Oh I agree that money and influence can do a lot of things. I guess what I'm saying is that these players don't really have any of that. The one benefit I could see (and admittedly it's a big one) is that they are probably able to get better lawyers than they otherwise could afford.
Clayborn
- Thread starter Clark
- Start date
Oh I agree that money and influence can do a lot of things. I guess what I'm saying is that these players don't really have any of that. The one benefit I could see (and admittedly it's a big one) is that they are probably able to get better lawyers than they otherwise could afford.
Even as bad as Iowa's legal troubles were a couple years ago we are only talking about a relatively small number of cases for both schools, especially if you take out the large number of alcohol related offenses which I assume never end up at trial.
but they didn't...and they didn't. ISU's defense (and Nebby's offense) stepped up when ISU was struggling on offense. Iowa's defense couldn't get the turnover they needed.
Here is your next question, Northwestern is 17-8 the last 2 years, if that is mediocre then how many games above .500 does a team have to be to not be considered "mediocre".
Iowa beat UNI on last second block of a FG....twice
Beat Ark St by 3
Michigan St on a last second pass
Indiana on the refs horrific calls
Michigan handed (yes handed as they weren't forced at all) Iowa 5 TO's
Penn St game was a coin flip
6 Games that could have gone either way and yet Iowa is in the National Title talk next year? Be happy you had a horse shoe up your YOU Know What and enjoy the Orange Bowl. One of the luckiest seasons I have seen by a team ever
Beat Ark St by 3
Michigan St on a last second pass
Indiana on the refs horrific calls
Michigan handed (yes handed as they weren't forced at all) Iowa 5 TO's
Penn St game was a coin flip
6 Games that could have gone either way and yet Iowa is in the National Title talk next year? Be happy you had a horse shoe up your YOU Know What and enjoy the Orange Bowl. One of the luckiest seasons I have seen by a team ever
They also had one of the most unluckiest injury seasons I can remember (even in 2004 when Iowa down to their 5th RB at least the injuires were confined to that spot) They lose a starting RB before the year and his backup never sees the field due to a foot injury. The third and fourth string runningbacks both also miss games due to injury. Their two best o-linemen missed 3 or more games, not to mention their starting guard missed the first two games due to injury. The starting tight end missed 3 games. The starting qb missed 2.5 games. The starting cornerback was hurt before the season. The starting safety missed two games. Heck, Iowa couldn't even keep their punt returner healthy (they lost two of those, both also receivers). Did I miss anyone?
I think it's pretty fair to say that the luck evened out (as it usually does)
Good point. I will agree that Iowa had injuries. But I also argue that EVERY team has injuries.
AROB missed games, so did Arnaud. We lost Money Reynolds for the season (best WR), Parker for the season (best DE), had 2 players quit mid year, had Terron Benton break his leg, and had Reggie Stephens miss time as well.
Happens to everyone. But I won't sit here and argue that injuries didn't affect Iowa
One problem. You don't really know what you're talking about. Penn State was a coin flip until Iowa took over the game. The Arkansas State game was never in doubt. And your Michigan analysis isn't even worth discussing in depth.
The other 3 games were close though. You're right about that. But I'm sure you don't want to talk about Iowa's two close losses.
Was Iowa not losing to Penn St in the 4th quarter? Did they not need a special teams TD to win the game?
I know the Arkansas St game was never in doubt but they beat a really really really bad team by 3 points at home. Not the sign of a National Championship team. Any other top 5 team in the country beats Arkansas St by 40+
Michigan fumbles punt. Forcier fumbles ball with no defender around him when going to throw the ball and Iowa wins by 2 points against a truly pathetic Michigan team
No they didn't need it. Iowa won by 11.
Arkansas State played a good game. Their D-line stopped the run. Stanzi lit 'em up. Ferentz scaled it back in the 4th on offense and the defense got picked apart by a senior qb to make the game close.
That pathetic Michigan team still thought they were decent against Iowa. It was a great chance to get back on the right track after their first loss. Forcier was actually very good in the first half, but Michigan had lapses on defense that cost them more than just the Iowa game. And Iowa did create turnovers against Michigan. They did get lucky that Forcier wasn't good with a cold football.
You are fooling yourself if you think that Iowa didn't need that punt to win the game. Football is a game of momentum. Iowa's offense hadn't done anything to that point
Arkansas St is a 4-8 team that Louisville beat worse than you did. Like I said top 5 to even top 15 teams beat ASU by 40+ this year
Forcier was not good. Did you not watch the game. That's not the point anyway. Iowa was given 3 TO's. 3 times Michigan handed the ball to them without them being forced
How could anyone argue this Iowa team wasn't lucky? That makes no sense. That's like me saying that Iowa State wasn't lucky against Nebraska. We were extremely lucky that they gift wrapped a couple TO's for us. I am not going to pretend that we are better than we are because of it
S
st8
Guest
Iowa wasn't even really being discussed in the NAtional Champioship picture this year when they were 9-0. what makes anybody think they will be going into next season? Until Iowa can show that they can beat mediocre teams handily without the aid of fortunate bounces or missteps by the opposition, I don't think anyone can seriosly consider them a contender. remember, a few plays go differently and the hawks are sitting at 7-5 and the "has ferentz worn out his welcome" talk would be dominating the message boards. This is not to say that they didn't do what they had to do to be where they are because they got it done (withor without style points), but they are fortunate to be in a BCS game.
lets not forget that they haven't beaten GT yet. If they go to the Orange and lose, I really don't think they go into next year ranked much higher then they did this year.
lets not forget that they haven't beaten GT yet. If they go to the Orange and lose, I really don't think they go into next year ranked much higher then they did this year.
So Iowa was undefeated and ranked #4 in the BCS with three weeks left in the season, and you're trying to convince yourself that they weren't in the NC discussion. Brilliant. Of course they were. So was Cincy, Boise, and TCU at that point in the season. They were never mentioned as frontrunners, for obvious reasons. But they were absolutely part of the discussion because nobody knew what would unfold with FL, AL, and TX. Then the sky fell against NW.
As for next year there's very little chance Iowa begins the season as a legit contender no matter what happens in the Orange Bowl, which might cause some Iowa fans to get huffy but in the end makes no difference.
S
st8
Guest
It has nothing to do with trying to convince myself. weren't all of you (trolls and hawk bandwagoners) the ones whining about the "lack of respect" by national pundits? few considered them a factor in the BCS picture, most were simply waiting for the inevitable which happened against northwestern.
Did you watch the game, Michigan was handed 25% of their scoring by Iowa without it being forced.
Would Michigan have scored without the turnovers, maybe, but would Iowa have went down the field and scored if they didn't throw that pick 6 creating a 14 point swing, maybe. You can't continue to compare one team's TO's without comparing the ones they got handed to them as well.
??? Since when is throwing an interception counted as HANDING a team a turnover? It's not and it also is not what I said
Michigan player dropped a punt that Iowa recovered. That is handing it to a team
Forcier dropped a ball with nobody around him. That is handing it to a team.
When Stanzi threw an INT (something he did more than anyone else in the country while he was healthy) you can't say that is the same
A lot of them were whining about lack of respect. I thought we were getting the respect we deserved based on the way we were winning. Either way, even the fact that some national pundits were banging on us doesn't dismiss the fact that Iowa was absolutely in the BCS NC game discussion. Unless I was imagining all the times I heard DP and the talking heads on ESPN discuss whether it would/should be Iowa, Cincy, or TCU in the title game if they won out and one of the top 3 teams lost. That kind of qualifies as being in the discussion.
No matter how much you dislike a team, if they're undefeated and #4 in the BCS with 3 weeks to go, they're a factor in the BCS picture.