HawkeyeGameFilm: Spring Defense Analysis

[Golfer]

Which points are you referring to?

In a broad sense, and I don't want to speak for him, so this is my interpretation, he is basically saying why should I take everything this expert says as gospel?

[deanvogs]

If I had my druthers,I would prefer a strong d-line over a strong secondary,but as we all saw in 2010, our strong d-line was not able to hold the fort with our lb corp devastated by injuries to 4 of our top 5 lbs.

My point is that the defense is really only as strong as the weakest link,wherever that might be. So, yes, our d-line is our weakest link,on paper,so it could really hurt us...but, with a strong lb corp and secondary,we can do things to help that d-line,like more blitzing. No unit operates in a vacumm,so having a strong back 7 is certainly better than no strength at all.

But,I guess if hog insists we can refer to them as strong middle three and strong back 4,if that makes him feel better.

I am hoping that with the new staff, we might do adapt to cover some of the D's weaknesses. I think a fair criticism of the old staff was a tendency to keep everything the same, no matter the talent level of the pieces in place. I'm hoping the new staff will be willing to say, that if we are stronger in the back 7 use creative ways to help get pressure for the front 4, or basically just lean on the back 7 more. It seems with the talk of blitzing more, we just might do more things to help mask our weaker areas. I am hopeful this holds true for the offense also.

[tm3308]

In a broad sense, and I don't want to speak for him, so this is my interpretation, he is basically saying why should I take everything this expert says as gospel?

You can easily say the same thing about Mel Kiper, Wes Bunting, or any other expert. The point that most people have been trying to make is that the anonymity doesn't really matter here. It's a message board, posters tend to like being anonymous. It's not wise to take any "expert's" opinion in sports as gospel, whether they have a name or not.

But Hogeye questioned HGF's credibility. The info is typically good, solid stuff. He's got a proven track record of that. He may be wrong from time to time, but so is any "credible" source.

Basically, his track record speaks much more loudly than his anonymity does, in terms of credibility. Deep Throat was plenty credible, and nobody knew who he was for over 30 years.

[Section136]

In a broad sense, and I don't want to speak for him, so this is my interpretation, he is basically saying why should I take everything this expert says as gospel?

If Jon is going to promote articles by HGF, I trust he is comfortable with his level of expertise. Nobody told you or hogeye to read his posts, let alone "take them as gospel".

[Golfer]

I said Hog made a good point. I indicated the point. Nothing more than that. I don't care if HGF wants anonymity.

HGF noticed some things at the scrimmage that I didn't. I appreciated it when he pointed this out. It is interesting that he talked about watching the line, and not the play. I did the same thing, and could have sworn I saw our D line in the O's backfield at least once.

I ask a lot of questions on here, and I learn.

I'm not directing this at either TM, or Sec 136, but it bothers when when posters jump on other posters here, for really no good reason.

Once again, I said "wow". Meaning I can't believe how this thing took off. And that Hog made a good point. Which I thought it was.

[hogeye]

But Hogeye questioned HGF's credibility.

I never once questioned his credibility.

[hogeye]

If Jon is going to promote articles by HGF, I trust he is comfortable with his level of expertise. Nobody told you or hogeye to read his posts, let alone "take them as gospel".

No one told you guys to pile on me and start making broad accusations. If you had left this thread to my last reply on the topic on page one we wouldn't be where we are now. Instead, you guys choose to question how dare I would care about any such fact as it's irrelevant because he provides good information.

People asked me questions, I gave them answers. No one said HGF wasn't qualified or that the information was bad, in fact I stated the opposite that it was generally good information.

The witch hunt is over...put the pitchforks away.

[AreWeThereYet]

I’m trying to remember how long Gamefilm has been at this, 2009 maybe as far back as 2008. He has been anonymous the entire time, which all of us respect. I think the anonymity allows him to share what he wants to with all the other fans without all the forum crazy’s getting in his business. His reputation has increased over time because his appraisals have stood up. He does best at following the starters, pointing out their strengths and weaknesses, and predicting how they might fit into the pros. The new guys coming up are a tougher call. No doubt that is because there isn’t much available on the new players unless you’re in the program.

[Casman]

Your analysis indicates that the Iowa football program is tired and lacks talent. This program is back-sliding every year under the current leadership. The program is losing ground to other Big-10 teams in recruiting, coaching, player development, and player retention.

Iowa used to on a par with Wisconsin, but while Wisconsin's players are starting to look more like the Green Bay Packers, Iowa's players are starting to look more like Iowa State and UNI.

Wisconsin goes shopping nationwide for top-notch, dual-threat quarterbacks. Iowa recruiters shop Iowa for lead-footed dropback quarterbacks that lack the ability to side-step a street sweeper on Burlington Ave. in Iowa City.

We need an infusion of new blood and enthusiasm into this program. You don't get that by hiring a 60-year old offensive coordinator, by elevating long-time coaches from within the program, or by hiring relatives. Wisconsin now has Iowa's old "swagger". Iowa's "swagger" has changed to "stagger". Sad, sad, sad.

[imported_Tmoney12]

Your analysis indicates that the Iowa football program is tired and lacks talent. This program is back-sliding every year under the current leadership. The program is losing ground to other Big-10 teams in recruiting, coaching, player development, and player retention. Iowa used to on a par with Wisconsin, but while Wisconsin's players are starting to look more like the Green Bay Packers, Iowa's players are starting to look more like Iowa State and UNI. Wisconsin goes shopping nationwide for top-notch, dual-threat quarterbacks. Iowa recruiters shop Iowa for lead-footed dropback quarterbacks that lack the ability to side-step a street sweeper on Burlington Ave. in Iowa City. We need an infusion of new blood and enthusiasm into this program. You don't get that by hiring a 60-year old offensive coordinator, by elevating long-time coaches from within the program, or by hiring relatives. Wisconsin now has Iowa's old "swagger". Iowa's "swagger" has changed to "stagger". Sad, sad, sad.

#butthurt

[CAARHawk]

I think that was his point, that team still won 7 games. Also, look at the future of the young guys. King and Kroul developed due to that season experience and made the hawks better in the long run. Not all is lost.

Did you watch the 2006 and 2007 seasons? King and Kroul got a lot better when they played next to Ballard and Clayborn. Then, when you swapped these two for Ballard and Klug (2 actual NFL starter caliber DL) the line became dominant.

But even though 2005-2007 was a weak line, I would take Iwebema and Mattison over any of these ends in a heartbeat.

I mean it really does look like 2005 in the middle with undersized DTs that might not be NFL regular caliber even if they get 4 full years to start, only without an Iwebema.

[bphawkeye]

OK, not really.

woody - love the avatar. also how do you post photos that can be seen without clicking a link here?

[bphawkeye]

i like games analysis - does not mean i agree 100% with any of it. But it is more truth information than i can get elsewhere. one of the main reasons i visit this site. he used to share over on TOS. anyways - thanks gamefilm.

[woodyk1]

woody - love the avatar. also how do you post photos that can be seen without clicking a link here?

On the reply, use the box that looks like a mountain range on the bottom (it should say Insert Image) and insert the link to the pic there. Good luck!