The Swamp

govmentchedda wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 9:34 pm Dan Lanning is way too aggressive a play caller.

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2023 8:16 am

govmentchedda wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 9:34 pm Dan Lanning is way too aggressive a play caller.

I assume you mean the fourth down decisions themselves and not the plays that were called on fourth down by the OC?

the fourth down at the end of the game was a perfectly fine decision to go for it. rolling a right-handed quarterback to his left, however ...

the call is also justified by how quickly Washington scored. by giving the Huskies a short field, Oregon had plenty of time after the TD. and he was going 2-for-1 before halftime. the math all makes sense from a strategic standpoint. the rollouts/sprintout plays they probably want back though

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2023 9:03 am Oregon was at the Washington 47

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 2:45 pm I'm not really sure. From what I've read, there isn't an actual rule to even violate. The only thing on the books is related to electronic communications during the game.

That said, curious for the conference to start publicly announcing shit like this. I mean... Are we talking about actually STEALING playbooks? Because figuring out how teams are signaling their plays... That's not against the rules.

Gotta be more than that.

A_B wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 2:48 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 2:45 pm I'm not really sure. From what I've read, there isn't an actual rule to even violate. The only thing on the books is related to electronic communications during the game.

That said, curious for the conference to start publicly announcing shit like this. I mean... Are we talking about actually STEALING playbooks? Because figuring out how teams are signaling their plays... That's not against the rules.

Gotta be more than that.

From what i've seen it's been in the stands with people figuring them out. If you figure it out on the field, well fuck the guys that can't disguise. If you're using people in the stands, that's pretty nasty.

Rex wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 7:59 pm I don’t know what this story is, but I’m seeing some good content

govmentchedda wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 6:35 am

Rex wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 7:59 pm I don’t know what this story is, but I’m seeing some good content

Iowa's offense is historically bad. Like for a few years now, it's been laughably bad. Their defense is very equally great. Their games have scores that are very, very low.

It gets better. The offensive coordinator is Brian Ferentz, son of iconic long time head coach, Kirk Ferentz. Papa Kirk is very protective of Brian, even though state nepotism laws had Brian being supervised by the AD directly, not Kirk.

The offense was so bad for so long that last offseason, AD Gary Barta rewrote Brian's contract so that Brian's salary went down a little, and Brian's continued employment depends on Iowa's total points this season (including defensive and special teams scores, which he has no impact on and can only help him) which has to be at least 325 points. This number is very likely 25 points x 13 games, although that assumes Iowa plays their 12 game regular season plus a bowl game, Iowa could also play in the B1G championship game (14th game) and that would count too. Shit, the could potentially have a 15th game if the made the NCAAFB championship game too, but that's highly unlikely.

Anyway, that average of 25 points a game requirement made it to the media because Iowa is a public school and people are tracking the "Drive for 325". For a little bit of context averaging 25 points a game, would be about 85th nationally out of ~130 FBS teams. And oh yeah, they're NOT on pace for it.

A_B wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 7:11 am Their last game against Wisconsin had an O/U of 30.5 I believe. It was never in doubt. 15-6 final.

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 9:17 pm the Wisconsin game closed at 33.5-34.5 depending on your book of choice

games since 2003 with totals at 34 or under are 5-1 to the under (counting the Wisconsin game at 33.5). that includes Minnesota-Iowa a year ago at 31.5 -- it tied the lowest total of a game since 2003. that was a 13-10 game.

in this case, I'm not sure I think the under is a lock. feels like a game that could have a defensive TD or special teams TD (or maybe even both). it is extremely funny that a 17-14 game could go over though

govmentchedda wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 9:47 pm

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 9:17 pm the Wisconsin game closed at 33.5-34.5 depending on your book of choice

games since 2003 with totals at 34 or under are 5-1 to the under (counting the Wisconsin game at 33.5). that includes Minnesota-Iowa a year ago at 31.5 -- it tied the lowest total of a game since 2003. that was a 13-10 game.

in this case, I'm not sure I think the under is a lock. feels like a game that could have a defensive TD or special teams TD (or maybe even both). it is extremely funny that a 17-14 game could go over though

I'm on the over 31.5 on the Iowa game. And Under 34 in Army Air Force.

sancarlos wrote: ↑Sat Oct 21, 2023 5:07 pm Maybe it’s just my perception but Brad Nessler seems to be rooting for Alabama today.

brian wrote: ↑Sat Oct 21, 2023 6:04 pm This Iowa-Minnesota game is nuts.

govmentchedda wrote: ↑Sat Oct 21, 2023 6:13 pm

brian wrote: ↑Sat Oct 21, 2023 6:04 pm This Iowa-Minnesota game is nuts.

Lol Hawkeyes

brian wrote: ↑Sat Oct 21, 2023 6:26 pm Also just have to say how much better NBC’s coverage is than CBS. Not looking forward to the B1G moving to CBS - they’re horrible.