Game Thread: Iowa State

[rabidrabbit]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Other positives were the punting game, and the FG and kick-off by Jacks were boomed out.

Defense played well, and other than the debacle of 68 yd up the middle TD in 4th, were not really outplayed by ISU offense.

Berry did some nice playmix in the one offensive series in the 2nd qtr, move 75 yards on about 8 plays. Shame that he finished it with 1 of 5 picks.

ISU defense did a fabulous job of reading Berry and the offensive play. They made those interceptions, many were deflections up, and capitalized on those.

Jacks should have learned from last night, and hope we see positive results starting next week vs Youngstown.

[Nate34]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

I was impressed with the running game of the Jacks and the defense. The one thing I like to see is aggressive defensive play which includes hard hitting ... and I was impressed with our boys going out there and lighting some dudes up from the start. I would have loved to see that game without all our stupid picks.

Regarding stupid picks:
I liked what I saw from Berry and I think he is going to have a great year. To me it looked like he just trusted the play design too much. All the picks I can think of (it was a late night), were designed screen passes or 3-step/one read/timing routes. What I mean was, he really didn't have a choice or a read to make. All week I'm sure it was ingrained to drop back, look off safeties or play action fake, turn and throw. Or with the 3-step quick slants, it was all timing and he wasn't making reads. I don't know if the staff was trying to make it simple for him, but to me he looked "programmed" and that didn't allow him read and play off those reads.
I do fault him for still going through with the throws on some of those passes when clearly I-State had the play read and had people in the right spots.
Again, he looked "over-coached" or programmed on most of the plays he threw the picks on or the quick outs where our receivers got lit-up.

It was an ugly score and an ugly game, but if you ignore those terrible "screen-pass-picks" with huge returns, I liked what I saw. Defense and special teams and running game looked good.

[propar80]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Got home from the game around 3:00 in the am. Ouch.

But worth both bags under my eyes here at work today! Had a great time tailgating with all the other SDSU fans at the "Haunted Forest".
Thanks to the ISU fans for really making it a great game-day, when it comes to tailgating...you guys do it up right!

The game:
Well, had a long drive home with a sleeping wife to think about it and all I can really come up with is...no major injuries and Youngstown State comes to Brookings and this team owes those guys one.

Always hate to see that many turnovers, but those same turnovers told me something about our defense. We're pretty damn good on D and when our Offense wasn't turning it over, they moved the ball fairly well.
4 turnovers in the first half against a Big XII team, should mean SDSU is down 40-0 instead of 20-0, and that's where I was very impressed with our defense.

Tired, but worth every mile to Ames, but now it's time to compete in the best football conference in the FCS.
Let's go out next weekend and show the Fighting Penguins what Jackrabbit Football at CAS is all about!


Go Jacks!!

[mitchell]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Even though we got spanked, we got to leave ames with 300,000 $$, no major injuries, and our players now know have the experience of playing against a FBS team so we don't get punished the next couple years.

Some positives are that we moved the ball fairly well. We would drive it down into the red zone but then there would be an interception. You can blame Ryan Berry completely. Our defense wasn't bad either, the Iowa State receivers made a lot of tough jumping catches.

Iowa State's D game plan was to blitz the crap out of us and play in pass protection with dime and nickel packages. They were going to let us beat them with the run, but not with the long ball. Berry's night consisted of hike it, gun it, and than get leveled.

Another plus was that Priddy had 3 punts and all were over 50 yards. He averaged 51 yds per punt.

[garn]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

even though the stats were fairly even, turnovers killed SDSU. My step-dad and I were sitting next to a former Jackrabbit O-lineman (I don't remember his name) and he pointed out to us that Iowa St was just blowing SDSU off the LOS (on both sides of the ball) and really had their way with the Jacks in that area of the game.

One thing I paid attention to was the new play clock and it really didn't seem to have an effect on the game, I recall there only being one delay game of penatly.

Not related to the game, my step-dad's streak continues. He's been at Arrowhead Stadium in KC twice and both times, he's seen people from his hometown of Burke, SD and last night, the streat continued. Unbeleivable.

Good luck to the Jacks the rest of the year, with the new Missouri Valley FB conference, i'll be keeping an eye out for scores, man talk about a wing-ding of a conference now with NDSU, UNI, Youngstown St, etc. Now on to my real passion...The Huskers!

Last night was a great way to kick off the the CFB season.

[mplscyclone]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

I was impressed with the running game of the Jacks and the defense. The one thing I like to see is aggressive defensive play which includes hard hitting ... and I was impressed with our boys going out there and lighting some dudes up from the start. I would have loved to see that game without all our stupid picks.

Regarding stupid picks:
I liked what I saw from Berry and I think he is going to have a great year. To me it looked like he just trusted the play design too much. All the picks I can think of (it was a late night), were designed screen passes or 3-step/one read/timing routes. What I mean was, he really didn't have a choice or a read to make. All week I'm sure it was ingrained to drop back, look off safeties or play action fake, turn and throw. Or with the 3-step quick slants, it was all timing and he wasn't making reads. I don't know if the staff was trying to make it simple for him, but to me he looked "programmed" and that didn't allow him read and play off those reads.
I do fault him for still going through with the throws on some of those passes when clearly I-State had the play read and had people in the right spots.
Again, he looked "over-coached" or programmed on most of the plays he threw the picks on or the quick outs where our receivers got lit-up.

It was an ugly score and an ugly game, but if you ignore those terrible "screen-pass-picks" with huge returns, I liked what I saw. Defense and special teams and running game looked good.

Your defense sucked and those picks were your QBs fault. Our D read the play and the line didn't penetrate too much. Your QB made HORRIBLE reads as each pick was thrown directly at our guys.

You can't say we played well despite this. I also recall much more hard hits on you guys than vice versa. Your QB took a spanking but I give him props for hanging in there. He could probably tell you about the different stars he saw in the sky since he was looking straight up at the sky most of the game...

[rational thought]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Your defense sucked and those picks were your QBs fault. Our D read the play and the line didn't penetrate too much. Your QB made HORRIBLE reads as each pick was thrown directly at our guys.

You can't say we played well despite this. I also recall much more hard hits on you guys than vice versa. Your QB took a spanking but I give him props for hanging in there. He could probably tell you about the different stars he saw in the sky since he was looking straight up at the sky most of the game...

Your right about Berry, he played poorly...and better get his act together quickly ( or he'll be carrying a clipboard). There were good hits on both sides of the ball, the difference being, our guys got up! The clones better have plenty of reserves on hand when you start to play the big boys....I personally would be embarrassed with the number of players you had assisted off of the field.

[IdahoJack]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

I haven't had the chance to see many games in the last five years, but after watching the game last night my biggest concern is the offensive scheme. Especially the quarterback play. It seemed to me that when Berry is under center it takes him a long time to drop back and it also seems to take a long time for the play to develop. I hope it had something to do with the speed of an FBS team and the fact that it's the first game of the season. The running game has the potential to be great, and the defense performed well at times. I especially liked the way #10 plays the run from the safety spot. I think they can learn a few things from the game film, hopefully Berry can put this game behind him, and start the FCS season off next week with a win over Youngstown State. I wish I could be there!!

[mplscyclone]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Your right about Berry, he played poorly...and better get his act together quickly ( or he'll be carrying a clipboard). There were good hits on both sides of the ball, the difference being, our guys got up! The clones better have plenty of reserves on hand when you start to play the big boys....I personally would be embarrassed with the number of players you had assisted off of the field.

Not worried about the injuries.... Part of the game. They were more self-inflicted and that happens. The injuries didn't happen because you guys were more physical. I heard comments from SDSU fans after the game talking about how much more physical ISU was and how big of a difference that is between the different levels.

[cydave]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Your right about Berry, he played poorly...and better get his act together quickly ( or he'll be carrying a clipboard). There were good hits on both sides of the ball, the difference being, our guys got up! The clones better have plenty of reserves on hand when you start to play the big boys....I personally would be embarrassed with the number of players you had assisted off of the field.

Being at the game, it was a night and day difference in the difference of physical play. ISU hit so much harder and owned the trenches. Most of the players getting helped off the field from ISU were from a self inflicted injury. Injuries are part of the game. I'm not embarrassed at all by the number of players being helped off the field. If they are out there to hit as hard as they can, getting the wind knocked out of you, stingers, etc. are going to come with that.

[MilwaukeeJacksAlum]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Being at the game, it was a night and day difference in the difference of physical play. ISU hit so much harder and owned the trenches. Most of the players getting helped off the field from ISU were from a self inflicted injury. Injuries are part of the game. I'm not embarrassed at all by the number of players being helped off the field. If they are out there to hit as hard as they can, getting the wind knocked out of you, stingers, etc. are going to come with that.

Wow, you ISU fans are in denial. I'll be the first to admit you beat us fair and square. But, to think you somehow hit so much harder and owned the trenches is showing a lack of football knowledge. ISU only got pressure on our QB when they brought the blitz. I thought that was a great game plan by ISU. But, it was not a matter of your D-line dominating the game. In fact, when your D only rushed the front 4, we had great protection. On D, SDSU gave up 2 runs over 10 yards all game. They had more times where a D-lineman blew into the backfield than ISU by far. I would say the line play on both sides was very even. Also, aside from that one long run by #22, we were winning the rushing battle. At half time, we were ahead on rushing yardage and we were throwing about 2 times to every 1 run. I never came on this board (the SDSU fan site, by the way) and said SDSU was going to kill ISU. I never even said we'd win. I said we had a really good chance based on our line play and we did. It was poor decision making in the face of constant pressure that won the game, not a dominating line play by ISU.

Then again, if I was ISU, I'd probably try to convince myself that we dominated SDSU on the line of scrimmage, too.

[mplscyclone]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Wow, you ISU fans are in denial. I'll be the first to admit you beat us fair and square. But, to think you somehow hit so much harder and owned the trenches is showing a lack of football knowledge. ISU only got pressure on our QB when they brought the blitz. I thought that was a great game plan by ISU. But, it was not a matter of your D-line dominating the game. In fact, when your D only rushed the front 4, we had great protection. On D, SDSU gave up 2 runs over 10 yards all game. They had more times where a D-lineman blew into the backfield than ISU by far. I would say the line play on both sides was very even. Also, aside from that one long run by #22, we were winning the rushing battle. At half time, we were ahead on rushing yardage and we were throwing about 2 times to every 1 run. I never came on this board (the SDSU fan site, by the way) and said SDSU was going to kill ISU. I never even said we'd win. I said we had a really good chance based on our line play and we did. It was poor decision making in the face of constant pressure that won the game, not a dominating line play by ISU.

Then again, if I was ISU, I'd probably try to convince myself that we dominated SDSU on the line of scrimmage, too.

If your Dline was so good, how come there were basically no rushes from ISU for a loss, no sacks and how did we go 20-0 at the half?

[cydave]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

Wow, you ISU fans are in denial. I'll be the first to admit you beat us fair and square. But, to think you somehow hit so much harder and owned the trenches is showing a lack of football knowledge. ISU only got pressure on our QB when they brought the blitz. I thought that was a great game plan by ISU. But, it was not a matter of your D-line dominating the game. In fact, when your D only rushed the front 4, we had great protection. On D, SDSU gave up 2 runs over 10 yards all game. They had more times where a D-lineman blew into the backfield than ISU by far. I would say the line play on both sides was very even. Also, aside from that one long run by #22, we were winning the rushing battle. At half time, we were ahead on rushing yardage and we were throwing about 2 times to every 1 run. I never came on this board (the SDSU fan site, by the way) and said SDSU was going to kill ISU. I never even said we'd win. I said we had a really good chance based on our line play and we did. It was poor decision making in the face of constant pressure that won the game, not a dominating line play by ISU.

Then again, if I was ISU, I'd probably try to convince myself that we dominated SDSU on the line of scrimmage, too.

When I say hit hard/be physical, I mean tackle with rage. I saw about 6 hits where an SDSU player got abosolutely layed out. I will give them credit for getting back up and playing! Here is a quote pulled from the Dm register from your coach. “What struck me most was how they could strike you,” said John Stiegelmeier, in his 12th season Jackrabbits coach. “There were many times when it was not a drag-you-down tackle, but a whack in the open field.”

[MilwaukeeJacksAlum]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

If your Dline was so good, how come there were basically no rushes from ISU for a loss, no sacks and how did we go 20-0 at the half?

Now I know how your 3rd grade teacher felt everytime you kept asking what "Name Here" meant. I don't know what "basically no rushes from ISU for a loss" means in quantifying terms, but it is a number that is greater than SDSU rushes for a loss. Our D-line played a great game. What kept the pressure off your QB was excellent blitz-pickup by your running backs and a QB who is very mobile. Your RB's and TE did a phenomonal job at picking up the blitz. Partly because we kept showing the blitz too early thanks to the way ISU calls a play from the sideline and partly because the RB was just doing a great job of blocking. But on a straight "smash mouth run up the middy" you only had one run for longer than 10 yards. Most were for a minimal gain or a loss.

Do you really want me to answer the 20-0 question? How does 2 turnovers inside ISU's 15 sound for an answer. If we even kick two field goals instead of 2 INT's, it's a 10-6 game at half. Anyone who watched that game knows that is a FACT - to borrow a phrase from the good doctor.

[MilwaukeeJacksAlum]

Re: Game Thread: Iowa State

When I say hit hard/be physical, I mean tackle with rage. I saw about 6 hits where an SDSU player got abosolutely layed out. I will give them credit for getting back up and playing! Here is a quote pulled from the Dm register from your coach. “What struck me most was how they could strike you,” said John Stiegelmeier, in his 12th season Jackrabbits coach. “There were many times when it was not a drag-you-down tackle, but a whack in the open field.”

Aside from your middle linebacker, I don't remember anyone just lighting people up. #23 had some nice hits, but were more a product of right place, right time than being physically overpowering. Your middle linebacker was the best defensive player on the field yesterday. He was flying around and lighting people up, no denying that. As an ex-linebacker, I can appreciate his play and even be envious of it. However, I don't remember any other huge shots than that. Give me an example of a huge hit that I'm missing and I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong. Assuming, of course, that you're not going to point to one of the 4 unsportsmanlike penalties for late hits. Because, those don't count. Although, #23 seemed to think they did.