Well our D seemed to be on the field a lot more than Iowa's D (thanks to our O). Not surprising that we would give up so much yardage.
To the Hawks...
- Thread starter SpokaneCY
- Start date
Well our D seemed to be on the field a lot more than Iowa's D (thanks to our O). Not surprising that we would give up so much yardage.
If it makes you feel better, Iowa is probably the 4th toughest on the schedule. Behind Baylor, TCU, and ou, but above the rest.
Big 12 is weak this year.
demoncore1031
Well-Known Member
Don't really need luck with such an easy schedule. Iowa won't play a ranked team this whole season.
I thought Iowa played well. Both lines looked good...I thought their Oline was supposed to be a weakness, and they had a push often on ISU's Dline overall. Beathard (SP?) was poised and made some nice throws. Their running backs and receivers were solid--when the ball went to them late, they made plays. I'd be curious to see if Vandenberg (SP, and is he a former Iowa player's relative? Sounds familiar) makes the same kind of plays throughout the season.
Just a more fundamentally sound team than ISU...which is not much different than a lot of other teams ISU plays...which is a big issue.
The problem with this is that ISU would probably still be about .500 with the same type of schedule.
They're really just not very good.
This is the first time I've ever agreed with one of your posts. Who are you and what have you done with BodeClone?
I asked my brother the same thing. It is apparently a different spelling than the name of their QB from a few years ago.
Agree on the lines issue. I thought their OL was supposed to suck. They were fairly solid I thought. Got a lot of push.
The WR is spelled Vandeberg, the old QB was Vandenberg. The WR doesn't have the second N. Vandeberg (the WR) was solid last year, not great He generally catches what's thrown his way. Isn't a burner, but isn't just a possession guy either (as the 48-yarder would say). Iowa State was shading their coverages to Smith (#4) so Vandeberg spent most of his time getting open against safeties and your 3rd or 4th CB.
Still much too early to know whether this Iowa team is good or if we just saw two mediocre teams play. If Ott and Daniels are out for a long period of time, that's trouble for Iowa. Hope the d-tackle for you all is back soon. He is a good player.
I think iowa is one of the better teams we play this year. The best of our first 5 opponents and better than Texas, KSU, and west Virginia.
I'm in the camp that the 4th and inches was crucial to the outcome of the game. We had the momentum. We pick that up and we had a chance to go up 13-3 or better yet 17 to 3. Plus, since everything is a cause set in motion, us giving the ball back led to Tucker getting hurt. Other wise he wouldn't have been in the time and place for it to happen. We didn't seize the moment with that call, we didn't play to win. And even though there may have been "plenty" other chances to somehow pull the game out, not going for it on 4th inches change the momentum and complexion of the game. We had them on their heels and should have gone for the jugular. I loved Dan McCarney, but yesterday was conservative McCarney ball all the way.
Coaching mostly lost this game, and poor QB play. Line couldn't block in the second half either. Team just fizzled out. Defense played well enough to win though. Cotton needs to figure out his spacing. Vandeberg crushed him yesterday.
ps
4th and 1 play was miniscule compared to the lack of offensive diversity and understanding of what Iowa was doing to us in the second half.
ps
4th and 1 play was miniscule compared to the lack of offensive diversity and understanding of what Iowa was doing to us in the second half.
I know some hawkeye fans that can't win gracefully at all. I got several text messages gloating about it and trying to rub it in. Not a big deal really, but the thing is, if I were to take time after we beat them and text them in the same manner they would be furious, they couldn't take it all.
The JC players on your D really improved it from the last several years. More size, quickness and strength. If you get a few JC players of that type every year you will have a very good D from now on. The only problem is some JC players are only eligible for one year- there is a reason they were in JC in the first place. Good luck the rest of the year.
Fox Sports coverage kept saying (& showing) Vandenberg, and we thought he might be related to James. Then saw him interviewed by a local news team after the game, and the caption read VandeBerg.