Your argument is flawed. Take a look at Iowa's schedule from last season and tell me how daunting that was. What a joke.
Question on EIU
- Thread starter clonefan1
- Start date
Your argument is flawed. Take a look at Iowa's schedule from last season and tell me how daunting that was. What a joke.
Clark -
I don't disagree with you AT ALL. However, Lee also hasn't played for over a season. What's more, PSU lost their 3 top DEs after last year. Lastly, they also lost their #2 DT, in Abe Koroma.
While that doesn't mean that PSU's front 7 still won't be exceptionally good ... it DOES mean that PSU's front 7 will rely heavily upon the talent and experience of their top 2 LBs and their DTs (DT was a deep position for them, so they can absorb the loss of Koroma).
In contrast, Iowa's LBs are just about as good and Iowa's DL doesn't have to reload across the board on DL quite like PSU will have to. And the critical thing to note with regard to the DL is that they're obviously of critical important to the success of the LBs!
Furthermore, if PSU continues to favor the noobs over Hayes (one of the few veterans they have at DE) ... that means that the DL will still have growing pains early in the season. It will be even more the case because PSU will need to rely upon the DEs to generate a pass rush since they have all new starters in the secondary. That extra pressure on the DEs to produce in that regard open up exploitable opportunities for opposing Os.
How was Iowa's schedule a joke? Iowa played 2 BCS conference teams in the OOC schedule. Iowa may have missed Ohio State ... however, missing Michigan turned out to be a non-issue. As it turned out, Iowa still played all but 1 of the top teams in the conference. The Big 10 teams that didn't play PSU didn't have any harder of a schedule.Your argument is flawed. Take a look at Iowa's schedule from last season and tell me how daunting that was. What a joke.
You can make this degenerate into the standard (and stupid) Big 10 vs Big 12 debate ... because that's all your argument amounts to.
And yes, I would fully agree that Dolph's argument is equally as empty.
I just found it humerous that he would argue such a silly point. I could just as easily say ok.....
Iowa plays in the Big 10 against Indiana(3-9), Michigan(3-9), Purdue(4-8), Illinois(5-7), and Minnesota(7-6).
Obviously the hawks have it very rough.
That and the fact that last year the Big XII North had a 10 win, a 9 win, and an 8 win team.
Thus the Big XII North had 3 teams out of 6 with 8 wins or more while the Big 10/11 had 5 teams out of 11 with 8 wins or more.
Last edited:
I don't disagree with anything you said. In fact I think Iowa has a decent chance of beating PSU, but more because I'm not sold on the PSU secondary and o-line more than anything else.
The reason most people aren't more skeptical about the PSU d-line is the fact that PSU seemingly reloads there year after year and they have one heck of a d-line coach (as I'm sure you know). This is obviously a flawed assumption and it reminds me a little of the 2005 Iowa defense.
I just found it humerous that he would argue such a silly point. I could just as easily say ok.....
Iowa plays in the Big 10 against Indiana(3-9), Michigan(3-9), Purdue(4-8), Illinois(5-7), and Minnesota(7-6).
Obviously the hawks have it very rough.
That and the fact that last year the Big XII North had a 10 win, a 9 win, and an 8 win team.
Thus the Big XII North had 3 teams out of 6 with 8 wins or more while the Big 10/11 had 5 teams out of 11 with 8 wins or more.
Iowa went 2-0 against the Big 12 and SEC last season. They would obviously dominate both conferences.
I just found it humerous that he would argue such a silly point. I could just as easily say ok.....
Iowa plays in the Big 10 against Indiana(3-9), Michigan(3-9), Purdue(4-8), Illinois(5-7), and Minnesota(7-6).
Obviously the hawks have it very rough.
That and the fact that last year the Big XII North had a 10 win, a 9 win, and an 8 win team.
Thus the Big XII North had 3 teams out of 6 with 8 wins or more while the Big 10/11 had 5 teams out of 11 with 8 wins or more.
Cyclonestate -
And yet you ignore that even a "crappy" Illinois team remained very competitive against a Mizzou team that shared the B12N title. Mind you, I'm not one who typically disparages the B12N either.
I frequently am on record showing respect to ISU and the Big 12 ... is it so hard to be a respectful poster yourself?
You need to remember where you are. I have thousands of posts on CF and 99.9% of those are respectful. You have to remember that it is nearly impossible to have a respectful conversation with the vast majority of hawk trolls on here. They come to take their shots at ISU and the Clone fans. I would say that less then 1% of hawk fans on here actually contribute anything to the site other then creating clicks so Jeremy can make more ad revenue.
That being said I am a firm believer that as a guest you don't come into somebody else's house and take a dump on their carpet. That is all the trolls do in here so to ask me to respect them is asking me to do something that is not possible. Don't forget where you are Homer.
FYI... That crappy Illinois team played Mizzou at a neutral site for the 1st game of the season. Probably isn't the best game to compare team strength. Then again... Mizzou did win so........
I frankly think that regardless of where an individual posts, it doesn't give them license to suspend reason (w/ the possible exception of on the occasional completely "homer" threads on the home football board ... fan is derived from "fanatic" after all).
Anyhow, if we're breaking down facts, there is increasing parity in college football as a whole. Obviously there are the occasional powerhouse programs that are truly insane-good ... however, that tends to also result from a confluence of exceptional recruiting (largely due to geography) and elite coaching.
Of course, one of the biggest monkeys on the back of the Big 10 is the fact that Michigan has been struggling in their transition under Rich Rod. The sad thing is that the Big 10 is and pretty much always will be judged by the elite programs in the conference that also so happen to have "tradition" on their side. Thus, that ends up meaning that the Big 10, for better or worse, gets judged by how well Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State are doing. Thus, with Michigan contending with what is presumably only a transient downturn ... the whole conference ends up having to deal with pie on its face.
What also doesn't help is that the Big 10 got caught in a tough bowl-slate where nearly every team was the underdog. Not shockingly, the Big 10 then didn't fare quite so well ... despite playing several very good teams tight. For instance, if the Big 10 was really so bad ... the Michigan State had no business staying in the game against Georgia. Heck, even I thought that the Spartans would get pasted. Similarly, Northwestern arguably should have beaten Mizzou ... of course, in defense of the Big 12, Mizzou didn't exactly finish their season strong (so it wasn't surprising that Mizzou didn't exactly put their best foot forward). Texas was a big favorite against Ohio State ... and that's another game that easily could have gone either way.
The sad thing is that had the Big 10 not gotten 2 BCS bowl games in '08-'09, the conference would have had a much more favorable bowl slate ... and the conference would have probably won all but 1 of the bowl match-ups. Instead, the conference lost all but one! Thus, if the former scenario had transpired ... the only thing dogging the Big 10 going into the '09 season would have been Michigan.
Oddly enough, folks seem to be casting a fairly blind eye to the ACC and Big East last year. Of course, I guess that's how it goes when the richest conference ends up laying the biggest egg over the bowl season.
Holy generalization Batman! You honestly believe that less than 1% of the Hawk fans here actually contribute to good conversation/debate?
I'd say that myself, THH, SI, HH777, Clark, Gary, Chad, etc. make up about 80% of all Hawkeye posts on this board and the vast majority of those posts are debating football - not taking shots, trolling, etc.
:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:
Do you know how to use a keyboard? I'm being honest here. You never add anything to a debate besides a bunch of laughing faces.
Im usually laughing to hard after reading your ridiculous "well me and my troll buddies add stuff to this site, really guys we do, we're not trolls, we're just like you guys, we put our pants on the same way you guys do, one leg at a time." posts to be able to type
Or you just have nothing to add to a logical debate so you hide behind the other posters and say "LOL, you're a troll! LOLz!!1"
ha, this coming from the guy who hides behind THH and GaryJohnson, get real guy richie, the day something logical comes out of the mouth of one of you guys is the day I actually will get into a logical debate with you.
Who's hiding? Have you paid attention to a single post of mine today? Here's a hint... I say something more than: ":biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:"
Someone getting a little flustered with the :biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:, come on Mr. Richie, tell us how you really feel?