"A bad Iowa team" - Cowherd
- Thread starter goods10
- Start date
DexterMorgan
Well-Known Member
Re: ESPN Radio
Here's what Cowherd knows about Iowa.
They looked like **** to close the year.
They lost a ton of players including their QB.
I wouldn't really put a whole lot of weight into his opinion on the situation.
Here's what Cowherd knows about Iowa.
They looked like **** to close the year.
They lost a ton of players including their QB.
I wouldn't really put a whole lot of weight into his opinion on the situation.
goods10
Well-Known Member
Re: ESPN Radio
I just found it interesting to hear him say "a bad Iowa team"
Here is my rule of thumb with Cowherd...I take half of what he says and I listen to about half of that and agree with about half of that.
I just found it interesting to hear him say "a bad Iowa team"
whammer33024
Well-Known Member
yeah can't really argue with him here. like duff said, on paper it looks like it could be a rough year
Hawkeye11en1
Well-Known Member
hoffman22103
Well-Known Member
As everyone has said, he's not bashing Iowa football, just what he see's as possibility to the upcoming season. He was on the Iowa bandwagon early and often last year until they lost late in the year. He was still saying after the Arizona game that Iowa has an outside shot.
RocketHawk
Well-Known Member
Great analysis, dead on.
would it be fair to say we have upgraded talent in some of the vacated positions. Reisner to CJ, for example. Our D line has some good talent coming in and it would not be hard for them to out produce clayborn last year with Daniels getting the attention. the bowl game was fun to watch especially watching Vandenburg yell at stanzi when he threw a pick.
Cowherd doesn't actually think about half the crap he says so I out no stock in him.
Cowherd doesn't actually think about half the crap he says so I out no stock in him.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
Not sure how Cowherd defines "bad", but excluding the first couple years of rebuilding, Ferentz has never had a team win less than 6 games in a season. I don't see that changing this year.. If we make a bowl game (not hard to do) I can't consider us a 'bad" team. Looking at the schedule, I wouldn't be surprised to see 8-9 wins this year.
DexterMorgan
Well-Known Member
Sure it would be fair, but I almost guarantee you he doesn't know who our Qb will be.
Raziel
Well-Known Member
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
Iowa could be "bad" by Iowa's standard IF we get hit pretty bad by the injury bug.
However, provided that the squad remains healthy AND Norm remains healthy ... we're looking at a pretty solid season. I wouldn't be necessarily looking for a "special" season this year ... however, I think that the Hawks will be fun to watch and should be competitive with EVERYBODY they play. I don't think that we can ask for too much more than that.
Other bits of good news for the 2011 squad are the following:
1. We don't have a group right now that is filled with NFL superstars. Thus, we're going to have a squad composed of guys who are much more interested in trying to emerge as a positive story-line rather than having a guy trying to simply trying to hold onto their projected NFL draft position. In other words ... I think that the 2011 squad is going to be a bit "hungrier."
2. We don't have elements on the squad who polarize and/or distract the team from their collective goal. Such guys can really make a negative impact on the team in the locker room ... and that can end up manifesting at game-time too.
3. As another poster indicated, we're looking at upgrades at a bunch of spots. For instance, every returning starter will be better. Furthermore, our #2 RB will likely be entering the fray receiving more reps than Coker got out of 2-a-days last year ... thus, our depth at RB very well could prove to be "more ready" in 2011. As another poster indicated, now that Fiedorowicz has some game reps under his belt and a lot of practice reps with the ones and twos ... the duo of Herman and CJ Fed arguably provides an upgrade to Reisner and Herman. Having Kirksey/Hitchens manning the WILL spot suggests that we could end up seeing an upgrade in coverage .... Hunter was strong against the run, however, he was exploitable against the pass. Furthermore, provided that the LBs can remain healthy, that in itself will help provide us with an upgrade at LB.
4. This kinda goes along with point 3 ... but it's worth noting that Vandenberg arguably has a higher ceiling than Stanzi. Thus, given Vandenberg's skill set, we could potentially hold some advantages at QB. As an example ... many folks probably felt that Chuck Long would have been an awful tough guy to follow ... and yet Chuck Hartlieb did just that. Similarly, Stanzi was definitely a tough act to follow ... and yet Vandenberg could emerge in many respects like the next Hartlieb.
However, provided that the squad remains healthy AND Norm remains healthy ... we're looking at a pretty solid season. I wouldn't be necessarily looking for a "special" season this year ... however, I think that the Hawks will be fun to watch and should be competitive with EVERYBODY they play. I don't think that we can ask for too much more than that.
Other bits of good news for the 2011 squad are the following:
1. We don't have a group right now that is filled with NFL superstars. Thus, we're going to have a squad composed of guys who are much more interested in trying to emerge as a positive story-line rather than having a guy trying to simply trying to hold onto their projected NFL draft position. In other words ... I think that the 2011 squad is going to be a bit "hungrier."
2. We don't have elements on the squad who polarize and/or distract the team from their collective goal. Such guys can really make a negative impact on the team in the locker room ... and that can end up manifesting at game-time too.
3. As another poster indicated, we're looking at upgrades at a bunch of spots. For instance, every returning starter will be better. Furthermore, our #2 RB will likely be entering the fray receiving more reps than Coker got out of 2-a-days last year ... thus, our depth at RB very well could prove to be "more ready" in 2011. As another poster indicated, now that Fiedorowicz has some game reps under his belt and a lot of practice reps with the ones and twos ... the duo of Herman and CJ Fed arguably provides an upgrade to Reisner and Herman. Having Kirksey/Hitchens manning the WILL spot suggests that we could end up seeing an upgrade in coverage .... Hunter was strong against the run, however, he was exploitable against the pass. Furthermore, provided that the LBs can remain healthy, that in itself will help provide us with an upgrade at LB.
4. This kinda goes along with point 3 ... but it's worth noting that Vandenberg arguably has a higher ceiling than Stanzi. Thus, given Vandenberg's skill set, we could potentially hold some advantages at QB. As an example ... many folks probably felt that Chuck Long would have been an awful tough guy to follow ... and yet Chuck Hartlieb did just that. Similarly, Stanzi was definitely a tough act to follow ... and yet Vandenberg could emerge in many respects like the next Hartlieb.
