[Dragonhawk]

this game is a perfect example of why, 1 pass to McNutt and 1 to Davis when they have a clear hgt advantage and refuse to use them, why would any wide reciever want to be here

[hawkfarmer]

I kind of agree with you, but KF's system isn't truly inviting to great skill players IMO. It's not what Iowa is built on. Tough to say yeah I would go to Iowa when they play for OT against ISU.

[1hawkeye1]

My hopes were up when VDB threw that 1st beautiful ball to Keenan Davis. I thought, "Wow, we are gonna own these db's."
Then we ran 178 straight stretch runs with Coker. But at least KOK can say, "I told you we were gonna run the ball and we did. Take that ISU!"

[Montanahawk]

Yes, but JVB was flat bad for long stretches. I suspect that's why they focused more on the run. I'm not giving the coaching staff a pass here because they should have been more inventive in getting the receivers the ball, but JVB was probably the biggest reason we didn't win the game. Growing pains that I hope he'll quickly get over.

[1hawkeye1]

I agree with you, Montana. JVB looked shell shocked from the pressure ISU was putting on him.

[homerHAWKeye777]

Originally Posted by hawkfarmer

I kind of agree with you, but KF's system isn't truly inviting to great skill players IMO. It's not what Iowa is built on. Tough to say yeah I would go to Iowa when they play for OT against ISU.

I disagree. When the play-action is working ... then there are huge opportunities for WRs to get big-gainers.

Similarly, Iowa's O is great for RBs too.

The problem that we saw was that this was just Vandenberg's 2nd game of the season. A lot of our passing issues in the game were on Vandenberg. The coaches tried to adjust the playcalling in order to ease some of the pressure on him. I see there being no problem with that. I like seeing that the coaches are looking out for their players.

A loss is a loss ... and they all sting. But we'll just have to move on here ...

[BALDIES7980]

Originally Posted by homerHAWKeye777

I disagree. When the play-action is working ... then there are huge opportunities for WRs to get big-gainers.

Similarly, Iowa's O is great for RBs too.

The problem that we saw was that this was just Vandenberg's 2nd game of the season. A lot of our passing issues in the game were on Vandenberg. The coaches tried to adjust the playcalling in order to ease some of the pressure on him. I see there being no problem with that. I like seeing that the coaches are looking out for their players.

A loss is a loss ... and they all sting. But we'll just have to move on here ...

Homer what did you see done to ease the pressure!

[knighthawk13]

Originally Posted by BALDIES7980

Homer what did you see done to ease the pressure!

They kept the TE in to block. There were plenty of plays called for our WR's. Unfortunately, JVB didn't deliver. Hopefully the young fella learned something and will get better.

[hawkfan2679]

Originally Posted by homerHAWKeye777

The problem that we saw was that this was just Vandenberg's 2nd game of the season.

Maybe I'm slow, but you lost me here. Our problems were because it was the 2nd game of the season? Why didn't Jantz have the same issues? What am I missing?

[Dragonhawk]

Vandy is a 4th yr JR with 4 years in the system with some starting time, with Jantz he is a juco in his 1st year on campus, and just his 2nd game, if anyone should have had jitters it should have been Jantz

[homerHAWKeye777]

Originally Posted by hawkfan2679

Maybe I'm slow, but you lost me here. Our problems were because it was the 2nd game of the season? Why didn't Jantz have the same issues? What am I missing?

What I'm saying is that Vandenberg played like it was just the 2nd game of the year. Furthermore, he didn't get sacked much ... which is good. But he was also reacting like he was feeling a lot of phantom pressure too.

I chalk a lot of that up to him still be relatively inexperienced. After all, Vandenberg hasn't ever been a regular starter for us before. He has some prior starts ... but he also played EVEN WORSE when he saw that much pressure as a RS FR.

Vandenberg is good ... and I think that he's going to develop into a great QB for us. However, a good number of our woes on O were, in part, on him.

For being a 2nd game of the season ... Iowa's pass-pro wasn't that bad. The run blocking has to get better. Our OL has to get to the second level more.

[homerHAWKeye777]

Originally Posted by Dragonhawk

Vandy is a 4th yr JR with 4 years in the system with some starting time, with Jantz he is a juco in his 1st year on campus, and just his 2nd game, if anyone should have had jitters it should have been Jantz

Jantz is still an upperclassman. Furthermore, he's an out-of-stater ... thus, the rivalry game doesn't mean quite as much to him.

Anyhow, Jantz had his jitters ... and he then finally calmed down at the end of the UNI game. He's been playing that way since. All the credit goes to him for playing really well.

Vandenberg is an upperclassman too ... but this was also his first game starting in the rivalry game. I don't know how much his play was due to jitters ... but I will say that he was clearly feeling some phantom pressure out there ... and that caused his passes to be a bit off.

[SheagleHawk]

Why would Amara even consider Iowa at this point? Does anyone think we have a realistic shot at him now?

[homerHAWKeye777]

Originally Posted by SheagleHawk

Why would Amara even consider Iowa at this point? Does anyone think we have a realistic shot at him now?

Why would he not? Despite playing against a D that was pretty good in coverage ... Iowa still passed the ball as much as it could to our top options.

[hawkeye2188]

Originally Posted by 1hawkeye1

My hopes were up when VDB threw that 1st beautiful ball to Keenan Davis. I thought, "Wow, we are gonna own these db's."
Then we ran 178 straight stretch runs with Coker. But at least KOK can say, "I told you we were gonna run the ball and we did. Take that ISU!"

The exact thought I had. I even laughed at their DBs for trying to cover them.