I’m probably the only one that was yelling go for it on 4th and 4. Just had a bad feeling about giving the ball back all tied up.
When does Manning become a liability?
- Thread starter Clonefan94
- Start date
If I had faith that Manning could scheme something up other than a quick out to Kolar who would be likely double covered or a crossing route short of the sticks I'd be with you.
This is such a stupid statement and it shows how dumb you really are. Players win games, if you don’t have talented kids no coach is gonna be able to scheme around that.
Crossed my mind too. But I was already mad that it was even 4th and 4.
They probably would have run some long developing play with one receiver 3 yards down field.
If you take a look at Ole Miss' coaching staff, you will see a lot of young coaches on the offense side, which is very similar to ISU. However, there is one huge difference...Lane Kiffen is the head coach, and he has nearly 20 years experience as a P5 head coach and P5 offensive assistant coach in various capacities. He can give direction to the young coaches. Ole Miss can pull off young coaches with limited experience because the head coach has the experience to keep the young coaches on the right track.
ISU just doesn't have that experience on the offense side, and it shows up week after week. The OL seems to be stuck at average level, receivers don't improve, disorganization in the play calling, slow adjustments, etc...all that "margins" stuff. Campbell doesn't have the P5 offensive experience, and neither does Manning. If the Head coach can't provide the experienced leadership, then the OC has to provide it.
Heacock, on the other hand, has over 30 years experience. ISU needs that experience guy for the offense.
Last edited:
I mean, they could run it.
But if basic pass blocking is hard, something more complicated likely isn't the answer.
I don't think it's that ridiculous to say that Iowa State has recently had some of the best players in program history on offense and those players have succeeded despite not always being put in great situations. How often have Montgomery and now Hall had to break tackles consistently in the backfield because the defense knows what's coming much of the time? People have been complaining a lot recently about never having open receivers, it wasn't as much of a problem when you could rely on Lazard or Butler to win just about every contested catch situation. As you said, you need great players to win, but that doesn't mean you can't make their job easier with schemes, play design, and offensive philosophy.
When your defense is always on the field because your offense can’t do anything, to me that falls on the offense.
31 points in the first half isn’t because the defense was too tired. They were getting gashed from the first snap of the game.
Remember hearing about "complimentary football" especially early in the year when the offense was doing nothing? It's always felt like a hand wavy way to say the defense needs to do most of the heavy lifting.
If the offense is remotely successful in the first half against what has been a terrible defense all year, the game is still within reach in the second half. The defense was bad. But the offense was too.
Our OL is just not good. I am not smart enough to judge talent vs. coaching, but I think talent is the bigger problem. Numerous knowledgeable people have said we are starting 5 interior linemen. Like Montgomery before him, Breece often has no holes to run through, thank god he can make people miss or bounce it out. Purdy spends many games evading the rush. Not sure play calling will solve this problem. Need guys with quicker feet.
If the defense was remotely successful in the first half against a freshman quarterback making his first start, the game is still within reach in the second half.
Go back and read what I’ve said. I’ve never claimed the offense was great. I just get tired of Heacock getting a pass every game while Manning gets blasted every game. The offense scored 38 points. That should be enough to win. This loss is on the defense.
There were a few times where Hall was open in the flat with green in front of him and Brock looked at him and checked off and ended up trying to force the pass to another receiver.
We got Brock Purdy’d by that kid. We didn’t have much film on him and it took a half to adjust. The problem is our offense didn’t play well either in the first half to keep pace.
I’m as upset as the next guy about yesterday but we are gonna miss these kids badly. They should be looked upon as fondly and Ejim, Georges, Monte and Naz.
I’m as upset as the next guy about yesterday but we are gonna miss these kids badly. They should be looked upon as fondly and Ejim, Georges, Monte and Naz.
I've said it multiple times as have other people, 38 is not really anything to write home about against Tech. Heacock was bad yesterday. He needs to be more willing to bring pressure early in games, especially when you're playing a QB in his first start. Can't just let him sit back and get in rhythm, I agree with you there.
Manning just has had more problems for longer and the problems keep showing up. Heacock absolutely has to clean up the pass defense on the back end or find a way to generate more pressure. I'd love it if he were more aggressive and the Cyclones didn't give so much cushion on third downs, letting teams pick them up far too often when the QB is willing to take what we give them.
I missed most of the 2nd half but followed the score...was good to see ISU get within 31-28.
Then Tech went like 75 yards in 6 plays to go up 38-28 and in a way that was the sign that ISU wasn't going to win.
doesn't when those 38 points are scored matter? Do it earlier and it changes the type of game it is. Its not the total amount of points that matter, it is how and when you are scoring them and how that impacts the flow of the game in your favor that matters. For example what if we had 21 at half? That probably means Tech has less points because our offense put together a drive and kept Tech off of the field preventing them from scoring, plus our D got some time off. Plus that drive may have wrestled momentum and maybe tired out Tech a little. It is how the game unfolds that tells the story. To make a blanket statement we scored 38, we should have won does not tell the whole story.
