Counterpoint, from ChatGPT…
Looking specifically at the 2025 Rutgers team (the season that included losses to Iowa, Minnesota, and Penn State), I think there were several coaching decisions that materially affected those games. Some were schematic, others were game-management related.
Iowa (38-28 loss)
This was probably the most frustrating because Rutgers actually played well enough offensively to win.
1. Failure to adjust to Iowa’s downhill run game
- Iowa increasingly leaned on quarterback runs and gap schemes as the game wore on.
- Rutgers continued playing aggressive pressure looks without consistently fitting the run.
- Iowa controlled the fourth quarter once it realized Rutgers wasn’t changing the picture.
2. Undisciplined situational football
- The defensive holding penalty that erased a third-down stop may have been a player mistake, but repeated late-game penalties become a coaching issue.
- Good teams under Schiano are normally disciplined. In this game they weren’t.
3. Special teams management
- Rutgers left points on the field with kicking issues.
- When you’re playing Iowa, every possession matters. Continuing to rely on a struggling kicking operation arguably cost win probability.
Coaching grade: C
Minnesota (31-28 loss)
This one felt more like a coaching loss than an execution loss.
1. No defensive adjustment after halftime
Minnesota found answers offensively, while Rutgers largely stayed in the same defensive structure.
Schiano even acknowledged afterward that tackling, takeaways and coverage breakdowns had become recurring issues and hinted that defensive changes were coming during the bye week.
2. Communication issues
The botched late-game snap wasn’t just a player error.
Schiano attributed it to crowd noise and communication, but that’s something coaches spend all week preparing for on the road
3. Conservative late-game approach
Rutgers became less aggressive once protecting a lead instead of continuing to attack through the passing game, which had been successful.
Coaching grade: D+
Penn State (40-36 loss)
Ironically, I think this was Schiano’s best coached game of the three.
Offensively
- Excellent game plan.
- Kaliakmanis threw for over 330 yards.
- Raymond ran for nearly 190.
- Rutgers scored 36 points against one of the nation’s better defenses.
The problem wasn’t offense.
1. Defensive philosophy
Penn State repeatedly gashed Rutgers on the ground.
The inability to slow the rushing attack wasn’t just talent—it reflected failure to adapt fronts and fits throughout the game. Rutgers surrendered over 300 rushing yards.
2. No answer for explosive plays
Penn State consistently generated chunk plays after halftime.
Rutgers rarely forced the Nittany Lions to sustain long drives.
3. Late-game management
The offense had to play nearly perfectly because the defense couldn’t generate stops.
That’s more an indictment of defensive coaching than offensive play-calling.
Coaching grade: B-
Bigger Picture
The pattern across all three games wasn’t really offensive coaching.
It was:
- inability to adjust defensively during games
- poor run fits
- inconsistent tackling
- lack of takeaways
- failure to get one critical stop in the fourth quarter
Those weren’t isolated problems—they persisted throughout Big Ten play. Analysts covering the team pointed to defensive collapse and run defense as recurring issues that extended beyond any single game.
www.nytimes.com
