Canzeri transfer rumblings????

[tm3308]

No, that was not at all the point.

No, the point was that we're complaining because a guy got 30 carries, the fact that he averaged 6 ypc and scored twice be damned.

Regardless of what you think Bullock or Daniels may have done with a few more carries, nobody was going to do more than Weisman did with his workload. There is no good reason to complain that Weisman had too many carries; not in a close game and not when he had such a good game.

 

[LawVHawk]

Jon, this thread needs to be closed and immediately deleted. Too much herp-a-derp for a serious sports message board.

#embarrassing

 

[DFaceHawkeye]

Wait wait wait...we hate Weisman now?? I don't get it.

I think all the hawk fans on here actually hate everything about the football team.

 

[NCHawker]

 

[Hawkfromnorwalk]

Obvious derp thread is absolutely ******* obvious.

 

[alexzelada]

Jon, this thread needs to be closed and immediately deleted. Too much herp-a-derp for a serious sports message board.

#embarrassing

It takes a lot of Derp to make demands when it isn't your board

 

[DP5555]

I'm pretty sure RockNRollFace is the same guy who swore up and down Harrison Barnes was gonna accomplish nothing at the NBA level. Not exactly the sharpest tack in the box.

Can't do anything but shake your head at some of the stuff we've seen posted the last few weeks. The level of insanity in the fanbase is approaching unique territory.

 

[imported_ankle23]

Well if you arent going to take any then Kirk could use some of that offense.

i'm all in on donations to the program. i'll do whatever is necessary to help. team player here......

 

[alexzelada]

Double post = still figuring out this computer/internet thingy

 

[imported_ankle23]

That can just as easily work the other way. The more opportunities a back gets the more chances to break long gains which greatly increase YPC. I thought I would explain that to you.

yeah, that makes sense. law of averages was always overrated. so you are saying as number of carries increases, yards per carry generally increase as well......?? thanks for that!

 

[tm3308]

That can just as easily work the other way. The more opportunities a back gets the more chances to break long gains which greatly increase YPC. I thought I would explain that to you.

More carries also gives a back more chances to get stuffed, and therefore bring down their average.

 

[Sirhouseman]

I think all the hawk fans on here actually hate everything about the football team.

I swear you are right.

 

[M1911A1Hawkeye]

I think all the hawk fans on here actually hate everything about the football team.

I can say that I don't.

 

[hawkfan2679]

Regardless of what you think Bullock or Daniels may have done with a few more carries, nobody was going to do more than Weisman did with his workload.

You are entering the world of conjecture, I think, unless you are saying that if given only a few more carries, neither Bullock nor Daniels would have approached 30 for 180 and a couple scores. We'll never know what Canzeri/Bullock/Daniels could have done with 30 carries...

 

[tm3308]

You are entering the world of conjecture, I think, unless you are saying that if given only a few more carries, neither Bullock nor Daniels would have approached 30 for 180 and a couple scores. We'll never know what Canzeri/Bullock/Daniels could have done with 30 carries...

We aren't talking about giving any of those guys 30 carries. We're talking about taking maybe 5-10 of Weisman's carries and spreading the wealth.

Think about that for 2 seconds. We're saying we should have taken away 5-10 carries who rushed for 180 yards at a 6-yard clip and scored twice. Sure, I can't know to a moral certainty that Bullock, Daniels, or anyone else might have done better had they gotten 30 carries. But I do know that this is a particular bone that's just stupid to pick.

"RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE....We could have gotten MORE than 296 yards if we'd just given the ball to someone OTHER than the guy that was dominating the game...RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE."

Seriously, there were issues with what Iowa was doing. But the running game wasn't one of them, so why are people nitpicking it like this?

 

[bitmap]

Like most people on here, I really don't know a lot about football, but this is impressive.

Hint: I don't know that much about football either. I like football. I like patterns and distributions. That is an example of what happens when those worlds collide.

 

[hawkfan2679]

We aren't talking about giving any of those guys 30 carries. We're talking about taking maybe 5-10 of Weisman's carries and spreading the wealth.

Think about that for 2 seconds. We're saying we should have taken away 5-10 carries who rushed for 180 yards at a 6-yard clip and scored twice. Sure, I can't know to a moral certainty that Bullock, Daniels, or anyone else might have done better had they gotten 30 carries. But I do know that this is a particular bone that's just stupid to pick.

"RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE....We could have gotten MORE than 296 yards if we'd just given the ball to someone OTHER than the guy that was dominating the game...RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE."

Seriously, there were issues with what Iowa was doing. But the running game wasn't one of them, so why are people nitpicking it like this?

The subject was Weisman's workload...you said no one would have done more with his workload. While that is quite possible, it is also quite possible that one of the RB's could have done as much or more with the workload. Hence the opening qualifying statement in my post.

FWIW I have no qualms with the running game. I expected to see a few more break wide open into the secondary/open field (based on Weisman 2012), but I am not going to complain about 500 yards rushing in 2 games, regardless of the level of opponent.

 

[tm3308]

The subject was Weisman's workload...you said no one would have done more with his workload. While that is quite possible, it is also quite possible that one of the RB's could have done as much or more with the workload. Hence the opening qualifying statement in my post.

FWIW I have no qualms with the running game. I expected to see a few more break wide open into the secondary/open field (based on Weisman 2012), but I am not going to complain about 500 yards rushing in 2 games, regardless of the level of opponent.

I should have phrased that post better. If those other guys had gotten 30 carries, maybe they do the same thing or even better. But I don't think Iowa would have been any better off by taking a handful of Weisman's carries and spreading them among Daniels, Bullock and Canzeri (or any combination of the three). Which is what some people seem to be suggesting.

 

[franstheman]

Canzeri should be thankful Iowa was the only Big Ten school to offer him and give him an opportunity to play big time college ball. Clearly Daniels is the more talented of RB and if Canzeri leaving means we get Leshun Daniels I'm all for it.

 

[Billso]

"RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE....We could have gotten MORE than 296 yards if we'd just given the ball to someone OTHER than the guy that was dominating the game...RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE."

Seriously, there were issues with what Iowa was doing. But the running game wasn't one of them, so why are people nitpicking it like this?

Because... derp?