Iowa
- Thread starter 8675309husker
- Start date
Or the last 2 years, to be accurate...
The same time we transitioned to knew offense and defense, coincidentally...
That talent is subjective. There are plenty teams that prove this every year. Recruiting rankings are centered around going out and being seen. Going out and wearing spandex and a goofy looking helmet and playing with no pads on. Being athletic doesn't automatically make a football player. A lot of kids don't go out to events so they don't get ranked. A lot of kids commit to a school and don't do anything other than play for their high school team. What makes those kids any worse than if they went to some Adidas deal and got seen?
Texas, Tennessee, LSU, Florida, USC, Michigan (before Harbaugh) etc; are all examples of teams that recruit really well but under perform. Why? Because their rankings are based around kids being from the south and being "athletic".
Wisconsin is a great example of being a developmental program where if kids stick around for four or five years, they will out perform supposed more talented teams.
The more talented team is the one that lines up 11 guys vs the other 11 guys and whips them.
A few players on this years team were signed in 2013 when the current 1-3 record started. I don't like the results either against Iowa but to be fair...those players are part of the proclaimed "talent" advantage.
I get that, and of course, I’m speaking generally here. Generally, consistently higher rated classes will have more talent than their lower rated counterparts. Generally. There are always exceptions.
Maybe more consideration needs to be given to actually coaching the athletes when they get to the school.
We may "supposedly" have the Jimmy's and the Joe's but we haven't had the X's and the O's lately against quite a few teams.
That’s exactly why much of this thread is saying. The coaching is lacking. I don’t disagree.
That's why the incredible run by John Cook with the volleyball program is so impressive. He consistently gets highly ranked recruiting classes but he knows how to actually "coach" great talent.
John cook has always been known as a great coach. He won at Wisconsin (I believe) before coming here. We brought him in because he was the Nick Saban of volleyball.
Riley being compared to Cook isn’t fair to Cook.
And yes, the run Cook is on is amazing.
Spoken like a true Iowa fan. Hard fought losses and a defense that does everything but win (while giving up the big play when a big play absolutely had to be made--4th down against PSU and a quarterback draw on 3rd vs MSU in the closing seconds) = amazing.
As much as Iowa fans love hard fought losses, your fan base should be satisfied this year, since you're sure to have at least a few more of them on the way to Ferentz's annual 5 losses. Neither of our programs are good--the difference is that we're not delusional enough to think otherwise.
You're kidding right? I've seen plenty of bragging on Facebook and here to see the delusion is mutual. There is no difference in Iowa and Nebraska fans. But to simply look at 0-2 vs, 2-0 and say that Nebraska is better is being just as delusional as me sitting here taking solice in two extremely close losses to waaaaaay better competition than Illinois and Rutgers.
I personally think taking a top 5 team to the brink and losing is more impressive than beating Rutgers by 10 at home. A Rutgers team that got beat 56-0 last night.
Oh, well I didn't include the all-knowing Facebook crowd. Color me impressed with that irrefutable fountain of football wisdom.
But again, a loss is a loss...except in Iowa fan's world. Only a Hawkeye would sit back smug and satisfied with a "better loss" than a conference rival.
I think outside the top 10 classes it's pretty wide open. If you load your class with 4 and 5 stars like the top 10 classes, you're generally gonna hit on maybe half of them. And that's all it takes. Can we sit here and honestly say that there is any sort of difference in a player ranked as a 5.7 three star and a player ranked 5.8 four star? I don't think so at all. But I will say, it sure makes me feel all warm inside to see that fourth star.
I'm talking in reference to the rest of the season. I'm using those games to predict where I think the two teams will finish the season. Which is way behind Wisconsin.
So we can assume that you're counting the Michigan State game as a "good" loss, then? To the same demoralized Spartan team that won 3 games last year and just got rolled by the Irish the week before?
Your subtle shots at everything Nebraska are more than fine with me, because that's what a good rivalry should be--nasty, full of contempt for the other program, etc. It's just funny that you seem to think that A-we're all oblivious to it, and B- that Iowa has anything to feel superior about. Based on two losses, no less.
Are we sure Iowa's defense is "amazing"? They are pretty good at keeping opponents out of the end zone but give up tons of yards at times against teams with competent offenses.
I'd say yes. The lack of offense and a horrible punter has put them on their own half of the field so many times the past two games. And to only give up 17 points the last two games is pretty crazy. Penn State is no slouch offensively.
Also, who do people get so into yards given up? Is it yards or points scored that proclaim the winner?
Fair enough. Vegas agrees with me at this point as Iowa is a 20 point favorite against Illinois. I think Nebraska opened at -6.5?
I may be oblivious to my own bias but I'm not oblivious that I have biases. Which I admitted in my original post. If that makes sense.
Fair enough. Vegas agrees with me at this point as Iowa is a 20 point favorite against Illinois. I think Nebraska opened at -6.5?
I may be oblivious to my own bias but I'm not oblivious that I have biases. Which I admitted in my original post. If that makes sense.
Of course, the disparity in the Vegas line exists largely because Nebraska had to travel to Champaign while Iowa will be hosting the Illini at Kinnick. But you already knew that.
No hard feelings at all. We all have our biases--I certainly have mine when it comes to the Huskers. And for the record, I actually think your message board schtick is pretty good (i.e., modestly poor mouth Iowa just enough so that you can simultaneously rip into Nebraska while still coming across as fair-minded and even keel). It's all in good fun, and again, part of what makes a great rivalry.
I'm actually more harsh on Iowa on our own boards. Kirk is something like 7.5-5.3 since 2010. That includes a 12-2 season. Haven't won a bowl since then either. I like Kirk as a person and his philosophy works in big games. But he doesn't change them for games Iowa should win. I wouldn't be against making a change in coaches but I've had to settle into knowing he is gonna be around atleast another five years. Gotta take the bad with the good though.
