Iowa: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Sorry, no extra section this week, as the game didn't really deserve one. It was neither an embarrassing loss nor a heartbreaker...it was just a loss. We were behind all day, and even though we almost made that 3rd TD at the end, we still would have faced the uncertainty of a 2 pt conversion just to put it into overtime. It was a puncher's duel, and we were the one who went home with the extra cut above the eye.
So what happened? We played away, and played like we were playing away. I figure if this were at home, the final score would have been reversed. But it wasn't, so here we are.
The Good:
1. Countess, Van Bergen and Martin. UFR will tell a more accurate story, but I felt these guys all played their hearts out, and were bright spots in an otherwise disappointing defensive performance.
2. Toussaint’s first half. He ran really well out of the I-form in the first half.
3. Gaining some street cred back towards the end of the game. Didn’t mean much, but it made a sour game taste a little less sour.
4. The offense, which wasn't great, really, but actually outgained Iowa. So I guess that's got to count for something.
The Bad:
1. The defense. We had our plays, but Iowa also had their way with us for most of the game. Ferentz' ultra-conservative MANBALL approach to offensive football partially papered over the fact that this was, in my opinion at least, our worst defensive performance of the year.
2. Denard’s running. I’m loathe to blame him for this, and I suspect some combination of poor blocking and a still-unknown injury are to blame. But he’s not turning on the jets like he used to, and not pivoting like he used to. Could be a psychological issue too—he does seem to be unusually “in” or “out of” the zone.
3. The Devin interludes. More evidence that this worked against Minnesota, but is of limited usefulness otherwise. Again, all the usual disclaimers apply--good kid, going to be a good QB, nice to see him get some reps, etc.--but I'm not seeing great results here. He had a whopping 2 yards total on his 5 carries and 1 pass. Why are we still doing this again?
4. Road errors. The fumble, the drops, etc. Those go the other way, and it's a different ballgame.
The Ugly:
1. Not punching it in from the goalline in 4 tries. No way to sugar coat that.
November 5th, 2011 at 7:51 PM ^
I think our defense as a whole played pretty darn well after the first quarter given how much they played. I think J.T. Floyd will be a major goat in the UFR.
Punching it in from the goal line is a little hard when interference is legal. It's even harder when you DO punch it in and it doesn't count somehow.
November 5th, 2011 at 7:55 PM ^
Add to your "ugly list" the following please:
1. A forced throw into heavy traffic near the end of the first half that resulted in a turnover instead of sure points.
2. Borges's playcalling in general, not just the momentum destroying use of Devon
3. The officiating.
November 5th, 2011 at 9:27 PM ^
Borges' playcalling in the second quarter confused me.
Fitz was gaining more than 5 ypc in the 1st quarter...so let's try some gimic plays?
Wtf.
I thought 8-4 would be a good regular season so I'm not TOO pissed...but sh*t, I really cannot wait for 2013-2014 when this recruiting class OL obliterates people at the point of attack so we aren't running misdirection/sweep sh*t in the redzone.
November 6th, 2011 at 10:13 AM ^
...if Roundtree hadn't been handcuffed, that was a completion at the 5 instead of a pick. The ball bounced off of his chest because his hands were locked down by the defender.
November 5th, 2011 at 7:53 PM ^
was all ugly man this game pissed me off... still 4 hours later
November 5th, 2011 at 7:55 PM ^
The thing is, we did punch it in once, and should have been given a 5th shot at it anyway.
November 5th, 2011 at 7:56 PM ^
Not being able to adjust to opponents' blitzes? Again Iowa found a way to get through to Denard and for the most part he struggled under pressure.
November 5th, 2011 at 7:58 PM ^
Was the field in bad condition? No one seemed to be able to change direction like they normally do, especially Denard. It almost seemed like they were playing on ice (not THAT bad but you get my point). That seemed to make Denard's running ineffective and played perfectly into iowa's 240lb manball back.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:08 PM ^
Iowa has FieldTurf, so footing shouldn't have been a problem.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:26 PM ^
Can you slow down a FieldTurf field by restricting draining?
November 5th, 2011 at 10:04 PM ^
To me, it seemed like Denard was waiting for holes (that never opened) in order to burst for 20+ yard gains. I'd prefer him to run harder and make gradual 5-6 yard gains rather than taking no gain four times for every long run. I don't think he's lost a step, as others are saying, but it's a matter of him waiting for blocks when he should just be getting positive yardage.
November 5th, 2011 at 7:59 PM ^
One bright spot of our D today was getting key stops on 3rd or 4th and short. I think we had 3 or them today
Bad:
Giving up that 4th and 7 in the 3qrt (I think?) really hurt.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:00 PM ^
given what they were up against. They were able to make stops and left us in a position to nearly pull it out. Coker had his yards, but he was also stopped on several crucial 3rd and 4th down plays. My concerns are that the new offensive scheme is turning Denard from a dangerous running spread QB into a mediocre drop-back passer, and that the Devon interludes are only hurting, not helping. Officiating is officiating, but not scoring from the deep red zone at the half and at the end is what killed us, and has happened more times than I care to think about.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:04 PM ^
Michigan lead the nation in red zone touchdowns coming into this game.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:45 PM ^
We are playing some better D's now.
November 5th, 2011 at 9:44 PM ^
Period
November 5th, 2011 at 8:06 PM ^
This team was not ready to play, that's on Hoke.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:08 PM ^
offense. The final measure of the offense is the points, and we couldn't score. And while Martin and Van Bergen had good plays, for most of the game the DL got handled. The Nebraska loss makes this even more bitter.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:36 PM ^
No pressure to prevent the out. It was always there and the DB gets the blame for not being Deion Sanders on every out.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:10 PM ^
24 points is not a bad performance from the defense considering our offense turns the ball over 2-3 times a game. Today 2 more turnovers. Iowa? none. There's a big reason M lost.
1st half offense : Hoke /Borges tried to out MANBALL Ferentz when he's got one of the best running QB's in the country. GAH. Why? Let Denard be Denard. As Brian Cook tweeted today, "This looks like an offense designed to maximize Denard Robinson's deficiencies."
I suspect Denard is playing hurt or we'd see more runs from him. They used him to run more earlier in the year, and he never carries on those jet sweeps. I wonder if they're just trying to keep him from getting hurt, or aggravate whatever injuries he has.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:11 PM ^
November 5th, 2011 at 8:17 PM ^
Did Big Will play? I don't even remember seeing him. Seems like they'd have him playing a lot versus a MANBALL team.
Also - Where's the pressure?
November 5th, 2011 at 8:47 PM ^
he got cut and fell down, or ate a block and fell down, or beat a block and then fell down
BWC still has not learned to how to shrug a block and get to the ball. Or play with intensity every down. We'll need that desperately next year, as we did this
November 5th, 2011 at 8:20 PM ^
We did punch it in.
Edit: beaten to the punch.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:21 PM ^
November 5th, 2011 at 8:47 PM ^
JT Floyd - we've known he doesn't have the speed to keep up with top b10 WR's. Problem is he's one of our best DB's right now.
I was a bit upset at the lack of blitzing, too. We got some pressure on Iowa's QB but not enough.
Denard is not a dropback QB and Borges needs to adjust to his talents. I'm sure he'll improve for next year, but uh, if you want to win now, you've got to adjust.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:51 PM ^
JT Floyd analysis. I cannot believe that with all the D1 talent we have on our team, we cannot find a single DB that can line up across from a WR and want to compete against him, man to man on every down. Its like all of CB's play scared.....How can every WR in the B10 be faster than our DB's? For having a team that was built around "speed" for the last 3 years, we sure have a bunch of WR's and DB's who are not very fast.....
November 6th, 2011 at 12:29 AM ^
Please do not include Countess in your sweeping assesment of the DB's. Coutness is a really good player.
November 6th, 2011 at 11:34 AM ^
Countess and some of the other Freshmen, have some great potential.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:23 PM ^
and thus avoided the big hit that ended up as a 5 yard moon-ball to Vincent Smith, short of the first down, just before the FG.
Denard was just past the final defender and simply needed to pivot his hips / right leg back toward the field, but he willingly ran out-of-bounds without any resistance to avoid any chance of a hit at the boundary.
Which in turn resulted in Denard getting clobbered a few plays later and missing a series.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:25 PM ^
Coach Hoke and his staff, notably Mattison and Borges have done a terrific job. The defense is palpably better and even in the games we lost, the defense kept the team in the game so that it was theoretically winnable right to the end. On offense the emergence of a glimmer of running game outside of Denard Robinson is a great sign.
Having said that it was puzzling to see the final set of plays. With first down and goal to go from the Iowa 3, we ran four straight pass plays with no roll out action. I understand that with no time outs, a sack or being tackled in bounds could risk running out of time, so for the 2nd and 3rd down plays it made sense to call a straight pass play.
But especially on the 4th down play when the clock is essentially turned off, why not roll out Denard Robinson to the wide side, his right side, with a run and pass option? It seems conventional and obvious, I agree, but it is rational. He is not a great passer, but he is a superb open field runner. Once he takes a strong move to the wide side, it forces the defense into a tough situation - stay with the receiver or move up to support against him. Remember it was only 3 yards and with time not a factor - we either score or game over, it seems a rational call. A throw back screen or throw back against the grain would also be possible. The TV color commentator Chris Spielman mentioned this and it seemed like a reasonable choice. With a conventional QB of average mobility, not having him try to run makes sense, but with a once in a generation broken field genius, it seems that the team wasn't really taking advantage of Robinson's strengths.
Perhaps Brian or Heiko could ask this at the press conference.
Please don't take as an attack on the staff because it has been a great season and the quality of play has been very high and the new staff clearly has been a positive factor. But in this case, it is a curious situation where maybe conventional wisdom may be correct.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:34 PM ^
I can't fathom a quick slant on that last play. You have as much time as you need to open the field up...IT IS GOING TO BE THE LAST PLAY. If you are wasting it on a quick slant throw Gardner in there and le thim throw it from a high release. DR side arm sling is hard to pick up out of the mass at the LOS.
A slow roll to the wide side allows for a play to develop in front of him and a decent checne to win a race to the edge. I didn't get it.
I was sweating after I agreed with Spielman
November 6th, 2011 at 10:10 AM ^
...that was a TD.
November 5th, 2011 at 9:26 PM ^
That was a touchdown that was negated by a non-PI call.
And we scored two plays before that.
And Vincent Smith dropped a TD the play before that.
Borges playcalling was fine on the final four plays, that was when the refs took over.
November 5th, 2011 at 10:19 PM ^
Let's also not forget that Junior had broken free w/ a corner move on 1st down. Denard was rushed and/or their was a miscommunication and he through it to the wrong location. The WR was wide open. Borges widely called the same play on 2nd down resulting in the negated TD. We had lots of golden chances on every play in that last series, including Smith's TD drop. Smith was also breaking free uncovered on the last play just as Denard threw the ill-fated, pass-interfered slant.
November 6th, 2011 at 12:35 AM ^
A couple points:
1) I love MIchigan, but Hemingway's catch was not a catch. The ball was still moving when he hit the ground, does not matter that the knee came down first when the ball hits the ground like it did. On the backside replay, you can clearly see the nose of the ball touch the ground when he comes down.
2) Why was it not Hemingway on the final play instead of Roundtree? I don't know what happens during the week, but Hemingway is a much bigger body with better hands.
November 6th, 2011 at 10:09 AM ^
...but if they had called it a touchdown on the field, the replay would have let it stand. There would not have been conclusive evidence to overturn a TD call.
<br>
<br>Somebody should go back through the history of replay calls. I'd bet that the clear majority go against us on the field, leaving it to Jim Delaney's assistants to divine conclusive reasons for screwing us.
<br>
<br>If you wear the Maize and Blue, the ground CAN cause a fumble.
November 6th, 2011 at 10:20 AM ^
I literally have not heard one person that believes that Junior's catch was not a catch. From everyone I know that I've spoken to, to my wife (impartial Purdue grad) to both Lou Holtz and Mark May after the game. Everyone but you that has seen it says it was a catch. Maybe you are the right one, but I doubt it.
Having said that, we lost the game before that play, and there is no guarantee even if the catch stood that we would have gotten the two pointer after, soit didn't cost the game IMO.
November 6th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^
He caught the ball, had his knee down, pulled it in and then as he was hitting the ground, the ball MAY have moved...but I don't think that's conclusive. Even then, it's not the NFL, it should have been a catch from the beginning.
November 6th, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^
from the beginning. It was ruled an incomplete pass by the refs. The replay booth would also need conclusive evidence to show that the ball did not move or get trapped by the ground. I thought it was a touchdown when I saw it live (and when I replayed it a couple of times in slow-mo). This is just bad luck / circumstances of us getting caught up by the shitting call on the field and the replay rules, not being able to draw a conclusive reversal.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:34 PM ^
proud of that effort to the end
Morgan is too small and inexperienced right now. But the D I thought played well. Demens made some great plays.
O can play a lot better, but having no identity has hurt and will continue to hurt.
I feel good about our chances in the final 3 games, can't wait. Perhaps they'll finally a little get angry on Offense, and have that burn off the away game jitters
November 5th, 2011 at 8:54 PM ^
November 5th, 2011 at 8:45 PM ^
add to ugly people bitching about playcalling
November 5th, 2011 at 8:52 PM ^
For those who think the defense played well...really? Iowa just lost to Minnesota, a game in which they only scored 21 points. Minnesota. Let me repeat that: Minnesota held them to fewer points.
This is not a good offense, but we were giving up lots of 7 yard runs and 9 yard slants, and without getting the takeaways to paper that over, like we did earlier in the year. Again, love Mattison, Hoke and what they've done with 2010's historically bad defense, but this wasn't their best game. We had a lot of trouble with a very average offense.
November 5th, 2011 at 9:00 PM ^
I wouldn't look too much into that one game in Minneapolis.
November 5th, 2011 at 10:26 PM ^
They're still not a good offense, and the moved the ball on us at will.
I think if Ferentz wasn't such so conservative, they'd have done even better.
November 5th, 2011 at 10:01 PM ^
and got to the MSU 48 & MSU 45 twice in the 4th qtr down one score?
The same Minnesota that gave up ~250 yds rushing to Coker last week and 446 yards of total offense?
Oh, and three of Iowa's points today were totally due to Denard's fumble.
They played well enough in the 4th quarter to give us a chance. They're not world beaters, just a bunch of lunch-pail guys that give us a chance, in complete contrast to last year.
November 6th, 2011 at 10:33 PM ^
your last paragraph sums it up perfectly. With a few excpetions, the defense is just a bunch of guys grinding it out and playing much better than they did last year.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:55 PM ^
Just going through my twitter from the game this afternoon, and you know what is ugly?? Sports "journalists" or "reporters" or whatever they want to call themselves criticizing and being outright offensive to college kids for not playing well or making "mistakes" in their blind eyes. It really is disgusting.
November 5th, 2011 at 8:59 PM ^
not to run just to prove he can be a pass first quarterback, not just to his "doubters" in the media but maybe for some scouts from the League. But after seeing his numerous hesitations today I think something else is going on, maybe not an injury but possibly just gunshy from getting his clock rang one too many times.