Matt and Miller getting pretty heated

[Jonecy]

If we just switched both team's performances on Saturday I would say the same thing. Any fan that wouldn't well, they need to take off the Cardinal/Gold glasses and step away from the Kool-Aid. Turnovers like that are a killer, and not a sign of a strong offense.

I aree with this for the most part and I also agree that Iowa did not dominate us in the trenches as would be percieved by a final score of 35-3. We were able to run the ball on them (AA & ARob both averaged over 5 yds/carry), there were no QB sacks and we had receivers open that weren't thrown to.....Arnaud just made very poor decisions and threw into double & even triple coverage all day long.

With that said, I would like to say how impressed I was with Iowa's passing attack and KOK's offensive gameplan. Who honestly thought Iowa would come out passing like they did? I know the hawk fans at the game next to me sure weren't planning on that and I doubt ISU's defense was either. My Dad had his headset on right next to me in the game and said at one point in the 1st half that Iowa had passed around 15 out of 20 offensive plays thus far....I would have put $1,000 up against those stats before the game started.

I was also very impressed with Brandon Wegher and I think he'll be a stud for Iowa over the next 4 years.

Congrats to the Hawks for the win - they were the better team on Saturday and definitely showed more discipline/experience.

 

[hippiehawk]

One thing I would point out is that time of possession was firmly in our favor but not incredibly lopsided. It ended up at 33 1/2 (Iowa) to 26 1/2 (ISU).

ISU started to give up sizable chunks on the ground and through the air starting with about six minutes left in the third quarter, after Arnaud throws his fourth pick. At that point, ISU's defense hadn't even been on the field that long. Even after the fourth quarter, which had to be very lopsided in Iowa's favor possession-wise, Iowa only ended up with three and a half minutes better than even.

The point being that even in a closer game, ISU's defense was going to get tired and start giving up big chunks of yardage at some point in the second half. If Iowa needed to play ball control to hold on to a one-touchdown lead in the fourth quarter, it's very likely they were going to be able to do that.

Either that, or your defense started to quit at 21-3, but I would hope for your team's sake that's not the case.

 

[Sportstalkmatt]

Ask Paul Rhoads...he said yesterday that the spirit of the defense was broken at 21-3. Which I agree with

 

[CycoCyclone]

Ask Paul Rhoads...he said yesterday that the spirit of the defense was broken at 21-3. Which I agree with

This.

Defense was holding strong, waiting for SOME offense at 14-3....and then it didn't happen.:mask:

 

[rdubbs]

Matt, the real problem alot of people have with you (Clone and Hawk fans) is you don't seem to know how to give anyone credit. You say Iowa's rushing yards don't count (because the majority were in the 2nd half) You call Iowa a bad football team who was handed turnovers (basically saying Iowa did nothing to cause them) You said the 2nd half didn't matter (go back to the tape Matt, you said those exact lines) You said the Big Ten sucks (after two weeks????) Iowa won the game 35-3, call it what you want but it was an Iowa team who won the game, ISU will get better and we'll see where Iowa goes, but give a little credit would ya? Remember without the 2nd half your beloved Patriots would have gone down in flames last night.

 

[hippiehawk]

Ask Paul Rhoads...he said yesterday that the spirit of the defense was broken at 21-3. Which I agree with

You're saying they quit at 21-3 with 18 minutes left? You might be right, but in any case that would really bother me if I were an ISU backer.

Not sure I buy it, though. Iowa was starting to run the ball quite a bit better starting on their first drive of the second half (at 14-3).

Maybe it was a mixture of fatigue and giving up, I don't know. You'd like to think the team wouldn't quit at any point during a rivalry game, though.

 

[DaddyMac]

One thing I would point out is that time of possession was firmly in our favor but not incredibly lopsided. It ended up at 33 1/2 (Iowa) to 26 1/2 (ISU).

ISU started to give up sizable chunks on the ground and through the air starting with about six minutes left in the third quarter, after Arnaud throws his fourth pick. At that point, ISU's defense hadn't even been on the field that long. Even after the fourth quarter, which had to be very lopsided in Iowa's favor possession-wise, Iowa only ended up with three and a half minutes better than even.

The point being that even in a closer game, ISU's defense was going to get tired and start giving up big chunks of yardage at some point in the second half. If Iowa needed to play ball control to hold on to a one-touchdown lead in the fourth quarter, it's very likely they were going to be able to do that.

Either that, or your defense started to quit at 21-3, but I would hope for your team's sake that's not the case.

Yes - but that's including a first quarter where ISU dominated the TOP almost 10 minutes to 5. After that, iowa held the ball near continually - including an almost 11 to 4 in the 2nd. With lopsided TOP in the 3rd and 4th as well. It ended up nearly 2:1 in the final 3 quarters.

So I dont' think it's really fair to say "in a closer game" the D was going to get tired. In a closer game - either the D has stops (which I don't think many of us expected with regularity), OR the O holds the ball (increased TOP keeping the D off the field and fresher) and scores. Which is what most of us figured would have to happen.

Fact is, iowa stopped ISU a few times, more often ISU handed the ball right back (either though ISU mistake or iowa good play, or both).

Again, my take on the game is pretty simple. ISU's defense had to contend with both iowa's offense, as well as our own. iowa's D effectively had the day off and looked great doing it. :wink:

 

[3TrueFans]

You're saying they quit at 21-3 with 18 minutes left? You might be right, but in any case that would really bother me if I were an ISU backer.

Not sure I buy it, though. Iowa was starting to run the ball quite a bit better starting on their first drive of the second half (at 14-3).

Maybe it was a mixture of fatigue and giving up, I don't know. You'd like to think the team wouldn't quit at any point during a rivalry game, though.

Probably not quit so much as completely demoralized. When you force 2 turnovers and play generally good defense in the first half and your offense does nothing but give it back 6 times it'd be tough to get fired up for the last quarter and a half.

 

[weR138]

Probably not quit so much as completely demoralized. When you force 2 turnovers and play generally good defense in the first half and your offense does nothing but give it back 6 times it'd be tough to get fired up for the last quarter and a half.[/QUOTE]

Not for HippieHawk. He'd be praying for ten turnovers so he wouldn't have to leave the field on defense.

HippieHawk's so tough; he'd eat the boogers out of a dead man's nose!

 

[hippiehawk]

Yes - but that's including a first quarter where ISU dominated the TOP almost 10 minutes to 5. After that, iowa held the ball near continually - including an almost 11 to 4 in the 2nd. With lopsided TOP in the 3rd and 4th as well. It ended up nearly 2:1 in the final 3 quarters.

There are some good points in your post. That being said, we agree that in the middle of the third quarter, TOP wasn't lopsided at all. Coming out of a half where TOP was roughly even and having gotten halftime to rest, a defense should not be that tired at that point in the game.

Knowing now what Rhoads said, I agree there's a good chance that the defense "lost spirit." That the Cyclone D would decide at 21-3, with eighteen minutes left, that the game was over and that they didn't care if Iowa ran up and down the field on them (on their home field, no less) would bother me a lot if the teams' positions were switched.

Not trying to flame; just making an observation.

 

[Sportstalkmatt]

Matt, the real problem alot of people have with you (Clone and Hawk fans) is you don't seem to know how to give anyone credit. You say Iowa's rushing yards don't count (because the majority were in the 2nd half) You call Iowa a bad football team who was handed turnovers (basically saying Iowa did nothing to cause them) You said the 2nd half didn't matter (go back to the tape Matt, you said those exact lines) You said the Big Ten sucks (after two weeks????) Iowa won the game 35-3, call it what you want but it was an Iowa team who won the game, ISU will get better and we'll see where Iowa goes, but give a little credit would ya? Remember without the 2nd half your beloved Patriots would have gone down in flames last night.

Ok - I really don't want this to be a point that keeps getting brought up all season.

What I meant - Really - was that the 2nd half for IOWA didn't matter because of the 3rd turnover to start the half. IOWA ST's defense was just emotionally broken at that point and then the running game got going. Iowa didn't run the ball well when they tried to run against ISU in the first half...they had 1 run for over 5 yards in the 1st half (I've got the pxp in front of me). Now you might say that they only ran the ball 12 times and the game plan was to throw...but they didn't really do that well either - see 2 picks. In the 3rd quarter, Iowa had 1 run of 17 yards and 1 for 14 yards but still...most of the runs were for under 5 yards. Now, you might say - hey, Iowa will 4.5 yards per clip per game - ok but I didn't see the consistency that will be needed for them to win games against good defenses.

ISU Down 28-3...that's when Wegher went to work on the defense...14, 11, 17, 5, 3, 10, 6 yard runs....66 yards of his 101 came on 1 drive in the 4th quarter....again - up 28-3. That's why I'm not jumping up and down at Iowa's running game in THE 2nd HALF.

I'm not discounting the entire half of football for the entire sport. Just my eval. of Iowa's game vs. Iowa St. thx

 

[Spam]

There are some good points in your post. That being said, we agree that in the middle of the third quarter, TOP wasn't lopsided at all. Coming out of a half where TOP was roughly even and having gotten halftime to rest, a defense should not be that tired at that point in the game.

Knowing now what Rhoads said, I agree there's a good chance that the defense "lost spirit." That the Cyclone D would decide at 21-3, with eighteen minutes left, that the game was over and that they didn't care if Iowa ran up and down the field on them (on their home field, no less) would bother me a lot if the teams' positions were switched.

Not trying to flame; just making an observation.

This is indeed disturbing. Lot's of things for Rhoads to fix.

 

[DaddyMac]

There are some good points in your post. That being said, we agree that in the middle of the third quarter, TOP wasn't lopsided at all. Coming out of a half where TOP was roughly even and having gotten halftime to rest, a defense should not be that tired at that point in the game.

Knowing now what Rhoads said, I agree there's a good chance that the defense "lost spirit." That the Cyclone D would decide at 21-3, with eighteen minutes left, that the game was over and that they didn't care if Iowa ran up and down the field on them (on their home field, no less) would bother me a lot if the teams' positions were switched.

Not trying to flame; just making an observation.

No, the total TOP wasn't lopsided at half. But iowa certainly had the benefit of the most recent rest in the breakdown between the two teams. ISU was on the field for 11 minutes of the 2nd. So it could be said the hawk D had a 30 minute half time. ISU only the 15 or 20 (whichever it was). That's a little weak sauce, I realize. But it is a little indicative of how little help the ISU D got from the O. And it's not like the iowa O took to ISU. The ISU O had FOUR possessions in the 2nd, and could only scrape together 4 minutes of possession? And despite that 11+ minutes of possession, the ISU D only gave up the 7 pts and had us still in the game.

Save the long pass to Stross - the yardage was pretty even in the 3rd. Which had two ISU possessions of another TO giving the hawks a fairly short field (iowa 42) and a 3 and out by the Clones.

Long and short of it, we knew what the ISU D was going into this game. I thought they played better than expected. iowa is well regarded for superior Oline play. This is nothing new. ISU's D, and the up front line, was suspect to begin with.

If there is anything for ISU fans to be concerned about - it sure as heck isn't on that side of the ball. At least no more than from last Friday.

Edit: Wow - ISU's possessions in the 2nd half (time, result, where iowa started the ensuing possession). This is enough to make anyone sick.

1:47 - Fumble (ISU 39)
3:27 - Int (iowa 42)
1:30 - Punt (iowa 35)
3:09 - Int (iowa 16) ** this would be the drive that may be bothersome, as it went for a TD
2:33 - Punt of 12 yds (iowa 40)

 

[3TrueFans]

This is indeed disturbing. Lot's of things for Rhoads to fix.

That's the difference between a winning and a losing program. We're not a winning program yet.

 

[rdubbs]

Ok - I really don't want this to be a point that keeps getting brought up all season.

What I meant - Really - was that the 2nd half for IOWA didn't matter because of the 3rd turnover to start the half. IOWA ST's defense was just emotionally broken at that point and then the running game got going. Iowa didn't run the ball well when they tried to run against ISU in the first half...they had 1 run for over 5 yards in the 1st half (I've got the pxp in front of me). Now you might say that they only ran the ball 12 times and the game plan was to throw...but they didn't really do that well either - see 2 picks. In the 3rd quarter, Iowa had 1 run of 17 yards and 1 for 14 yards but still...most of the runs were for under 5 yards. Now, you might say - hey, Iowa will 4.5 yards per clip per game - ok but I didn't see the consistency that will be needed for them to win games against good defenses.

ISU Down 28-3...that's when Wegher went to work on the defense...14, 11, 17, 5, 3, 10, 6 yard runs....66 yards of his 101 came on 1 drive in the 4th quarter....again - up 28-3. That's why I'm not jumping up and down at Iowa's running game in THE 2nd HALF.

I'm not discounting the entire half of football for the entire sport. Just my eval. of Iowa's game vs. Iowa St. thx

Matt, the 2nd half stats count, whether they were against a pumped up or deflated defense THAT isn't Iowa's fault how ISU played, what was Iowa's job was to capitalize on the mistakes and they did. You continue to hold onto the thought that how Iowa played was directly because Iowa State gave up and that my friend, isn't the way to breakdown a game. You have come across as arrogant, bullheaded and frankly not very intelligent when it comes to breaking down a game. If this is how you plan on continuing your career, I wouldn't be buying a house anytime soon in Iowa.

 

[Sportstalkmatt]

We can agree to disagree...you see it as Iowa running well....I see it as a team beating up a deflated team. Fine...we'll see how Iowa runs the ball in the coming weeks and how they play against the quality teams in the Big 10 (how many there are is debateable).

Let's have me worry about my future....I will be just fine in this field - always have been.

 

[rdubbs]

When you make outrageous accusations as you did yesterday I can't imagine a GM would be real excited to keep you on the payroll, guess we'll see in the coming weeks won't we?

 

[CyPride]

We can agree to disagree...you see it as Iowa running well....I see it as a team beating up a deflated team. Fine...we'll see how Iowa runs the ball in the coming weeks and how they play against the quality teams in the Big 10 (how many there are is debateable).

Let's have me worry about my future....I will be just fine in this field - always have been.

that could be said about our conference too - both N and S. Debatable quality.

 

[Frak]

When you make outrageous accusations as you did yesterday I can't imagine a GM would be real excited to keep you on the payroll, guess we'll see in the coming weeks won't we?

Just because you think they are outrageous doesn't mean everyone else agrees.

 

[GeronimusClone]

We can agree to disagree...you see it as Iowa running well....I see it as a team beating up a deflated team. Fine...we'll see how Iowa runs the ball in the coming weeks and how they play against the quality teams in the Big 10 (how many there are is debateable).

Let's have me worry about my future....I will be just fine in this field - always have been.

Matt you got to stop with the comedy...you just said quality and Big Ten in the same sentence... you're killing me.