I can’t prove it, but I think the real problem is not personnel or execution. Our scheme has been figured out, which is way worse than the two problems you mentioned.
More than "scheme" is tendencies. When your tendencies become more absolutes and you do nothing to buck them, you get beat - in every way possible.
Except for the few times when we did...I give you a couple of examples...
1) In the second quarter, on first down we run for no gain/short loss. On second and long, ISU brings the safety blitz. Grier gets away from the safety but is still brought down for a sack for a 12 yard loss. Here is where we break tendency - we run a tunnel screen to Jennings who fights and weaves for a 21 yard gain. Still deep in our own end, on 4th and 1 we punt. We never go back to it.
2) In the third, we again run a screen against that blitz. Again to Jennings (not a tunnel though). Two of our linemen, who I won't name, run out to a spot looking to block someone who isn't there instead of finding a man to attack. Instead, the defender cuts Jennings down well short of the first down.
ISU's game plan on defense was really simple and should have been figured out after the first quarter - definitely by halftime - and changes made. Yet, they never were. What was their game plan?
On 1st down, show a 4 or 5 man box. Slant (crash) the line the opposite of the back and bring backers in to stop the cutbacks.
On 2nd and long, bring the safety on a blitz up the B gap and directly in Grier's face. This safety will have to be blocked by the back because WVU does not run their back into the flats on flare routes. Get an easy sack or force incompletions due to WVU running deep dig, posts, and fly routes.
On 3rd down and long, drop 8 into a cloud coverage and keep WVU receivers in front of the sticks.
Walk off field smiling on 4th down.
Unless tendencies change, we can expect a lot more of this as the year goes on.