Ummm, it's not just our young guys that are struggling the to get set in time. It's the entire front line. But, I'm guessing if you were watching the games - you'd know that.
ISU @ Colorado Postgame
- Thread starter superdorf
- Start date
Completely disagree. It doesn't matter who calls the defensive plays against Mizzou because we don't have the horses to stop them. It wouldn't exactly look good if Chizik makes a bold move and takes control of the defense and then gives up 50 points at home on senior day. Teams make changes like that when they are desperate to make a bowl game or win a conference championship, not to get to 3-9.
So the veteran (Kurtis Taylor) is suppose to rush to the line and get set, while everyone else reads the offense and sorts out what's going on. Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
One guy being set > zero guys being set.
If you can't admit that it's ridiculous we still can't get set on defense, 10 games into the season, you're FB knowledge is slim to none.
anyone who thinks we played conservative on defense has never coached a day in his life. We brought pressure all day and got sizzled in the second half...complian about blown coverages if you want or lack of execution but not about us being too conservative on defense
As far as tha last play call... I would have qb sneaked it.
Because I loved Dan being the coach I lose all credibility... Wow... What the heck do you smoke?? I really want some of it..
Dan was the coach when I was going to college from 99-03. I went to my first bowl game when he was coaching and we won the game.
I can't simply dismiss what he did. Was it time for him to go??? Yes... I will say that any day of the week.
Am I satisfied with 1 or 2 wins?? Heck no, but even I can understand it takes more then 2 years to get things going... Last time I checked the jersey said IOWA STATE on the front and not Alabama... It even took Captian Kirk out to the East 3 years to rebuild. I seem to remember they were calling for his head after year 1 oh and again in year 2. That would of been a disaster if they would of fired him after only 2 years.
So while I'm still up in the air on Chizik, I will defend him for another year or so. I can't jump ship right now.
I guess its unrealistic to give a coach 4 years....
By the way... Cyclone_Power... How can you call yourself a fan? You already admitted you jumped ship. If you don't want to waste your time with ISU stuff then why are you on this message board and why are you being negative??? Just let it go....
Also, what in the history of ISU sports makes you think we should have instant results like your hoping. We have never sustained success over a period of time in any sport except for wrestling.
The sweet is never as sweet without the sour.....
4th quarter with about 8 minutes to go in the game, ISU was fairly conservative on defense. ISU did not play prevent but it was pretty close. The receivers had HUGE cushions and there were several easy catches about 4-5 yards from the LOS where they were able to gain several yards after catch as everyone was dropped back. Yes, the D was conservative late in the game with a double digit lead and lost. If the same playcalling from the third quarter was happening, ISU MAY have won, we will never know.
And maybe take off-season conditioning more seriously. Lots of our o-linemen have really put on the pounds (not in a good way) over the last year or two. Alvarez - good god. It looks like the only thing he's intense about is eating...
You must be referring to the Three Paunches when they did a closeup off the players.
No, you don't lose any credibility. The guy who says you do is the one with no credibility. I find the Mac-bashers funny in a ridiculous sort of way....whenever you point out 5 bowl games in 6 years and the only bowl wins in ISU history, they criticize that as settling for mediocrity. Maybe they're right -- things are much better now, huh? :biglaugh:
Maybe so but you still make my point....they marched right down the field on us the first two possessions of the second half we blow two coverages and they score easily....most coaches might think to themselves...we're getting carved up here maybe I will change tactics...bottom line is CU scored on us when we were being "agressive" and when we were playing "prevent". It doesn't really matter...we are not good at this time...
BTW, the posts about Bolt being out of a job by next weekend are preposterous.
Assistant coaches don't need to start getting sacrificed quite yet.
Assistant coaches don't need to start getting sacrificed quite yet.
I definitely think that our offensive play calling has gotten better. I thought MacFarland called a pretty good game yesterday, but that is being trumped by the call on the last play. That was absolutely awful. This was the best our offensive line looked all year. Line up and find out which team wants it more.
A lot of people seem to have a problem with the second half defense but not the first half defense. Something tells me that our defense wouldn't have looked as good in the first half if Cody Hawkins started.
A lot of people seem to have a problem with the second half defense but not the first half defense. Something tells me that our defense wouldn't have looked as good in the first half if Cody Hawkins started.
I agree. I was very nervous when the change was made. Twice this year I believe we win games if the coaches on the other sidelines had not made QB changes (Iowa, CU).
Gotta give credit to Coach Hawkins for making that change.
Built up the courage to rewatch the final play. Did anybody see an assistant coach talking to #88 Franklin after the play? He was talking to him and Franklin was acting like he was trying to explain himself. After rewatching the play, it looks like the entire o-line blocked the man to their right except Franklin. He blocked the man right in front of him and our rt tackle got tangled up in the mess.
Not sure if it would have made a difference overall, maybe AA wouldn't have had to pitch it as soon if Franklin would have picked up the right guy.
Thought it was good that the coach was talking to him about it rather than just blowing it off b/c it was the end of the game.
Not sure if it would have made a difference overall, maybe AA wouldn't have had to pitch it as soon if Franklin would have picked up the right guy.
Thought it was good that the coach was talking to him about it rather than just blowing it off b/c it was the end of the game.
The key is though, we got the play off AFTER the play clock had expired - it should not have mattered. I'm not sure if that's a reviewable play or not. If so and if we had scored - the TD would've been taken off the board.
(insert kick to the groin photo here)
You raise a valid point. Typically outside zone and speed option plays call for reach blocking techniques. If CF instead blocked man-on rather than reach, the play would be doomed to fail as it turned out to be. I believe that there was also some mention in one of the locker room interviews of a problem with getting the proper seal on the corner. A better seal on the edge might have allowed AA to force the issue rather than be forced to pitch early.