Ok, at least one of us saw the schedule and knew the 'talent' last year and predicted a 12-0 season. I had nothing to lose, lol. Looking at the schedule this year, it is easy to predict another 12-0 season as they will be favored in like every game. They won a bunch of tough road games last year that they have ALL at home this year. And I don't want to hear about how great Michigan is and their coach, blah, blah, blah...... I'm telling you that Rudock made him look like a genius last year, wait and see how good they do with these other QB's.... LOL. So many think that Michigan coming to town is the game of the year, blah, blah, blah...Iowa will be undefeated at that point, so unless there are major injuries, Iowa will destroy Michigan at home under the lights. Like I said last year, 'mark it', you heard it here first....but nobody did, told me what an idiot I was, blah, blah, blah.........and then conveniently 'forgot' that I called it and even had the scores close....I need to start my own site or make friends with Rob.....I'll make him look like a genius!!!
Another "Iowa got real lucky last season" article
- Thread starter Mademyaccount4u
- Start date
HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
Recent posts now make so much sense.
Ghost-Nick-Clinton version 4
Hope your right again.
Did Clinton get banned?
judzeehawk
Well-Known Member
Now that you mention it I haven't seen him around for awhile. Ahhhhh crap I hope he didn't get banned.
I believe the last TD they got was legit in that it was a pass to their stud in the end zone. However they did convert a 4th and 15ish play shortly before that to keep drive alive. I was so mad because on 3rd down Meir got a sack to force that play and we gave their TE the whole middle of the field to work with and they converted it pretty easily. However if your referring to the blocked punt return yeah that was what it was. But it happened earlier in the game.
Without reading the article... yes Iowa was very lucky to 12-0 in last year's regular season. Pittsburgh, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Nebraska were all games that could have gone either way. They could have easily lost those games. But, they didn't. They didn't lose a single game until Connor f***ing Cook
We were huge favorites late in the game of all of those except Pitt and Wisconsin . Pitt we had a touchdown lead during their last drive of the game. When a team has to score a touchdown to tie, prevent a score late, then win in overtime, you can't really say they had a good chance to win. So to say we got lucky against Pitt is a bit of an exaggeration too. Like I said, the only game we truly got lucky in is Wisconsin and it wasn't even a lot of luck.
People like to say since we couldn't move the ball, we would have lost if they didn't fumble on the goal line. I disagree. Once a team takes the lead, it changes the mindset of both teams. We would have been more aggressive and they would have probably went into safe mode. Think MSU in 09. It happens all the time.
SteveGarvey1
Well-Known Member
Only one of those you could consider lucky was Wisconsin because their QB tripped and fumbled at our 1 yard line. But then maybe one of our D-lineman made the O-lineman step back and make him trip so it might not have been luck after all.
All the other games we were in the lead and basically in charge the whole game.
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
The only this publication can state that Iowa "only has 12 starters" is if you do things like count Ott as a lost starter, even though Iowa played more games without him than with him last year. Let's go through the list.
Offense
FB - Iowa will have a new FB. Cox and Pliewa were good, but Iowa has replaced fullbacks many times.
TE - Krieger-Cobie gone, Kittle in. Is senior year Kittle going to be better than senior-year Krieger Coble? Probably. Depth will not be as good, but Kittle can play.
OL - Iowa loses both Blythe and Walsh. Both good players. But every one of the presumptive starters will have started multiple games in their careers already, including Daniels. Croston, Myer, Welsh, Daniels and Boettger is solid to very good.
WR - replacing T. Smith. J. Smith started twice last year, including a 4 catch, 100-yard game against Illinois.
So on offense, the only place Iowa will be starting a guy who never started a game before is fullback. Do the same exercise with other West teams and I think Iowa compares very favorably.
Defense
DL - Johnson and Bazata are starters. Hesse should be considered a returning starter, he started 8 games. Nelson is the new starter and he played a lot of snaps.
LB - Jewell and Nieman returning starters. Mends is new, played a lot of special teams.
DB - Taylor, Mabin, King all started at least 13 games. King didn't start the Nebraska game as he had to sit out first quarter. Snyder is new starter but played ST.
3 new starters, with only 2 of them (Mends and Snyder) having not played a lot of snaps from scrimmage.
If the team name was Nebraska or Wisconsin and they had this amount of returning starters (including the second team all-league QB and the best defensive back in the country), they would be the heavy favorite for a division title. But since it is Iowa, they are not. To be fair. Iowa has performed poorly before with high expectations.
Biggest concern to me are the specialists. Brand-new guys punting and kicking. I wouldn't be surprised if the 5th-year transfer from Central Michigan wins the punting job.
You make some good points. According to his bio, Kittle started 6 games last year, so I would consider him a returning starter. Also, Bowers was covering for nieman in the bowl game and the spring, but I believe he will be the starter at the Will and has a lot of starting experience as he started all 13 games in 2014. Yes, Kulick will be a new starter, but he did get on the field last year which was good. He is a weight room beast (working on becoming a strength and conditioning coach) and is a legitimate pass catching threat unlike our 2 fullbacks last year. A lot to like about this coming team......
Where is this Corona clown or 247 coming up with this 12 starters number? Are they going from the pre-season depth chart of last year? Or who was actually on the field? Even if you go from the depth chart heading into the 1st game, I count 13? I you count anyone who started a game it's like 17. Who's listed as starters right now, may change by the first game, so what is the point?
docholihawk
Well-Known Member
It's funny, when Bama, ND, and other blue bloods win close games they never mention them as being lucky. Iowa wins like they do every year by having a game plan and sticking to it. It's not like Michigan State beating Michigan last year. That was lucky.
Mademyaccount4u
Well-Known Member
I like when the pundits tell us that X team is better than Iowa because they had better recruiting the last few years. They should just skip the games and give Bama/OSU the NC, you know, because "they won the NC in recruiting.
docholihawk
Well-Known Member
Let me see if I understand this. Iowa won close games because we're lucky. Seems to me Michigan State won a game late in the year on a last second play. I'm guessing the writer would say their win was not lucky. People shouldn't write if they can't set aside their personal bias.
bigjim
Well-Known Member
I feel ya!
