.. Yea, they were going to struggle..No surprise there.
Okie State? Looked pretty good last night..a bit inconsistent, but athletic at certain positions..Much better than Texas A&M or Texas Tech
Oklahoma=easily the class of the Big 12 this season...still young and rebuilding from the Bradford years..which is why Nebraska was able to stay close in the Big 12 title game.
Plenty of spread teams in the Big 10. Indiana with Tandon Doss (great WR btw) Doss is a better WR than any team in the Big 12 North I hope he leaves early for the NFL Northwestern with Dan Persa..Him going down was a huge hit to the Wildcats.. They're easily a top 25 team with Persa...Maybe a top 60 w/o him. I consider Persa to be a tougher QB to defend than Gabbert. He's smarter and more of a heady player and better with his feet too.
Illinois..6-6 team (spread), but talented and started the year off with a freshman QB.. Easily better than Mizzou by the end of the season. No team in the Big 12 north has the talent Illinois has offensively, including Mizzou and Nebraska..Both teams are very one dimensional
Purdue lost their top 2 QBs this year and their record shows that...Easily considered a "spread" team. A dangerous team when hitting on all cylinders
OSU runs a form of the spread with Terrelle Pryor..Not many QBs with his physical skills..The one player comparable to Pryor in athletic ability at QB won the Heisman this year. (Newton) OSU has some shifty RBs and an NFL caliber WR (Posey) with their usual number of great athletes at LB and DB.
Penn State runs the spread too and suffered some growing pains with a true freshman (very highly recruited) QB. They also lost some good players on defense to the NFL in the 2010 draft.
Everything runs in cycles and right now the Big 12 north is in rebuild mode along with the powers in the Big 12 south
This post supports which argument... because it seems like it boiled down to; Once Nebraska adopted an B10 style of football, they were more successful...
It simply cannot be the case that having bigger guys means you beat the BXII. I will not subscribe to that logic.
I think this Big 12/Big 10 argument has somewhat of a double edged sword, and you saw it in the Iowa/Missouri game.
Yes, those large Big 10 o-lines are going to be able to manhandle the smaller faster Big 12 d-lines. However, on the other side of the ball, that Big 12 speed can torch the Big 10 size. Mizzou was moving the ball almost at will against Iowa, and if it wasn't for their own bone headed mistakes, probably could have won the game. Instead Jackson doesn't make the play on a very catchable ball that ends up in Greenwood's arm, and Gabbert forgot that Micah Hyde wasn't on his team. There's your ball game.
IMO, these Big 12/Big 10 matchups provide an opportunity for some offensive fireworks, as that's where the mismatches are: The Big 10's size up front, and the Big 12's speed downfield.
NW and Nebby have had more success by going against their respective conference trends because it's a system that their opponents aren't set up to stop.
Yes, those large Big 10 o-lines are going to be able to manhandle the smaller faster Big 12 d-lines. However, on the other side of the ball, that Big 12 speed can torch the Big 10 size. Mizzou was moving the ball almost at will against Iowa, and if it wasn't for their own bone headed mistakes, probably could have won the game. Instead Jackson doesn't make the play on a very catchable ball that ends up in Greenwood's arm, and Gabbert forgot that Micah Hyde wasn't on his team. There's your ball game.
IMO, these Big 12/Big 10 matchups provide an opportunity for some offensive fireworks, as that's where the mismatches are: The Big 10's size up front, and the Big 12's speed downfield.
NW and Nebby have had more success by going against their respective conference trends because it's a system that their opponents aren't set up to stop.
I agree. It happens the other way as well where the smaller but quicker defense just swarms the bigger and slower offense and the bigger, slower defense just bullies the smaller, quicker offense.
I would think people would understand by now, the reason Iowa gave up so many yards has to do with the style of defense they play, and injuries sustained to the most important position to that style of play.... linebacker. The reason Missou got the yards was not because they had burners on the outside, the speed difference between the two teams was little, if any.
And the pick by Greenwood was not due to a "bone headed mistake by Missou" it was caused by Prater sticking his hand in a popping the ball up. But most people on this forum still think that Sash is "lucky" on all his picks.
Yeah, Tyler Neilson is a pretty crappy linebacker. Only a US Army All American, 4 star player that had to wait to start this year because he was playing behind some other crappy AJ Edds guy, who for some reason commented earlier this year how well Neilson was doing.
How could anyone know? Tarp hardly played this year, and he was considered the best in coverage out of everyone there. Nielsen was pretty darn good in coverage (he's practically a clone of Edds). Trading Nielsen for Troy Johnson spells big trouble in pass coverage.
You can make the argument that Mizzou's defense is built to stop the spread, and doesn't handle power running games very well. But it's not like Iowa's offensive line is huge. It's VERY undersized.
In fact, it's smaller than 10 Big 12 schools' lines (Texas Tech and Okie State didn't have a link to their depth charts that I could find, so it could be that all 12 schools have bigger lines). Of the 10 that I found depth charts for, only Oklahoma averaged less than 300 pounds per man up front (294 lbs). Iowa averaged 288 pounds per man against Mizzou. So yes, the Hawks are from the Big Ten and want to play physical, and Mizzou's defensive front is undersized because they play against the spread most of the time. But they went 10-2 against much bigger lines than Iowa's.
That's not even mentioning the fact that Mizzou beat K-State (312 lbs, 2nd biggest of the 10 I found), who also hand the ball off to Daniel Thomas, who is a better back than Marcus Coker (At least for now. Sorry, can't hold back the homerism on that one :smile
.
