4th and 8

[MichiganDad3]

The D performed well in the 4th quarter until the last drive. The 4th and 8 call was the same "give the slot receiver 10 yards with no challenge" that we have seen all year. It is mind boggling that Chin uses this call. Below is a quote from a nice article on the play. The video is even worse than when I watched it live.

 

Quote

On the edges, the corners lined up in tight coverage. That left senior Antonio Reed all by himself as the deep safety. Prior to the snap, he moved over toward where Hockensen was lined up but was still 3 yards past the line to gain, giving him an 11-yard cushion on fourth-and-8.

 hailvarsity.com/s/5564/play-of-the-game-iowas-fourth-and-8-conversion

[Jeremy]

More than once they exploited the comically soft coverage on the slot. This, along with the corners seemingly unable to turn around and find the ball, has plagued this defense all year. You'd think a guy making money like Chinander is would know these things, but maybe he's seeing something we aren't. 

[Nebfanatic]

45 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

More than once they exploited the comically soft coverage on the slot. This, along with the corners seemingly unable to turn around and find the ball, has plagued this defense all year. You'd think a guy making money like Chinander is would know these things, but maybe he's seeing something we aren't. 

We have improved significantly at snapping head around to the ball in coverage....significantly

[HS_Coach_C]

1 hour ago, MichiganDad3 said:

The D performed well in the 4th quarter until the last drive. The 4th and 8 call was the same "give the slot receiver 10 yards with no challenge" that we have seen all year. It is mind boggling that Chin uses this call. Below is a quote from a nice article on the play. The video is even worse than when I watched it live.

 

 hailvarsity.com/s/5564/play-of-the-game-iowas-fourth-and-8-conversion

I'm curious if everyone played their responsibility correctly here. To me it looks almost as if Reed was expecting underneath coverage by a linebacker to take away the easy throw, but who knows.

 

I'm sure this staff will self scout and clean several things up for next year.

 

Edit: after reading Shanle's comment and Frost's comment, it was mostly Reed's fault and somewhat Young's. Oh well. Get em next year.

Edited November 24, 2018 by HS_Coach_C

[4skers89]

Good article.  Inexplicable soft coverage by Reed and hesitant blitzing by Young made an easy play for Iowa.

[Enhance]

I won't pretend to know exactly what the defense was supposed to be doing on that play. It definitely looked bad for Reed, almost as if they were playing the big play vs. the one that would get a first down.

[Stumpy1]

What irritated me most about Reeds play is we ran tight coverage on the same play earlier in the quarter and even on that drive. 

 

In the first half,  Aaron Williams would play soft and they burned us with short slants.  

 

We adjusted in the second half and took that away, except for that last play.  

[ColoradoHusk]

I wonder if Frost outsmarted himself by calling the timeout with 40 seconds left.  I honestly think Ferentz would have let the clock wind down and tried a miracle FG or punted the ball away.  I love Frost's aggressiveness and wanting to always get the ball back to his offense, but in this instance it wasn't the smart approach.

[gobiggergoredder]

We have almost a non existent pass rush.  Pick your poison.  Tighten up and let someone run wild deep.

[DefenderAO]

11 hours ago, Enhance said:

I won't pretend to know exactly what the defense was supposed to be doing on that play. It definitely looked bad for Reed, almost as if they were playing the big play vs. the one that would get a first down.

 

I would've rather given up a touchdown in aggression than the 1st down in passivity 

[Cdog923]

It was a truly awful playcall by Chins. Absolutely no reason to play Cover 0 in that situation, especially when your blitz hasn't done anything all day long. 

[Enhance]

14 minutes ago, DefenderAO said:

I would've rather given up a touchdown in aggression than the 1st down in passivity 

I think the problem was the defensive play didn't appear to fit a specific strategy, at least on the surface.

 

Nebraska calls a timeout with the apparent anticipation of getting the ball back in some fashion. Either Iowa will kick the field goal, punt, or go for it on fourth down. Given that Iowa elects to go for it, percentages suggest they're going to go for the first down since they're mostly out of field goal range and they have time with which to work. Yet, the defensive alignment was such that they were almost trying to prevent the 'big play.'

 

Ultimately, I'm with you, though - I think you gotta play to the situation and that alignment just didn't make a lot of sense based on what I think I know (emphasis on think )

[MichiganDad3]

1 hour ago, DefenderAO said:

 

I would've rather given up a touchdown in aggression than the 1st down in passivity 

Exactly, a low percentage play that goes for a TD, or a certain 1st down. That is an easy decision.

[4skers89]

13 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I think the problem was the defensive play didn't appear to fit a specific strategy, at least on the surface.

 

Nebraska calls a timeout with the apparent anticipation of getting the ball back in some fashion. Either Iowa will kick the field goal, punt, or go for it on fourth down. Given that Iowa elects to go for it, percentages suggest they're going to go for the first down since they're mostly out of field goal range and they have time with which to work. Yet, the defensive alignment was such that they were almost trying to prevent the 'big play.'

 

Ultimately, I'm with you, though - I think you gotta play to the situation and that alignment just didn't make a lot of sense based on what I think I know (emphasis on think )

Most teams play tight coverage when blitzing because the QB doesn't have time for a deep pass.  The secondary needs to defend a smaller area.  Either the blitz gets home or the QB feels pressure and is forced to throw a short pass where a defender should be in position for an interception or pass breakup.  We blitzed and Reed was playing off their TE for some reason.  Where he lined up on the start of the play was probably fine but he shouldn't have worried about their TE going deep.  When the TE reached the first down he should have been right there with him.  Not necessarily because he was at the first down line but time wise that's where the QB could throw it to.  It might be we have no confidence in our blitz so we don't consider the field shortened or it could be Reed wasn't doing what he was coached to do.  We don't always play smart and we already know it took a half season for players to learn what they were being coached is important only after it cost us games.  It's nice to have athletes but I think it's equally important to have players that can play smart as part of a team.  Wisconsin and Iowa do this and are considered "sound" defensively because their players are playing smart and disciplined.  They can get out athleted but they are usually in the right position.  I believe we are lacking both the athletic talent and are not always playing within the defensive scheme. 

[Cdog923]

17 minutes ago, MichiganDad3 said:

Exactly, a low percentage play that goes for a TD, or a certain 1st down. That is an easy decision.

 

Augmented by the fact that it would have given the offense (which was humming at the time) a chance to tie the game again.