Switching topics

[MMcCormick]

So the offensive line was clearly probably one. When you look at the offensive staff it's a really really experienced staff right now at every position with guys who have coached in the pros and been head coaches etc. Bell is not an elite OC, but he calls a creative passing game and from what I can see is a good creative play caller. Hopefully we see productivity.

There is another issue that has not been talked about and that's the defense is nowhere near as good as it was a couple years back. With the veterans it should be great. Allen blames the number of plays they are defending which has some merit, but offenses get tired too. It's a bit of an excuse in my book. They are giving up way too many big plays and I think are ranked 75th in the country. It's been far from a banner year on defense, and Allen the responsibility on that side is squarely on Allen.

 

[vesuvius13]

So the offensive line was clearly probably one. When you look at the offensive staff it's a really really experienced staff right now at every position with guys who have coached in the pros and been head coaches etc. Bell is not an elite OC, but he calls a creative passing game and from what I can see is a good creative play caller. Hopefully we see productivity.

There is another issue that has not been talked about and that's the defense is nowhere near as good as it was a couple years back. With the veterans it should be great. Allen blames the number of plays they are defending which has some merit, but offenses get tired too. It's a bit of an excuse in my book. They are giving up way too many big plays and I think are ranked 75th in the country. It's been far from a banner year on defense, and Allen the responsibility on that side is squarely on Allen.

Playing defense is far different that offense as OL doesn't run much along with the QB. A good defense will fly to the ball every play and if they don't get much recovery on the sideline with an offense that goes 3 and out most of the time. Ask players what is tougher to play - offense or defense, if they played both in HS they will tell you defense as the only positions that may run as much are the receivers and RBs. That is the reason I say coach Allen needs to tell coach Bell to slow down the offense with hurry up in strategic doses.

 

[jlasson]

So the offensive line was clearly probably one. When you look at the offensive staff it's a really really experienced staff right now at every position with guys who have coached in the pros and been head coaches etc. Bell is not an elite OC, but he calls a creative passing game and from what I can see is a good creative play caller. Hopefully we see productivity.

There is another issue that has not been talked about and that's the defense is nowhere near as good as it was a couple years back. With the veterans it should be great. Allen blames the number of plays they are defending which has some merit, but offenses get tired too. It's a bit of an excuse in my book. They are giving up way too many big plays and I think are ranked 75th in the country. It's been far from a banner year on defense, and Allen the responsibility on that side is squarely on Allen.

Joel Klatt mentioned on the broadcast that he wasn't sure if running an up-tempo offense was the best idea at a place like Indiana(implying we are generally less talented than our opponents), he said it gave the opposing offense more chances against our defense and Indiana's defense lacks the depth to sustain that many plays in most games. To this point the Offensive Line has been such a mess I can't really blame Bell for most of our offensive issues but it's definitely interesting food for thought when analyzing the Post-Hiller, Bell offense.

 

[Jackskip23]

Joel Klatt mentioned on the broadcast that he wasn't sure if running an up-tempo offense was the best idea at a place like Indiana(implying we are generally less talented than our opponents), he said it gave the opposing offense more chances against our defense and Indiana's defense lacks the depth to sustain that many plays in most games. To this point the Offensive Line has been such a mess I can't really blame Bell for most of our offensive issues but it's definitely interesting food for thought when analyzing the Post-Hiller, Bell offense.

Bit that’s exactly what Coach Allen bought when he brought in Walt Bell. We knew it was going to be a tempo / spread attack. It’s what we wanted and what we have, so we’d better make the best of it or find yet another OC, and I doubt CTA gets that chance.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Joel Klatt mentioned on the broadcast that he wasn't sure if running an up-tempo offense was the best idea at a place like Indiana(implying we are generally less talented than our opponents), he said it gave the opposing offense more chances against our defense and Indiana's defense lacks the depth to sustain that many plays in most games. To this point the Offensive Line has been such a mess I can't really blame Bell for most of our offensive issues but it's definitely interesting food for thought when analyzing the Post-Hiller, Bell offense.

Given the totality of the offense, it has not worked well.. It isn't a bad set of schemes but we didn't have one key component. Vesuvius13 makes this point well above. As posted earlier before our buddy freaked out; we need to make the best of what we have for the balance of the season and then hit the portal hard as well as looking for a new OL/run coach. I hate more staff churn but it is what it is.

I could be wrong, but i just don't see RC as the answer. We need to hire big here.

 

[Jackskip23]

So the offensive line was clearly probably one. When you look at the offensive staff it's a really really experienced staff right now at every position with guys who have coached in the pros and been head coaches etc. Bell is not an elite OC, but he calls a creative passing game and from what I can see is a good creative play caller. Hopefully we see productivity.

There is another issue that has not been talked about and that's the defense is nowhere near as good as it was a couple years back. With the veterans it should be great. Allen blames the number of plays they are defending which has some merit, but offenses get tired too. It's a bit of an excuse in my book. They are giving up way too many big plays and I think are ranked 75th in the country. It's been far from a banner year on defense, and Allen the responsibility on that side is squarely on Allen.

Coach Allen knew exactly what he was getting when he hired Walt Bell, so blaming the O in any way for our D shortcomings is a dog that doesn’t hunt. We’re all in on the scheme unless we change yet again, which CTA isn’t likely to be able to do.

We were dysfunctional last season, and we’re still suffering from that. Whether we fired Warren or he fired us, neither party wanted the other. So we are where we are because of the person in the mirror. That’s part of what LEO is about, right? Accountability? But, yeah, the D isn’t nearly as good as it needs to be, and it starts up front. We aren’t talented enough there. CTA knew it and hired a guy he thought could solve the recruiting issue (CW), but it didn’t work, so we portaled. That’s going to be our strategy when 2022 concludes, as well. We really have no other option.

 

[Indymoon]

Joel Klatt mentioned on the broadcast that he wasn't sure if running an up-tempo offense was the best idea at a place like Indiana(implying we are generally less talented than our opponents), he said it gave the opposing offense more chances against our defense and Indiana's defense lacks the depth to sustain that many plays in most games. To this point the Offensive Line has been such a mess I can't really blame Bell for most of our offensive issues but it's definitely interesting food for thought when analyzing the Post-Hiller, Bell offense.

100% agree with Klatt.

 

[Hoosiers47614]

So the offensive line was clearly probably one. When you look at the offensive staff it's a really really experienced staff right now at every position with guys who have coached in the pros and been head coaches etc. Bell is not an elite OC, but he calls a creative passing game and from what I can see is a good creative play caller. Hopefully we see productivity.

There is another issue that has not been talked about and that's the defense is nowhere near as good as it was a couple years back. With the veterans it should be great. Allen blames the number of plays they are defending which has some merit, but offenses get tired too. It's a bit of an excuse in my book. They are giving up way too many big plays and I think are ranked 75th in the country. It's been far from a banner year on defense, and Allen the responsibility on that side is squarely on Allen.

They really just need to clean up the busts. Big plays are killing the team, but, including yesterday, they do a pretty solid job of keeping opposing offenses in check (WKU notwithstanding) when the busts don't come.

Like, Michigan had a 50-yard run that lead to a touchdown on their first drive and then were essentially stymied for the entire rest of the first half. The same thing kind of played out against Cincinnati in reverse; they cleaned up the busted coverages in the second half and Cincinnati could do next to nothing on offense once they did.

Clean up the mistakes, and they haven't really tended to come in bunches, so it should be doable, and I think the defense will be fine. They were nearly there yesterday, even. I mentioned the big run, but yesterday was the first game we had where we didn't have any glaring busts in deep coverage. Even Idaho got one. Michigan had the fairly long TD coming off the crossing pattern, but that is a different thing than what's been plaguing us this year and appeared to be a result of the route going into the space our blitz vacated rather than any severe miscommunication.

 

[MMcCormick]

They really just need to clean up the busts. Big plays are killing the team, but, including yesterday, they do a pretty solid job of keeping opposing offenses in check (WKU notwithstanding) when the busts don't come.

Like, Michigan had a 50-yard run that lead to a touchdown on their first drive and then were essentially stymied for the entire rest of the first half. The same thing kind of played out against Cincinnati in reverse; they cleaned up the busted coverages in the second half and Cincinnati could do next to nothing on offense once they did.

Clean up the mistakes, and they haven't really tended to come in bunches, so it should be doable, and I think the defense will be fine. They were nearly there yesterday, even. I mentioned the big run, but yesterday was the first game we had where we didn't have any glaring busts in deep coverage. Even Idaho got one. Michigan had the fairly long TD coming off the crossing pattern, but that is a different thing than what's been plaguing us this year and appeared to be a result of the route going into the space our blitz vacated rather than any severe miscommunication.

Agree the big plays represent a big part of the issue, but when it happens every game, it's part of the defenses DNA. I thought with Allen coordinating we'd be better defensively. He bet on himself and the bet has not yet worked. I think he'll get things fixed, but that side needs to be stellar.

 

[Bowlmania]

There is another issue that has not been talked about and that's the defense is nowhere near as good as it was a couple years back.

Our D wasn't the reason we lost to the #4 team in the country. With even mediocre OL play, yesterday's game would have likely come down to the final possession of the 4th quarter.

 

[Jackskip23]

Our D wasn't the reason we lost to the #4 team in the country. With even mediocre OL play, yesterday's game would have likely come down to the final possession of the 4th quarter.

They had an 11 play, 98 yard drive in their first possession of the second half. That doesn’t fall on the O or the O line. They controlled us up front in the second half. Our O line play is obviously a weakness, but you make no sense when you say things like this. They adjusted to what we were doing by opening up their O, and it put our D on its heels. One position group wasn’t the difference yesterday.

 

[ribbont]

Joel Klatt mentioned on the broadcast that he wasn't sure if running an up-tempo offense was the best idea at a place like Indiana(implying we are generally less talented than our opponents), he said it gave the opposing offense more chances against our defense and Indiana's defense lacks the depth to sustain that many plays in most games. To this point the Offensive Line has been such a mess I can't really blame Bell for most of our offensive issues but it's definitely interesting food for thought when analyzing the Post-Hiller, Bell offense.

I think TA and Wilt believe we have the depth on D. And I think we do as well IF the O is average. But it is so below average that the D is worn down even with us being 2 deep.

Not saying I agree, but I think this is TA's thinking.

 

[jlasson]

I think TA and Wilt believe we have the depth on D. And I think we do as well IF the O is average. But it is so below average that the D is worn down even with us being 2 deep.

Not saying I agree, but I think this is TA's thinking.

I agree that is probably the logic he is using, he is probably more confident in his defense to make up the talent gap under his eye than he is of our offense to make up the talent gap against opposing defenses. The whole point of up-tempo offenses is to give them an advantage and throw off the opposing defense so the D make mistakes they wouldn't normally make, i.e to make up the talent gap between our offense and opposing defenses. I think in some sense, being willing to run this style of offense is a vote of confidence in our defense.

 

[Crossblock]

Playing defense is far different that offense as OL doesn't run much along with the QB. A good defense will fly to the ball every play and if they don't get much recovery on the sideline with an offense that goes 3 and out most of the time. Ask players what is tougher to play - offense or defense, if they played both in HS they will tell you defense as the only positions that may run as much are the receivers and RBs. That is the reason I say coach Allen needs to tell coach Bell to slow down the offense with hurry up in strategic doses.

I agree with you based upon my high school experiences and playing both ways, Playing Offense is less stressful and easier in part because You know the play, where the ball is going, and the blocking scheme. On defense you have to align and react based upon what You perceive. I played back in the 60's when teams didn't throw the ball anywhere near as many times as they do today and in much less sophisticated schemes.

One of the things that was the most fun on offense was when Your team generated a long time consuming drive of mostly running plays. When You ran 15-18 plays and covered 70 to 80 Yards in a drive, You could sense the fight and desire leaving the Defense and fatigue setting in. If You were playing Defense and subject to that kind of Drive, it is one of the most frustrating things in football. You may not be giving up big plays, but You can't stop the Offense and get Yourself off the field.

The point is frustrating a Defense may not depend upon whether You play fast or slow. It depends more upon how many plays You can run in a row against the Defense. Run 3 drives of 15 plays or more and see how little the Defense has left ad how excited they are to get back on the field and face another series.

 

[IndyIUFan66]

They had an 11 play, 98 yard drive in their first possession of the second half. That doesn’t fall on the O or the O line. They controlled us up front in the second half. Our O line play is obviously a weakness, but you make no sense when you say things like this. They adjusted to what we were doing by opening up their O, and it put our D on its heels. One position group wasn’t the difference yesterday.

But IU was only down 7 into the Q4, and we opened the half with a 3 & out. The offense has NOT been helping the defense almost at all. Negative yards in last 2 Q4’s? C‘’Mon, everyone should be able to agree, yes Defense can still clean up things for sure. But how can 10 pts and negative 4th Q yards and 7 sacks be defensible to say offense not pulling their weight? 10 pts! All in first half!

 

[Jackskip23]

But IU was only down 7 into the Q4, and we opened the half with a 3 & out. The offense has NOT been helping the defense almost at all. Negative yards in last 2 Q4’s? C‘’Mon, everyone should be able to agree, yes Defense can still clean up things for sure. But how can 10 pts and negative 4th Q yards and 7 sacks be defensible to say offense not pulling their weight? 10 pts! All in first half!

Not saying it’s “defensible” but, like most things, there are always multiple causes, and that’s been the case with us.

 

[Champs1976]

Not saying it’s “defensible” but, like most things, there are always multiple causes, and that’s been the case with us.

If the offense puts up 24 points/game it's a totally different dynamic. You can see that can't you? If the offense can stay on the field enough for ToP to be roughly equal or at least not a 16 minute differential, doesn't that make a difference? To imply that the blame on the failings for this team falls multiple places is again pointing out the obvious, which you do a lot, rather than looking at the major causes first and prioritizing where you spend time and effort on fixing. That is basic coaching analytical/problem management skills. So yes the offense was the bigger problem by far and the biggest problem on the offense is that the OL can't run block or pass block. No offense can succeed with an OL that can't do either. And yes, anyone with any experience playing/coaching football knows that unless you are unusually deep (vast majority of teams are not) the ToP affects performance of the D.

Now on Saturday it became very obvious what happened to the O in the second half. Michigan knowing they could stop the run and get to Bazelak quickly loaded up the LoS and played up on the receivers. Beating this defense positioning required Bazelak to have at least enough time for the receivers to get behind the DBs and get open. Michigan's DL ran through the OL like they weren't there. And that was that. The ToP was 38 minutes to 22 minutes, but that was skewed by IU having a couple of decent drives in the first half. The second half IU possessions were 7-3-7-3-6 (going for it on fourth down on its last possession) plays no scores. Michigan's possessions were 13-6-8-7-3 (kneel down) and three TDs. Four of IU's first downs were due to Michigan penalties, or else some of the possessions would have been even shorter. Bazelak was sacked seven times but it could have been twice that many (remember how high Bazelak had to throw the ball out of bounds because UM was literally on top of him?).

The OL was the most significant cause of the O operating so poorly. The OL was the cause for larger ToP differential and the D having to be on the field so much. The best play caller in the world couldn't make an offense run with the play of the OL. Yes Bell is partly culpable and Allen's D played far from perfectly but the game would have been much closer if the OL was even mediocre and it wasn't.

 

[Fenny72]

It seems we give up a score on every first drive of the game or third quarter, big play or not. Seem to settle down the rest of the first half, and third quarter, before wearing down in the 4th, due to the offense's ineptitude in the second half recently. If our offense could maintain time of possession at and least keep it even in the second half, it would really help the def out.

 

[Jackskip23]

If the offense puts up 24 points/game it's a totally different dynamic. You can see that can't you? If the offense can stay on the field enough for ToP to be roughly equal or at least not a 16 minute differential, doesn't that make a difference? To imply that the blame on the failings for this team falls multiple places is again pointing out the obvious, which you do a lot, rather than looking at the major causes first and prioritizing where you spend time and effort on fixing. That is basic coaching analytical/problem management skills. So yes the offense was the bigger problem by far and the biggest problem on the offense is that the OL can't run block or pass block. No offense can succeed with an OL that can't do either. And yes, anyone with any experience playing/coaching football knows that unless you are unusually deep (vast majority of teams are not) the ToP affects performance of the D.

Now on Saturday it became very obvious what happened to the O in the second half. Michigan knowing they could stop the run and get to Bazelak quickly loaded up the LoS and played up on the receivers. Beating this defense positioning required Bazelak to have at least enough time for the receivers to get behind the DBs and get open. Michigan's DL ran through the OL like they weren't there. And that was that. The ToP was 38 minutes to 22 minutes, but that was skewed by IU having a couple of decent drives in the first half. The second half IU possessions were 7-3-7-3-6 (going for it on fourth down on its last possession) plays no scores. Michigan's possessions were 13-6-8-7-3 (kneel down) and three TDs. Four of IU's first downs were due to Michigan penalties, or else some of the possessions would have been even shorter. Bazelak was sacked seven times but it could have been twice that many (remember how high Bazelak had to throw the ball out of bounds because UM was literally on top of him?).

The OL was the most significant cause of the O operating so poorly. The OL was the cause for larger ToP differential and the D having to be on the field so much. The best play caller in the world couldn't make an offense run with the play of the OL. Yes Bell is partly culpable and Allen's D played far from perfectly but the game would have been much closer if the OL was even mediocre and it wasn't.

No one is saying the O line isn’t and hasn’t been an issue, but we have challenges at a variety of position groups. We aren’t very good up front on D, either, and it’s the main reason you give up 11 play, 98 yard drives.

As for the O, we’re paying the price for having our 4th OC in 6 years. New guy(s), new schemes, new leadership (since CTA isn’t actively involved there) always means you move backward before you have a chance to move forward. I have no issue with Hiller falling on his sword, but the lack of continuity is the bigger issue here, and it’s what has inhibited us for several years.

 

[Jackskip23]

It seems we give up a score on every first drive of the game or third quarter, big play or not. Seem to settle down the rest of the first half, and third quarter, before wearing down in the 4th, due to the offense's ineptitude in the second half recently. If our offense could maintain time of possession at and least keep it even in the second half, it would really help the def out.

Until recently, the O has actually been better in the second half, with the first being the problem. This is what happens when you keep starting over.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

If the offense puts up 24 points/game it's a totally different dynamic. You can see that can't you? If the offense can stay on the field enough for ToP to be roughly equal or at least not a 16 minute differential, doesn't that make a difference? To imply that the blame on the failings for this team falls multiple places is again pointing out the obvious, which you do a lot, rather than looking at the major causes first and prioritizing where you spend time and effort on fixing. That is basic coaching analytical/problem management skills. So yes the offense was the bigger problem by far and the biggest problem on the offense is that the OL can't run block or pass block. No offense can succeed with an OL that can't do either. And yes, anyone with any experience playing/coaching football knows that unless you are unusually deep (vast majority of teams are not) the ToP affects performance of the D.

Now on Saturday it became very obvious what happened to the O in the second half. Michigan knowing they could stop the run and get to Bazelak quickly loaded up the LoS and played up on the receivers. Beating this defense positioning required Bazelak to have at least enough time for the receivers to get behind the DBs and get open. Michigan's DL ran through the OL like they weren't there. And that was that. The ToP was 38 minutes to 22 minutes, but that was skewed by IU having a couple of decent drives in the first half. The second half IU possessions were 7-3-7-3-6 (going for it on fourth down on its last possession) plays no scores. Michigan's possessions were 13-6-8-7-3 (kneel down) and three TDs. Four of IU's first downs were due to Michigan penalties, or else some of the possessions would have been even shorter. Bazelak was sacked seven times but it could have been twice that many (remember how high Bazelak had to throw the ball out of bounds because UM was literally on top of him?).

The OL was the most significant cause of the O operating so poorly. The OL was the cause for larger ToP differential and the D having to be on the field so much. The best play caller in the world couldn't make an offense run with the play of the OL. Yes Bell is partly culpable and Allen's D played far from perfectly but the game would have been much closer if the OL was even mediocre and it wasn't.

You are much more of a FB guy technically than i am (I am the Hoops guy) and we appreciate you being here as we have had a gap for two or three years.

But it does seem even to me that the OL is the primary issue as their performance limits the ability to play with pace thus stressing our defense with unbalanced TOP. Their play also shuts down the run and get CB pummeled. You are spot on with what Mich adjusted at HT...why do you think they didn't open that way? Our issues don't seem to be a secret.

 

[Bowlmania]

They had an 11 play, 98 yard drive in their first possession of the second half. That doesn’t fall on the O or the O line. They controlled us up front in the second half. Our O line play is obviously a weakness, but you make no sense when you say things like this. They adjusted to what we were doing by opening up their O, and it put our D on its heels. One position group wasn’t the difference yesterday.

That drive was Michigan's only score of the 3rd quarter. Our D made several huge plays in the 3rd to keep us in the game, including Matthews' pick of McCarthy in the end zone (McCarthy's first interception of the season).

You probably don't recall our first possession of the 3rd quarter, but here's what happened. We were 1st and 10 at the UM 47. Bazelak was sacked for a loss of 9 yards, and that was that.

It was a one-score game going into the 4th quarter. We were very much in the game against the #4 team in the country. Our D was playing great. Care to know what happened on our first drive of the 4th quarter? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 9. End of drive. What about IU's next possession? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 11. End of possession. What about IU's next possession? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 8. End of possession.

Here's some Breaking News for you, Ord. A team can't win if it can't score. This was the second game in a row we were unable to score in the second half. More Breaking News - - a team can't score if they can't move the chains, and they can't move the chains with below average run-blocking and virtually no pass blocking. A team can't score if the offense rarely has the ball. Third quarter time of possession: UM: 9:25. IU: 5:35. Fourth quarter TOP: UM: 12:06. IU: 2:54. Final piece of Breaking News: A defense - - even a strong defense - - that is on the field constantly will eventually wear down.

Here's what Allen said after the game: "It starts up front. We have to protect the quarterback. We're not getting it done there."

With a little help from the offensive line, IU would have walked off the field with a huge upset. The D played well enough to win.

Finally, there are people who post here who aren't very knowledgeable when it comes to IU football, and that's fine. Some are casual fans, others perhaps follow basketball more closely and they're waiting for hoops season. You, though, post with an unparalleled arrogance, frequently boasting of purported inside information but never providing any "scoops" or anything of substance before it's public information. Your spin is frequently devoid of support and devoid of fact, and your latest "analysis" in connection with the UM game demonstrates that you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. But, on some level, you are entertaining, so at least you've got that going for you.

 

[alanh13]

IU runs the 2nd most plays in college football, but they lack production and efficiency. This is because Allen has no idea about coaching. He doesn’t recognize his personnel and tailors his schemes to what he has.

 

[Jackskip23]

That drive was Michigan's only score of the 3rd quarter. Our D made several huge plays in the 3rd to keep us in the game, including Matthews' pick of McCarthy in the end zone (McCarthy's first interception of the season).

You probably don't recall our first possession of the 3rd quarter, but here's what happened. We were 1st and 10 at the UM 47. Bazelak was sacked for a loss of 9 yards, and that was that.

It was a one-score game going into the 4th quarter. We were very much in the game against the #4 team in the country. Our D was playing great. Care to know what happened on our first drive of the 4th quarter? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 9. End of drive. What about IU's next possession? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 11. End of possession. What about IU's next possession? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 8. End of possession.

Here's some Breaking News for you, Ord. A team can't win if it can't score. This was the second game in a row we were unable to score in the second half. More Breaking News - - a team can't score if they can't move the chains, and they can't move the chains with below average run-blocking and virtually no pass blocking. A team can't score if the offense rarely has the ball. Third quarter time of possession: UM: 9:25. IU: 5:35. Fourth quarter TOP: UM: 12:06. IU: 2:54. Final piece of Breaking News: A defense - - even a strong defense - - that is on the field constantly will eventually wear down.

Here's what Allen said after the game: "It starts up front. We have to protect the quarterback. We're not getting it done there."

With a little help from the offensive line, IU would have walked off the field with a huge upset. The D played well enough to win.

Finally, there are people who post here who aren't very knowledgeable when it comes to IU football, and that's fine. Some are casual fans, others perhaps follow basketball more closely and they're waiting for hoops season. You, though, post with an unparalleled arrogance, frequently boasting of purported inside information but never providing any "scoops" or anything of substance before it's public information. Your spin is frequently devoid of support and devoid of fact, and your latest "analysis" in connection with the UM game demonstrates that you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. But, on some level, you are entertaining, so at least you've got that going for you.

Defenses that give up 11 play, 98 yard drives aren’t playing great. I realize you’re a sunshiny optimist who recently argued that posters shouldn’t be able to share their legitimate views of the program, but that wasn’t a “great” defensive display. But my realistic assessment of the D isn’t an endorsement of the offense or the O line, but rather the simple realization that our issues go well beyond one position group. Try watching a little closer and you might understand this better. It’s clear that opinions other than your own infuriate you, or that anything you perceive as negative is automatically considered a troll, but that’s not the case. Your Mal / Wyche babble notwithstanding, you should worry more about yourself and far less about everyone else.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Finally, there are people who post here who aren't very knowledgeable when it comes to IU football, and that's fine. Some are casual fans, others perhaps follow basketball more closely and they're waiting for hoops season. You, though, post with an unparalleled arrogance, frequently boasting of purported inside information but never providing any "scoops" or anything of substance before it's public information. Your spin is frequently devoid of support and devoid of fact, and your latest "analysis" in connection with the UM game demonstrates that you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. But, on some level, you are entertaining, so at least you've got that going for you.

Unchanged for the last 15 user names.

 

[IndyIUFan66]

If the offense puts up 24 points/game it's a totally different dynamic. You can see that can't you? If the offense can stay on the field enough for ToP to be roughly equal or at least not a 16 minute differential, doesn't that make a difference? To imply that the blame on the failings for this team falls multiple places is again pointing out the obvious, which you do a lot, rather than looking at the major causes first and prioritizing where you spend time and effort on fixing. That is basic coaching analytical/problem management skills. So yes the offense was the bigger problem by far and the biggest problem on the offense is that the OL can't run block or pass block. No offense can succeed with an OL that can't do either. And yes, anyone with any experience playing/coaching football knows that unless you are unusually deep (vast majority of teams are not) the ToP affects performance of the D.

Now on Saturday it became very obvious what happened to the O in the second half. Michigan knowing they could stop the run and get to Bazelak quickly loaded up the LoS and played up on the receivers. Beating this defense positioning required Bazelak to have at least enough time for the receivers to get behind the DBs and get open. Michigan's DL ran through the OL like they weren't there. And that was that. The ToP was 38 minutes to 22 minutes, but that was skewed by IU having a couple of decent drives in the first half. The second half IU possessions were 7-3-7-3-6 (going for it on fourth down on its last possession) plays no scores. Michigan's possessions were 13-6-8-7-3 (kneel down) and three TDs. Four of IU's first downs were due to Michigan penalties, or else some of the possessions would have been even shorter. Bazelak was sacked seven times but it could have been twice that many (remember how high Bazelak had to throw the ball out of bounds because UM was literally on top of him?).

The OL was the most significant cause of the O operating so poorly. The OL was the cause for larger ToP differential and the D having to be on the field so much. The best play caller in the world couldn't make an offense run with the play of the OL. Yes Bell is partly culpable and Allen's D played far from perfectly but the game would have been much closer if the OL was even mediocre and it wasn't.

Bravo! 100% agree

 

[Bowlmania]

I realize you’re a sunshiny optimist who recently argued that posters shouldn’t be able to share their legitimate views of the program,

I guess you're desperate because now you're just making shit up. Any reference I made about you being a troll applies only to you.

But, with respect to optimism, I am much more optimistic about IU football than I was two days ago. Anyone who knows anything about football knows that our OL has been a disaster for some time, and the biggest problem for the team. Many of us had been calling, in multiple threads, for Carey to replace Hiller. I must have missed your "inside information" that that development was imminent.

Your comments that our issues go beyond one position group is like saying water is wet. Is there room for improvement beyond the OL? Of course, but you could say that about any team at virtually any position. The primary problem, the elephant in he room (and Saturday's game was yet another glaring example) is the offensive line. Thankfully, we've now got a coaching upgrade for that group.

Your posts on this topic, with the same mindless, recurring theme, add absolutely nothing of value. You need to get your head in the game or at least refine your trolling.

 

[Jackskip23]

I guess you're desperate because now you're just making shit up. Any reference I made about you being a troll applies only to you.

But, with respect to optimism, I am much more optimistic about IU football than I was two days ago. Anyone who knows anything about football knows that our OL has been a disaster for some time, and the biggest problem for the team. Many of us had been calling, in multiple threads, for Carey to replace Hiller. I must have missed your "inside information" that that development was imminent.

Your comments that our issues go beyond one position group is like saying water is wet. Is there room for improvement beyond the OL? Of course, but you could say that about any team at virtually any position. The primary problem, the elephant in he room (and Saturday's game was yet another glaring example) is the offensive line. Thankfully, we've now got a coaching upgrade for that group.

Your posts on this topic, with the same mindless, recurring theme, add absolutely nothing of value. You need to get your head in the game or at least refine your trolling.

No, you were quite clear to shout down other posters whose views disagreed with your own as not being legitimate, and you were quick to criticize me for writing off the running game too early. Not surprised that you’re ruinously backtracking now. Your next post of substance will be your first. The Mal / Wyche one was epically stupid and showed how little you know about IU. By the way, here’s what you said when people began to question the direction and leadership of the program:

You're entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that your post, and particularly the timing of it, is kind of effed up.

It is September 25. We are 3-1. Two of our three wins were against quality teams. Our first loss, the only loss, was to a team that returned a lot of talent from its College Football Playoff season and never loses at home.

I don't disagree that some aspects of our play have been concerning. I discussed them in a thread I started. But we have two new coordinators and many new players. Some hiccups, especially early in the season, were inevitable.

Maybe you're right. Maybe Allen isn't the guy for the job. But to make that suggestion in September, with a big game coming up at Nebraska and bowl eligibility still very much in play, strikes me as unfair and inappropriate. Again, just my opinion.

 

[Champs1976]

No, you were quite clear to shout down other posters whose views disagreed with your own as not being legitimate, and you were quick to criticize me for writing off the running game too early. Not surprised that you’re ruinously backtracking now. Your next post of substance will be your first. The Mal / Wyche one was epically stupid and showed how little you know about IU. By the way, here’s what you said when people began to question the direction and leadership of the program:

You're entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that your post, and particularly the timing of it, is kind of effed up.

It is September 25. We are 3-1. Two of our three wins were against quality teams. Our first loss, the only loss, was to a team that returned a lot of talent from its College Football Playoff season and never loses at home.

I don't disagree that some aspects of our play have been concerning. I discussed them in a thread I started. But we have two new coordinators and many new players. Some hiccups, especially early in the season, were inevitable.

Maybe you're right. Maybe Allen isn't the guy for the job. But to make that suggestion in September, with a big game coming up at Nebraska and bowl eligibility still very much in play, strikes me as unfair and inappropriate. Again, just my opinion.

Um it's October 10 not September 25 and we're 3-3 and lost to a team with a recently fired head coach and DC and then proceeded to stink it up in the second half against UM while demonstrating pretty much the entire game that the OL was totally unsuited to play in a P5 conf and probably not in FBS and probably only mediocre in FCS, at best. And you say hiccups and new coordinators etc. and yet there is mountains of evidence of new guys coming in and complete turnarounds ocurring, even in mediocre programs traditionally. Heck WKU started a DII QB transfer as their new QB and continue to run their offense like always and their OL performs quite well year in year out. Granted the scheme doesn't change much but the OL personell does. The IU OL problem has existed for years. We've seen it and commented on it and it goes back to DeBord. What you don't seem to grasp is the scheme matters some, but not as much as you seem to think. The lack of fundamentals evidenced by the OL pretty much states it is the unit and the unit's coach at fault. The ONLY reason the OL wasn't as obvious an issue was Penix in his prime got the ball out unbelievably quickly.

Unless you have something of value to say just stop. Move on to a topic you do know something about and pray do tell what your "inside" info tells you that isn't already known by any casual observer.

 

[Jackskip23]

Um it's October 10 not September 25 and we're 3-3 and lost to a team with a recently fired head coach and DC and then proceeded to stink it up in the second half against UM while demonstrating pretty much the entire game that the OL was totally unsuited to play in a P5 conf and probably not in FBS and probably only mediocre in FCS, at best. And you say hiccups and new coordinators etc. and yet there is mountains of evidence of new guys coming in and complete turnarounds ocurring, even in mediocre programs traditionally. Heck WKU started a DII QB transfer as their new QB and continue to run their offense like always and their OL performs quite well year in year out. Granted the scheme doesn't change much but the OL personell does. The IU OL problem has existed for years. We've seen it and commented on it and it goes back to DeBord. What you don't seem to grasp is the scheme matters some, but not as much as you seem to think. The lack of fundamentals evidenced by the OL pretty much states it is the unit and the unit's coach at fault. The ONLY reason the OL wasn't as obvious an issue was Penix in his prime got the ball out unbelievably quickly.

Unless you have something of value to say just stop. Move on to a topic you do know something about and pray do tell what your "inside" info tells you that isn't already known by any casual observer.

Maybe you should hold the head coach accountable for these issues. I’m not the person who made the choices he did, nor did I blindly defend him when things haven’t worked. Not the least bit concerned that you’re not familiar with any of the workings of the program.

 

[IUINSB]

Some hiccups, especially early in the season, were inevitable.

In our case the hiccups appear to be fatal.

 

[Bowlmania]

The Mal / Wyche one was epically stupid and showed how little you know about IU.

Hilarious. Classic projection. You made the patently absurd claim that Sam Wyche, who used IU as a steppingstone to an NFL head coaching gig, would have taken us to "higher levels" than Mallory did. Utterly ridiculous on so many levels.

Then, I think in the same thread, you jumped all over me when I said Allen had been vetted for the Florida State job after Taggart was fired. You told me I was full of it and insisted CTA had never been vetted for the job - - until I produced an article reflecting that he had, in fact, been vetted for it. Then, I guess to hide your embarrassment, you quickly pivoted to questioning the meaning of "vetted," after having no problem with the term in your earlier posts.

You're a fraud and a troll, Skippy, and everyone here has your number. Pretty soon you may have to roll out your 20th user name.

 

[Jackskip23]

Hilarious. Classic projection. You made the patently absurd claim that Sam Wyche, who used IU as a steppingstone to an NFL head coaching gig, would have taken us to "higher levels" than Mallory did. Utterly ridiculous on so many levels.

Then, I think in the same thread, you jumped all over me when I said Allen had been vetted for the Florida State job after Taggart was fired. You told me I was full of it and insisted CTA had never been vetted for the job - - until I produced an article reflecting that he had, in fact, been vetted for it. Then, I guess to hide your embarrassment, you quickly pivoted to questioning the meaning of "vetted," after having no problem with the term in your earlier posts.

You're a fraud and a troll, Skippy, and everyone here has your number. Pretty soon you may have to roll out your 20th user name.

You produced one “report” from the Football Scoop website and nothing more. Nothing from ACC sources, nothing from any Tallahassee source, nothing. That’s it. And you ran away from the fact that, whatever “vetted” may have meant, he was never interviewed nor was he a candidate for the FSU job.

As for Mal and Wyche, I merely said that I thought Wyche would’ve taken us to heights beyond what Mal achieved, and I used his recruiting prowess as support for that. Of course, you ignored (or were probably unaware) that Mal’s Big 10 winning percentage was right at 38%. To suggest that SW couldn’t have eclipsed that standard only underscores your abject ignorance about a sport you never played and one you clearly don’t understand. It also shows you have no idea of what our program was like during that era.

You’ve been consistently wrong here about our team, even as you lecture others about what they should and shouldn’t be able to post. Please stop with the lectures and learn at least a little about our program. Right now, it’s obvious you know nothing. The only fraud here is you, though you’re a sunshiny, happy talk fraud, so you have that going for you. Lol.

 

[Bowlmania]

You produced one “report” from the Football Scoop website and nothing more. Nothing from ACC sources, nothing from any Tallahassee source, nothing. That’s it. And you ran away from the fact that, whatever “vetted” may have meant, he was never interviewed nor was he a candidate for the FSU job.

As for Mal and Wyche, I merely said that I thought Wyche would’ve taken us to heights beyond what Mal achieved, and I used his recruiting prowess as support for that. Of course, you ignored (or were probably unaware) that Mal’s Big 10 winning percentage was right at 38%. To suggest that SW couldn’t have eclipsed that standard only underscores your abject ignorance about a sport you never played and one you clearly don’t understand. It also shows you have no idea of what our program was like during that era.

You’ve been consistently wrong here about our team, even as you lecture others about what they should and shouldn’t be able to post. Please stop with the lectures and learn at least a little about our program. Right now, it’s obvious you know nothing. The only fraud here is you, though you’re a sunshiny, happy talk fraud, so you have that going for you. Lol.

And you produced nothing. As usual.

The only person I’ve lectured here is you, but you’re too ignorant to learn the lesson.

Get a life, Skippy. 24/7 trolling can’t be very satisfying.

 

[Jackskip23]

The only person I’ve lectured here is you, but you’re too ignorant to learn the lesson.

Get a life, Skippy. 24/7 trolling can’t be very satisfying.

But you’re not wise enough to lecture anyone, especially on a topic that you clearly don’t understand. You’ve demonstrated that here on multiple occasions, and the Mal / Wyche scenario is but one. It’s clear you had no idea about that era of IU football, yet you lied and claimed otherwise. I loved Mal, but he won at a 38% rate in the Big Ten. How could any IU fan not know that basic fact? And your commentary about where we are currently is laughable, even if you sincerely believe it. The only troll here is you.

 

[IndyIUFan66]

But you’re not wise enough to lecture anyone, especially on a topic that you clearly don’t understand. You’ve demonstrated that here on multiple occasions, and the Mal / Wyche scenario is but one. It’s clear you had no idea about that era of IU football, yet you lied and claimed otherwise. I loved Mal, but he won at a 38% rate in the Big Ten. How could any IU fan not know that basic fact? And your commentary about where we are currently is laughable, even if you sincerely believe it. The only troll here is you.

As the old saying goes, “Don’t get into a fight with a pig, because everyone gets muddy but the pigs enjoy it.”

The analogy here: This dude says very little, but LOVES to lecture, never admits anything and just keeps coming back for more and sucks people into the death spiral post session back & forth.

Suggestion: don’t let the arrogant tone or false insider bravado suck you in and just move onto the next text or comment. Better for the soul!

 

[Radio Zero]

As the old saying goes, “Don’t get into a fight with a pig, because everyone gets muddy but the pigs enjoy it.”

The analogy here: This dude says very little, but LOVES to lecture, never admits anything and just keeps coming back for more and sucks people into the death spiral post session back & forth.

Suggestion: don’t let the arrogant tone or false insider bravado suck you in and just move onto the next text or comment. Better for the soul!

This is a path for true healing.

 

[Champs1976]

Maybe you should hold the head coach accountable for these issues. I’m not the person who made the choices he did, nor did I blindly defend him when things haven’t worked. Not the least bit concerned that you’re not familiar with any of the workings of the program.

Apparently you read thoroughly, I have clearly held TA accountable. From the very beginning. It baffles me still that even after last season he kept Hiller around. I most definitely did not blindly defend him. You have said nothing to prove you "familiar" with the workings of the program. Stop positioning yourself like you have gifted insight, you don't.

 

[Hoosier Clarion]

That drive was Michigan's only score of the 3rd quarter. Our D made several huge plays in the 3rd to keep us in the game, including Matthews' pick of McCarthy in the end zone (McCarthy's first interception of the season).

You probably don't recall our first possession of the 3rd quarter, but here's what happened. We were 1st and 10 at the UM 47. Bazelak was sacked for a loss of 9 yards, and that was that.

It was a one-score game going into the 4th quarter. We were very much in the game against the #4 team in the country. Our D was playing great. Care to know what happened on our first drive of the 4th quarter? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 9. End of drive. What about IU's next possession? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 11. End of possession. What about IU's next possession? Bazelak sacked for a loss of 8. End of possession.

Here's some Breaking News for you, Ord. A team can't win if it can't score. This was the second game in a row we were unable to score in the second half. More Breaking News - - a team can't score if they can't move the chains, and they can't move the chains with below average run-blocking and virtually no pass blocking. A team can't score if the offense rarely has the ball. Third quarter time of possession: UM: 9:25. IU: 5:35. Fourth quarter TOP: UM: 12:06. IU: 2:54. Final piece of Breaking News: A defense - - even a strong defense - - that is on the field constantly will eventually wear down.

Here's what Allen said after the game: "It starts up front. We have to protect the quarterback. We're not getting it done there."

With a little help from the offensive line, IU would have walked off the field with a huge upset. The D played well enough to win.

Finally, there are people who post here who aren't very knowledgeable when it comes to IU football, and that's fine. Some are casual fans, others perhaps follow basketball more closely and they're waiting for hoops season. You, though, post with an unparalleled arrogance, frequently boasting of purported inside information but never providing any "scoops" or anything of substance before it's public information. Your spin is frequently devoid of support and devoid of fact, and your latest "analysis" in connection with the UM game demonstrates that you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. But, on some level, you are entertaining, so at least you've got that going for you.

Absolutely share your aspects of IUFB in that 2nd half and it's substantiated with like views from Coach Allen. Unlike the unsubstantiated crap thrown around here with leading inferences that all the IUFB inside info is locked in his closet.

 

[Hoosier Clarion]

Defenses that give up 11 play, 98 yard drives aren’t playing great. I realize you’re a sunshiny optimist who recently argued that posters shouldn’t be able to share their legitimate views of the program, but that wasn’t a “great” defensive display. But my realistic assessment of the D isn’t an endorsement of the offense or the O line, but rather the simple realization that our issues go well beyond one position group. Try watching a little closer and you might understand this better. It’s clear that opinions other than your own infuriate you, or that anything you perceive as negative is automatically considered a troll, but that’s not the case. Your Mal / Wyche babble notwithstanding, you should worry more about yourself and far less about everyone else.

Hilarious belly roll.