|
Post by emptybackfield on Jan 6, 2010 11:58:51 GMT -6
I'm just a young pup learning here and have a couple questions for you veterans.
1) Iowa played their OLBs basically in 90s. Did they do this to take away the arc block angle of the wing and to keep the QB from getting to the edge after the pull on ISV? 2) Wasn't there something GT could've done to combat this? I know they ran midline a lot but were unsuccessful. It seems like like they could've ran midline follow with the wing leading up to the OLB and had great angles and numbers.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 6, 2010 12:12:44 GMT -6
I don't remember seeing GT running follow once last night.
Sitting in the double-wing spread formation all night didn't help much in forcing the defense to outflank it, confuse it, or break it.
I.E. Defense does THIS - what you going to do to break/stress it?
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 6, 2010 12:13:25 GMT -6
I'm just a young pup learning here and have a couple questions for you veterans. 1) Iowa played their OLBs basically in 90s. Did they do this to take away the arc block angle of the wing and to keep the QB from getting to the edge after the pull on ISV? 2) Wasn't there something GT could've done to combat this? I know they ran midline a lot but were unsuccessful. It seems like like they could've ran midline follow with the wing leading up to the OLB and had great angles and numbers. 1. Yes, they did and once they realized that they could take away the midline with just the Mike LB in the middle of the field, they get doing so. Plus, the wings were just outmatched by the OLBs; they couldn't get them reached and they couldn't get them cut to the ground. 2. They ran midline just the way you described, but again, the wings didn't have a chance against the the LBs, period. Iowa was generally playing their 3 tech to field as well making it tough to run ISV to space. They'd run various plays into the boundary and then use midline to get back to the middle of the field. Bottom line, the veer/midline option is about very precise execution, when you're out executed, you don't get much done. What really hurt them was the fact that Iowa took the rocket sweep away so well. And not just because of alignment; you use the rocket sweep to stretch the DEs and Clayborn couldn't be reached. When you think about it, their best play was speed option to Dwyer; because they were reading Clayborn and taking him out of the play. They kept doing it, but the penalties really hurt them. Also, when you get penalties on 2nd and medium, you're screwed as an option team. 3rd and long is a death-knell to option teams. They had some pretty good drives going and were doing their thing and then they'd do something stupid and it would end it.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jan 6, 2010 12:15:43 GMT -6
GT lost because Nesbitt had a horrible game (and because Iowa played very solid defense, especially on the DL).
The first half Nesbitt was forcing the keep, especially on Midline. There were several times (atleast 3 I can vividly remember) where he pulled it, but Dwyer had a solid 4 yard pickup (atleast) on the give. We are talking about 3rd and 2 instead of 3rd and 7.
The second half GT went with a lot more counter/speed/load options.
As others have said, he was absolutely panicked in the pocket (for good reason). They couldn't pass because the Iowa was domianting the LoS and Nesbitt was watching the rush.
Honestly, I felt like the bright lights got to GT, or atleast a few key players. They lost because of a lack of execution, especially from Nesbitt. They weren't getting Iowa down with the cut blocks, they wern't getting movement on the 1-tech (IV) or 5 tech (Midline). Iowa got off blocks and tackled.
But blaming the system for this loss is akin to saying the pro-style offense can't work because Tony Romo chokes in the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by Coach JR on Jan 6, 2010 12:17:39 GMT -6
I'm not sure/sold on the time thing. Parker is going to do what he does and sit.........he doesn't "scheme" the hell out of any team they play. I don't think that the extra time was important as far as scheme. I think that the extra practice time is a big help for getting players to play assignment defense at full speed. Great post!
|
|
|
Post by knight9299 on Jan 6, 2010 12:18:45 GMT -6
When you think about it, their best play was speed option to Dwyer; because they were reading Clayborn and taking him out of the play. They kept doing it, but the penalties really hurt them. Or they just didn't run his direction. But what puzzled me the most about GT was what Brophy said, other than trips, they never really tried to flank Iowa. In the first half they really never had a drive go long enough to really throw stuff at the wall to see what stuck. But to not try some end over stuff against a defense that sits in zone coverage 90% of the time left me scratching my head.
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Jan 6, 2010 12:37:06 GMT -6
Great posts guys,
It is also key to remember that this game was close until that last TD broke it open to 10. GT didn't play well, period.
Penalties killed them. A ball control team cannot fumble and they cannot get themselves in penalty situations. Ex. GT had a holding call on a Rocket Sweep to the left that they couldn't overcome.
PJ said that their problem was execution and that was plain to see. It is also not fair to expect an option QB to be a pocket passer when the defense knows you are not running the ball well.
OJW
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Jan 6, 2010 12:38:25 GMT -6
I loved how the announcers kept saying , just one big run and this game is close, then Iowa broke one off!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 6, 2010 12:44:41 GMT -6
It is also key to remember that this game was close until that last TD broke it open to 10. I disagree. How was it 'close', though? GT offense was fighting to tread water in the first half, and if not for their 2nd half opener really didn't have much to pat themselves on the back for. Outside of stretch and stretch-boot, there really isn't much that the Iowa offense is proficient at (been that way for years)
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Jan 6, 2010 12:57:08 GMT -6
how was it close?
it was 17-14 when GT had the ball and threw the pick on FIRST DOWN ....I think.
then, how stupid was it for that rb to run backward into his own endzone and nearly get tackled for a safety after they stopped the fake fg?
the gt players played terrible in the last 8 or 9 minutes in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 6, 2010 13:20:49 GMT -6
Score was close...........because the GT defense scored. The GT offense couldn't even get a 1st down (which is NO slight on the triple-option flexbone).
Thats like saying "good fundamental weight lifting" when you can't get the weight off the rack, let alone do a rep.
|
|
|
Post by Coach JR on Jan 6, 2010 13:46:14 GMT -6
Score was close...........because the GT defense scored. The GT offense couldn't even get a 1st down (which is NO slight on the triple-option flexbone). Thats like saying " good fundamental weight lifting" when you can't get the weight off the rack, let alone do a rep. Going to have to agree with Brophy...GT might have kept it a 1 possession game for most of the game, but they were really never a threat other than the threat of getting another break, or big play on def. or special teams, all of which count of course, but their offense just never even got cranked up, much less rolling.
|
|
|
Post by tripleoption61 on Jan 6, 2010 13:53:45 GMT -6
The rules committee meeting should be interesting this year. I've heard that there will be a lot of sentiment to close some loopholes in chop and crack blocking rules. What are they wanting to change?
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jan 6, 2010 13:56:58 GMT -6
The rules committee meeting should be interesting this year. I've heard that there will be a lot of sentiment to close some loopholes in chop and crack blocking rules. What are they wanting to change? Nothing radical. Just looking at some grey areas in how chop (not cut) blocking and illegal crackbacks are defined.
|
|
hwkfn1
Junior Member
Posts: 258
|
Post by hwkfn1 on Jan 6, 2010 14:21:14 GMT -6
The reason why the game was close was because Iowa kept Tech in the game. The pick 6, dropping a third down pass inside the 10 (before the field goal), receiver falling down in the end zone before the fake field goal, several delay of game penalties (one on 3rd and 2), etc. If Iowa does only half of those mistakes, they win by three scores at least...My point is to say that both teams made mistakes. The more dominant team won the game despite the close score.
|
|
|
Post by hlb2 on Jan 6, 2010 15:07:26 GMT -6
I disagree with brophy's point. They started out running ISV with the slot arcing and WR cracking and the DE's were giving "cloudy reads" (plus Nesbitt still struggles some at the reads). So they went and ran their "Cowboy" scheme that puts the FB on the HOK, and that did not work whatsoever, that 1 DE tossed Dwyer away like he was a rag doll. Also, if you look, they went speed option out of trips in the 2nd 1/2 because ISV was not getting Dwyer the ball, and since he's their best runner, that's the route they went to get him the football.
The part I do agree with, was the fact their seemed to be little counter option or trap. These 2 have been a big part of thier run game this season (way more than he did when at Navy) and I don't think they ran trap at all, and only ran counter option 5 times (season avg. is around 15 times or so). I thought that was very odd, but then they may have felt they couldn't block those DE's well enough to run counter option, I don't know.
To me, the 2 keys that hurt them were: 1) Inability to throw the football down the field. I know this is option football, but PJ has been throwing the ball a lot more than in previous years. The main reason for this, lack of pass protection. Can't throw it lying on your back, and when Iowa can only rush 4 and get pressure, you are going to have a long day throwing the football. 2) Inabilty to consistently stop the run on defense. Period, the number 1 killer of their gameplan last night in my opinion. IMO, it is better to be able to stop the run than to be able to run, and PJ did get some run game going, but the never did really shut down Iowa's run game which led to playaction and 9 guys around the line of scrimmage...yada yada yada.
Anyhow, I do feel the number of practice days allowed vs. the option is 1 thing that saved Iowa, and is 1 thing that made UGA look so bad last year when they played them. This is not an offense you can prepare for in a week. That is why I run it. The benefits are unbeleivable because my defense gets to work against it daily, so the see it all year. It's a win-win to me, but hey, what do I know???
|
|
|
Post by tbelding on Jan 6, 2010 19:02:13 GMT -6
Tech killed 4 or 5 of their drives with penalties. Iowa never stopped the run in the second half.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 6, 2010 19:13:37 GMT -6
I disagree with brophy's point. They started out running ISV with the slot arcing and WR cracking and the DE's were giving "cloudy reads" (plus Nesbitt still struggles some at the reads). So they went and ran their "Cowboy" scheme that puts the FB on the HOK, and that did not work whatsoever, that 1 DE tossed Dwyer away like he was a rag doll. Also, if you look, they went speed option out of trips in the 2nd 1/2 because ISV was not getting Dwyer the ball, and since he's their best runner, that's the route they went to get him the football. [glow=red,2,300] The part I do agree with, was the fact their seemed to be little counter option or trap. These 2 have been a big part of thier run game this season (way more than he did when at Navy) and I don't think they ran trap at all, and only ran counter option 5 times (season avg. is around 15 times or so). I thought that was very odd, but then they may have felt they couldn't block those DE's well enough to run counter option, I don't know. [/glow] To me, the 2 keys that hurt them were: 1) Inability to throw the football down the field. I know this is option football, but PJ has been throwing the ball a lot more than in previous years. The main reason for this, lack of pass protection. Can't throw it lying on your back, and when Iowa can only rush 4 and get pressure, you are going to have a long day throwing the football. 2) Inabilty to consistently stop the run on defense. Period, the number 1 killer of their gameplan last night in my opinion. IMO, it is better to be able to stop the run than to be able to run, and PJ did get some run game going, but the never did really shut down Iowa's run game which led to playaction and 9 guys around the line of scrimmage...yada yada yada. Anyhow, I do feel the number of practice days allowed vs. the option is 1 thing that saved Iowa, and is 1 thing that made UGA look so bad last year when they played them. This is not an offense you can prepare for in a week. That is why I run it. The benefits are unbeleivable because my defense gets to work against it daily, so the see it all year. It's a win-win to me, but hey, what do I know??? Each time they ran counter option, it was blown up, hard.. They dropped Nesbitt for a 5 yard loss on one of them.. The BSG just couldn't he a good log block on the DEs. They didn't run trap because the 3 tech was closing down on the FB on midline all game. So, basically, they were taking away trap as well. Also, Nesbitt walked into the game with just 300 fewer rushing yards than Dwyer. They involved Nesbitt in the running game almost as much as Dwyer this year. People always make the assumption that everything with an option offense starts with the FB, but the PJ's version of the offense involves the QB alot. Yeah, you'd like to be able to bang it between the tackles with ISV, but you don't give up on it if the DE is taking it away. It opens up the QB to make some big plays carrying the ball.. Assuming the rest of the friggin' offense does their job and blocks.
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Jan 6, 2010 23:23:05 GMT -6
Sorry Brophy, what I should have said was "The score was close..." But since that really is a good measurement, maybe it was close after all. OJW
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Jan 6, 2010 23:23:47 GMT -6
Gentlemen...
Its quite obvious, many of you have missed the true meaning of the GT v Iowa bowl game...
And it is exactly what I've been yelling from the rooftops since I've joined Hueys'...
1. The Big 10 is reestablishing itself as the premiere conference in the FBS! 2. Power football, Old school I formation is the new spread!
Tell me I'm lying!
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Jan 6, 2010 23:35:59 GMT -6
I think your right Khalfie the Big 10 was stronger this year than they've been. I also think that the ACC was down. The SEC was a little bit down too, I've heard some say that it wasn't a good year for QB's in the SEC. The Pac-10 seemed to be down the most, because we are used to USC being highly ranked I think.
We didn't get our usual Big 10/SEC challenge either. OJW
|
|
|
Post by charger109 on Jan 7, 2010 2:20:11 GMT -6
A month to prepare for a triple-option team is a ton of time.........GT had a few bright spots, but man they looked really bad from what I was expecting.
Do you think that their passing game will be expanded a little more? If they can do that and be effective throughout the season, then their bowl games could be better......
|
|
|
Post by baldingmullett on Jan 7, 2010 7:53:40 GMT -6
We are switching to more of anoption atack next year and I was disappointed in their performance, because I was hoping they would pull out all of the stops and they stayed pretty base all night.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Jan 7, 2010 8:25:36 GMT -6
and still could have won the game.
|
|
|
Post by knighter on Jan 7, 2010 8:40:35 GMT -6
As a Hawk fan I felt this game was never in doubt after GT failed to score on Iowa's first turnover. Iowa's front 7 defensively dominated the game with very little help needed from the secondary. Anyone who "thought" the game was ever in jeopardy is not truly a Iowa fan, as Iowa fans know Norm Parker will not give up many points. Iowa's offense was allowed to play conservative basically all night (Ferentz and Tressel are very much alike). Defense wins championships and if you look at what Hawkeye football has been all about since Norm Parker joined this staff you understand that THAT is the philosophy at Iowa. Had Iowa chosen to open up the playbook a little on offense, and had we not had several dropped passes this game could have very easily turned into a blowout.
Scary, Iowa has d-a-m-n near everyone back next year. Bulaga declared fro the draft, we lose our 2 LB's, but we get one of our best defensive backs back from injury (Bernstine) and we get 2 good RB's back (not that true freshman Wegher, and redshirt freshman Robinson did a bad job at all). We have OL in waiting to take over for Bulaga.
Iowa has a legit shot to make a run at a national title next fall...
Ferentz and his staff have made a habit out of doing the most with a whole heckuva lot less than any other "major" national power in the nation. The way our defense played I believe we could have beaten anyone in the nation this bowl season.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 7, 2010 9:51:08 GMT -6
Spoken like a true fan
|
|
|
Post by knighter on Jan 7, 2010 10:00:12 GMT -6
and someone who knows the Iowa program very well having worked camps for them for the last 8 years. even the coaching staff at Iowa felt we were a year away from having one of the best teams we have ever had at Iowa. I know a little about the game Brophy...lol, a little.
|
|
|
Post by coachdawhip on Jan 7, 2010 10:33:41 GMT -6
knighter, I haven't posted on the since then as a Tech alum, I am sick to my stomach.
Now I have to listen to everyone say, if you have 30 days you can stop the triple option. I don't believe that, but.....
Iowa, just beat us up on the front line. That's our weak point congrads to Iowa.
I think we played better 2nd half and if our kicker could have hit a FG the game "could" have been different.
Anyway back in my hole, I'll be back on the board maybe this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 7, 2010 10:46:12 GMT -6
having worked camps for them for the last 8 years..... the coaching staff at Iowa felt we were a year away from having one of the best teams we have ever had at Iowa. I know a little about the game. well, I guess that qualifies all the Super Fan claims made in your post, then You think this years team is close to the 2004 team or the 1985 team? I agree the game really never came out of Iowa's control, but Iowa's defense didn't do anything different than they've done all year (and every other season) which is line up in 2-high and just knock the {censored} out of folks playing good fundamental technique. I am not sure how an unbiased eye would think Iowa would contend with any of the top 5 FCS teams this season. Now I have to listen to everyone say, if you have 30 days you can stop the triple option. I don't believe that, but..... neither do I. Its an unquantifiable argument. How many days is 'enough'? In addition, it dismisses exactly WHAT the Iowa defense is (which usually never gets premiere athletes) - just basic fundamental defense, that never deviates
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 7, 2010 10:46:34 GMT -6
.
|
|