Can someone explain why some say we’ll be better next year?

[Xerxes]

Jon says it a lot and I’ve heard it on the boards, but I don’t understand.

We lose Wadley but we bring back one of the worst offenses in the country. The young guys get better, probably, but we’re 117th. We’re not going to suddenly leap up and be a top 50 offense.

Defense is losing a ton and they will certainly be worse.

So why the feeling we’re for sure gonna be better?

I'm guessing its because Iowa is playing a lot of young guys at key spots and the schedule is easier. But in college football this year's Iowa team isn't very unique. Lots of programs have first year players/inexperience. Wisconsin being a prime example of a fairly young team that has been decimated on both sides of the ball with injuries. I think Iowa has some young talent but I'm not sure that will translate to success. Everything has to line up perfectly for Iowa to be really successful and that just doesn't happen very often.

The schedule is easier but having Wisconsin, NW, & Nebraska at home doesn't equal improvement. All have won in Kinnick recently and more than once. Its been 10 years since Wisconsin lost there.

 

[Stanzi]

If Daniels & JJ go pro, it's gonna be pretty rough, but at least the Kirk gang will have more excuses....

Daniels would be crazy to leave early. Most NFL teams don’t want a center who snaps the ball when his QB is still making calls.

 

[thefizz]

This is simple. 4 OL will return, both TE's will return, all but 1 WR will be back, all but one DL will return, and it looks like 3 starters in the secondary will return now that Jackson is probably going pro. Most importantly, the QB will return. What we replace is a pair of RB's, all LB's, a CB, and a WR that has perhaps lost a step. Wadley will be tough to replace, but the young guys have shown some flashes and will no doubt be better physically next year than they are this year. A more experienced and physically developed OL will also help the RB's with replacing Wadley as well. If given the choice of replacing your DL, LB's, or DB's, I'll always choose LB's. My best example of this would be in 2005. Iowa had Greenway and Hodge back, but the DL was young and the defense wasn't close to the level they had been in years previous. Jackson will be the toughest guy to replace on the team assuming he leaves. But it wouldn't be far fetched for Ojemudia or Rugumba to take the same step forward that Jackson did this season. I trust Phil Parker's ability to develop DB's. All of this doesn't mean that they WILL be better, but it does mean they SHOULD be better, health permitting. If one were to legitimately believe they SHOULDN'T be better next year, then that person is probably a glass is 1/2 empty sort of person and there just isn't much I or anyone else can do for that person regarding their point of view.

 

[HawkInATX]

The expectations rise from the softer schedule - Iowa could be favored in ten games but lose to the only two ranked teams on it's schedule. People will crow about how great of a turnaround it is and new Kirk, and all kinds of other we're back nonsense. Iowa will finish 2nd to Wisconsin. Iowa will go to a bowl and get destroyed.

Everybody likes to harp on expectations and how Kirk is about the same as Hayden.

Hayden had to play Michigan and Ohio State every year. That's at least one guaranteed loss on talent being talent every year. OSU and Michigan had more scholarships. The Big Ten didn't have revenue sharing. Hayden got paid $48,000/yr! The Iowa program had 17 straight losing seasons before he got here. There were like 8 bowl games. All the advantages were there for the blue bloods. They played 11 games. 7 wins during this period is like 9 wins during the Ferentz era.

Beating OSU or Michigan in the 80's was like climbing Everest. If you weren't a superior physical specimen, you were going to die during the attempt.

The expectations have to rise when the competition gets weaker overall - which is where it will be next year. Next year, Iowa could win every game it is favored in. Just like this year.

Yep, there it is again, gotta bring up Hayden. You do realize he retired almost two decades ago, right? Oh yeah, and what's Kirk's record against Michigan? How about that OSU game a couple weeks ago? How often did Hayden beat PSU in the 90s? I know you're old balls, but people who constantly have to remind us about Hayden live even more in the past than Kirk Ferentz at an off-season presser.

 

[hawkeyes87]

4 OL will return, both TE's will return, all but 1 WR will be back, all but one DL will return,

Wasn't this all true, except for the TE's, this year?

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Sure doesn't look better to me. I remember the last time Iowa started 3 new LB's. Not good.

What, is Matt Campbell coming to coach Iowa and I didn't know it?

 

[revkev73]

Rebuilding year...fill in date...

 

[thefizz]

Wasn't this all true, except for the TE's, this year?

We returned 4 out of 5 OL coming into the year, but 2 of the 4 returnees were injured before conference play so really we were looking at 2 out of 5 returning starters by the time conference play started. Injuries are a part of the game unfortunately so sometimes something can be projected, but it may not play out that way in the season. We also only returned 1 WR with any sort of experience (and coming off of injury) coming into the year as opposed to returning all but one WR next year. So what should be returning in 2018 on offense really isn't the same as what was returning in 2017 at all.

 

[taffaej]

Jon says it a lot and I’ve heard it on the boards, but I don’t understand.

We lose Wadley but we bring back one of the worst offenses in the country. The young guys get better, probably, but we’re 117th. We’re not going to suddenly leap up and be a top 50 offense.

Defense is losing a ton and they will certainly be worse.

So why the feeling we’re for sure gonna be better?

We won't, Jon is drinking the kool-aid again so he does not have his media credentials taken from him just like aways and I am going to say the others had a really good buzz going towards the end of the Whisky game when they posted that junk.

 

[SheagleHawk]

Yep, there it is again, gotta bring up Hayden. You do realize he retired almost two decades ago, right? Oh yeah, and what's Kirk's record against Michigan? How about that OSU game a couple weeks ago? How often did Hayden beat PSU in the 90s? I know you're old balls, but people who constantly have to remind us about Hayden live even more in the past than Kirk Ferentz at an off-season presser.

Please tell me you're not comparing the Michigan and Penn State of the last decade to the Michigan and Penn State of Hayden's day. And KF beat OSU what....twice in almost 20 years? Amazing. KF barely has a winning record against a bottom 5 school of ALL TIME. How do you defend that? Pretty sure Hayden wasn't losing to directional Michigan schools or FCS schools at home.

 

[Kennyfromminne]

Losing wadley from an already below average offense and 3 starting lbs sounds pretty shaky

 

[hawkeyes87]

We also only returned 1 WR with any sort of experience (and coming off of injury) coming into the year as opposed to returning all but one WR next year. So what should be returning in 2018 on offense really isn't the same as what was returning in 2017 at all.

At the time last season ended, we were projecting to return MVB (possession receiver), J Smith (a better athlete w/ questionable receiving skills), and a cast of unknowns / unprovens. This year we project to return Easley (possession), ISM (athlete w/ questionable receiving skills), and a cast of unknowns / unprovens. I don't see much difference (granted, J Smith leaving hurt, but we don't know what's gonna happen to this year's team between now and next year).

 

[Hawkalum2002]

Because we've seen over and over again that as our young o-lines get older, the teams get better. RBs are always replaceable, it'll either be one guy with 1200 yards or two guys combining for it. Receivers we only lose Vandenberg and he's barely been used this year changing receiver spots. And most important, we play a nice, weak schedule again next year. Not 2015 weak, we still play at PSU, but weak enough to win ten games and win the West even if we aren't as talented as we might be other years with a tougher schedule. LB replacement is the big key, that was the difference between 2013 and 2014 for instance.

 

[GVGiant44]

Jon says it a lot and I’ve heard it on the boards, but I don’t understand.

We lose Wadley but we bring back one of the worst offenses in the country. The young guys get better, probably, but we’re 117th. We’re not going to suddenly leap up and be a top 50 offense.

Defense is losing a ton and they will certainly be worse.

So why the feeling we’re for sure gonna be better?

Agree totally. One thing 2010 taught us was we cannot be a good team without good linebackers. That year, we had also just lost three really good linebackers - and some of the ones targeted to start in 2010 were injured. It seemed we couldn't set the edge all season. And the guy playing MLB was just plain a joke - he had no business being on a B1G football team. We could easily see the same thing next year.

 

[Seth53]

Several reasons ...

1) We return more starters/depth than the average B1G team, especially in the trenches and at QB where it counts.

2) Easier opponents. This year we had PSU, OSU and MSU in the crossovers, about as tough as it gets. Next year we have Indiana, Maryland, PSU.

3) Other contenders in the B1G West have much tougher schedules in 2018. Wiscy has Michigan, PSU, Rutgers. Nobby gets Michigan, OSU, MSU. Northwestern has Michigan, MSU, Rutgers.

4) We get ISU, Wiscy, NW and Nebby at home.

An easier schedule doesn't necessarily equate to a better team

 

[revkev73]

After reading this thread...can't wait for Iowa BB to get onto BTN...

 

[thefizz]

At the time last season ended, we were projecting to return MVB (possession receiver), J Smith (a better athlete w/ questionable receiving skills), and a cast of unknowns / unprovens. This year we project to return Easley (possession), ISM (athlete w/ questionable receiving skills), and a cast of unknowns / unprovens. I don't see much difference (granted, J Smith leaving hurt, but we don't know what's gonna happen to this year's team between now and next year).

I don't really count Jerminic Smith as a part of the equation in regards to why or why not the WR unit should be better in 2018 than 2017. Smith was never a part of the 2017 team once the season rolled around. To me, this comes down to do you think Vandeburg, Easley, ISM, and Brandon Smith are better right now in 2017 than Easley, ISM, Brandon Smith, and (blank) will be in 2018? Keep in mind that Easley, ISM, and Brandon Smith are all in their first year in the program and ISM and Smith are both true freshman. All three should be better versions in 2018 and I'd expect ISM and Smith to take larger leaps than Easley between now and the beginning of next season. Also, a more experienced QB will be throwing these guys the ball. I can't guarantee the unit will be better in 2018, but if I was forced to bet a life on it, I'd bet they will be improved. How much improved? I don't know.

 

[Motigerhawk]

We are becoming the "new" Cubs fans: "WAIT TIL NEXT YEAR!"

 

[Motigerhawk]

I like Stanley enough to give KOK time to improve him.
I like our skill guys. But they will be young. And will need time to develop.
Im hoping our O line play improves. Are these our next 2 pro OTs? We better hope. But they will be SOs.
TE will be spectacular. If we get them the ball.
D line should be good. If they let Espy loose and teach how not to get sucked inside.
LBs will be terrible. No doubt about that.
DBs will be a big question. Our CBs after Jackson suck. And even if Jackson stays, opposing teams will Desmond King him. Safeties could be real good.

This team is built for FKFs last season in 2019. Then he retires, takes all that guaranteed money and lets BF take over.
2018 is a developmental year.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

Every team has roster losses every season, but you can't just crunch the numbers like they are all weighted equally.

Returning a young talented QB after a year's experience is huge, as is the return of an OC after said experience. Those experiences alone outweigh most of the losses.

Same with the O-line. Returning two young talented starters at tackle is weighted much more than returning guards. Losing Daniels would hurt, but I'll be surprised if he goes. He's not ready, and, by all accounts, really likes the college experience. There is some intriguing talent at the guard positions. Don't be surprised if Jenkins gets a lot of PT as a frosh.

Even if JJ leaves, personally, I love our talent at CB. Watch out for Turner and Hankins. Either could easily beat out Ojemudia in the spring. Boswell is another dark horse. Snyder should be back and Hooker will only get better.

As for the LBs, there will be a learning curve, but I would say our depth and potential there is much better than it was 3 years ago. Welsh, Jones and Niemann and Taylor all look like solid prospects, and, by all accounts, the coaches are very high on Wieland. I'll be interested to see how that shakes out, but my gut says Hockaday and Mends will be the odd guys out.