Hawkeyenation podcast

[HawkU]

..... I absolutely hate that part of it and the game does not interest me due to that anymore.

And yet here you are posting on a rival's forum no less.

What does it look like when you do have interest in said game?

 

[Hawk4Fan]

Steve has never been very bright when it comes to ISU and Michigan, his homerism is stupidly high on those two and he does nothing to hide it. To even say he has a clue what really happened is thrown out the door with those 2 teams...cause all he is when he talks about those 2 is a MAJOR CLOWN!

 

[4thngoal]

Here is the real deal.
Iowa doesn't have the depth yet at DB to have this many guys banged up. The younger guys got a taste and now maybe that lights a fire under their assess.
I'm hoping that the lb play was because of the obvious help needed in the back. It was fair, but far from a strength of the team.
Our strength in the ISU game was the lines. (Go back and watch). You take out the two 45min breaks and our lines start to dominate. Our avg per carry was pretty good at times anyway and without those delays would have gone up. As I said we didn't get into a rhythm or even really hear pads popping until the 4th quarter.

 

[deanvogs]

Happy to talk about that if you want to. I just disagree with you 100%. Calling a contest where there is a winner and a loser a no lose situation is fundamentally incorrect. I also think the notion that "ISU will be better for this game later" is just totally overblown and incorrect. ISU is no longer in a position where they need this game to sell tickets or get revenue from it.

I'm interested in ISU raising the profile of their program. The long history of this game shows it tips strongly in the favor of the Hawks. Even if the scales even out, and it's a game with a 50% win probability, that's bad. They shouldn't be playing games with less than a 75% win probability in the noncon. If they could schedule 3 teams in the 90% range that would be great. There have been 3 Big 12 teams that have elevated themselves from the basement to a good team in my lifetime and they've all scheduled the crappiest noncon teams possible.

ISU needs wins. ESPN's FPI has ISU ending with either 6 or 7 wins based on the metric right now. Massey has them as a 6 or 7 win team. If this team wins 6 games this year it's a step back, and then we graduate a ton of people this year, and we play on the road next year at Kinnick and all of a sudden making a bowl in 2020 becomes difficult. When you have as many natural disadvantages as ISU does, you need to give yourself every advantage possible, and scheduling is one of the few ways you can do that.

Look at Purdue for example, a program on a similar level as ISU. I think most fans here would say Brohm is a good coach. But he's a guy who has never won more than 7 games at Purdue, Purdue is going to be very hard pressed to make a bowl this year as they are just 1-2. At a program at this level, the scheduling they are doing is foolish. They should be 3-0 right now. Right now FPI is projecting them at 3 or 4 wins.

This isn't even to mention how this rivalry turns some regular people into a-holes. And it turns some a-holes into mega a-holes. I absolutely hate that part of it and the game does not interest me due to that anymore.

Fans won't accept scheduling 3 horrible teams for so long. Heck Iowa fans think we should have ISU and another team like Notre Dame, or Oklahoma, or Texas or some primetime opponent.

Losing to Iowa does nothing at all to hurt ISU. If ISU only wins 4 conference games, well then who really cares if they are then a 6 win team or 7 win team? Either way that is and okish type year for ISU and you go bowling. Now lets say ISU wins 7 games in the Big12, well once again now you are talking ISU is a 9 win or 10 win team, and either way the important thing is did that 7-2 Big12 record get them into the Big12 championship game.

You are making WAYYYYY to big a deal out of loss here. I would say the same thing if Iowa loss this game. Even if Iowa lost in Ames, think of it like the 2004 season. You still have the B1G in front of you that you can win, and that is what really matters. The 2004 team goes 10-2, and that loss to Arizona St. is a footnote in history for the most part. I'll take a B1G championship and a loss to ASU over lets say beating ASU, but dropping a close game to Penn St., Minnesota, or Purdue any day.

 

[Xerxes]

Iowa won by 1 point. What happened in the game is what happened. Nobody dominated.

100% correct.

ISU had only one 3 and out the entire game. Averaged over 7 yards per play. Had 2 gigantic turnovers that both cost them points. One was completely self inflicted.

Iowa had a 10 min TOP advantage and ran 20+ more plays. Had big advantage on 3rd downs and turnovers. Struggled terribly against the ISU passing game.

Both teams had advantages & disadvantages in different areas. Ultimately a pretty evenly matched game that was basically decided on 1 single play. Had that play gone different, ISU most likely wins.

 

[NCHawker]

Man is their analysis just horrible about the Iowa vs ISU game. ISU had two big plays and then did nothing offensively the rest of the night. 2 plays for 124 yards and 2 TD's. Outside of that they ran only 52 plays for 294 yards and 3 points. ISU's defensive coordinator Heacock says that yards given up mean nothing, look at red zone defense (ISU got into the red zone 1 time and scored 3 points). Also he says look at 3rd down conversions (ISU was 3 of 9). ISU is lucky they got 2 big plays, otherwise this is just another Iowa drubbing of ISU.

Good insight and deeper than just sitting back lazily and citing yards per play. Outliers skey averages and people use the Average too often to describe something.

 

[deanvogs]

Honestly, just to put in to perspective how telling that stat typically is:

In last 10 years in College Football, teams that gained 7.7 yards per play or more and allowed 4.3 yards per play or less were 498-2. Iowa State was one of those two losses on Saturday.

Obviously there were certain circumstances that lead to that being not significant. But typically that stat is a 99.6% winning chance for the team that achieves it.

In how many games where a team averaged 7.7 yards per play did they only run 54 plays? That would be one question that I have. I would also ask that in how many games where a team averaged 7.7 did they average 5.65 yards per play if you take away only 2 big plays?

I knew as soon as I heard this from Deace's lips that ISU fans were going to glob onto this, like that is the end all beat all stat, and there wasn't any fluky at all on how ISU got to 7.7 yards per play. Now I see Blum twitting this out, like he came up with it (Blum is a hack that got it from someone else but is acting like he came up with it). I do see he is using it as a rally cry that all will be good for ISU

 

[deanvogs]

1. Why wouldn't they "accept" it? KSU fans accepted it for 25 years of the Snyder era.

2. I care if they are a 6 win or a 7 win team.

3. ISU has never won 7 games in the Big 12 and won't this year either. If ISU goes 7-2, you are correct this game wouldn't matter just like ultimately it didn't matter the last two years. But ultimately this program has a razor thin margin for error. I'm not particularly interested in that margin being even tighter. Also, if you go 7-2, with three auto wins that's a 10 win season for the first time in school history. Seems like that would be good.

I will say this - I think you're coming at this from a different perspective than me because you are rooting for a higher level of program than I do. Iowa is extremely consistent. Iowa is extremely consistent as a team winning 7 to 8 games. ISU is not, and this particular wave upward could and should have been higher. There is no guarantee it lasts. If ISU goes 2-1 in the noncon next year and then 3-6 in conference play, and misses a bowl, the game was bad. Very bad. Very, very huge downside bad. And that's not a risk I think ISU should be taking.

Maybe it is just a difference of perspective. I get you want every win obviously, but the fact is if you went 3-0 every non con while beating nobodies, and only could win 4 conference games, ISU fans would get sick of that soon as well. I mean it isn't like you would be going to a good bowl game winning 7 games and finishing 6th-8th in the Big12.

 

[Hawk90]

Happy to talk about that if you want to. I just disagree with you 100%. Calling a contest where there is a winner and a loser a no lose situation is fundamentally incorrect. I also think the notion that "ISU will be better for this game later" is just totally overblown and incorrect. ISU is no longer in a position where they need this game to sell tickets or get revenue from it.

I'm interested in ISU raising the profile of their program. The long history of this game shows it tips strongly in the favor of the Hawks. Even if the scales even out, and it's a game with a 50% win probability, that's bad. They shouldn't be playing games with less than a 75% win probability in the noncon. If they could schedule 3 teams in the 90% range that would be great. There have been 3 Big 12 teams that have elevated themselves from the basement to a good team in my lifetime and they've all scheduled the crappiest noncon teams possible.

ISU needs wins. ESPN's FPI has ISU ending with either 6 or 7 wins based on the metric right now. Massey has them as a 6 or 7 win team. If this team wins 6 games this year it's a step back, and then we graduate a ton of people this year, and we play on the road next year at Kinnick and all of a sudden making a bowl in 2020 becomes difficult. When you have as many natural disadvantages as ISU does, you need to give yourself every advantage possible, and scheduling is one of the few ways you can do that.

Look at Purdue for example, a program on a similar level as ISU. I think most fans here would say Brohm is a good coach. But he's a guy who has never won more than 7 games at Purdue, Purdue is going to be very hard pressed to make a bowl this year as they are just 1-2. At a program at this level, the scheduling they are doing is foolish. They should be 3-0 right now. Right now FPI is projecting them at 3 or 4 wins.

This isn't even to mention how this rivalry turns some regular people into a-holes. And it turns some a-holes into mega a-holes. I absolutely hate that part of it and the game does not interest me due to that anymore.

Since adding on, besides the Iowa and UNI games, when have they ever sold out......never.

 

[4thngoal]

d

Honestly probably most of them. You don't average 7.7 YPC if you run 75 plays, because then you'd have 577 yards of offense and that doesn't happen that often.



Again, you're not listening. It's the risk of going 3-6 in the Big 12 and not making a bowl. That's the risk and it's IMO it's not worth taking. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

You are missing the point.
Say you are backed up to your own 1 yard line. Throw a pass on first down and take it to the house. 99 yards.
Later you are at your 20 and throw and it goes to the 50. 30 more yards.
2 plays 129 yards. The lesser amount of plays in a game (yards divided by plays) the better the stats look. When really you got lucky on one play (because going 99 yards in one play is lucky) and had another decent play and that's all.

It's like shooting baskets. You might make the first 3 and if you stop you are 3-3, great stats, but if you keep going you might be 5-10. Not so great.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

I still say the Clowns have more to gain and us to lose by playing this series. Their biggest Super Bowl ever, we beat them (albeit by 1 point, but that is all it takes), at their place, on College Game Day.....and we only go up 1 spot in one of the polls. Enough said.

 

[hawkeyes87]

Man is their analysis just horrible about the Iowa vs ISU game. ISU had two big plays and then did nothing offensively the rest of the night. 2 plays for 124 yards and 2 TD's. Outside of that they ran only 52 plays for 294 yards and 3 points.

I really can't decide what's more laughable ( or sad ): your "analysis", or the fact that you bash somebody else's version as a preface to yours, or the fact that so many people have commended this w/ a "like".

Basically, your point is that possession time & number of plays are more important than touchdowns? I can't believe it took so long for me to realize @deanvogs is a Ferentz!

If you don't count ISU's 2 big plays (meaning you take 2 possessions away from their stats), the Hawks dominated their offense to the tune of "only" 6 yards a play???

Possession time was Hawks 35 to 25 . Yards 313 to 418 ( 294 "non-big" ). Plays 72 to 54.

But, the Hawks' 1st drive was 15 plays, 7:30, and 68 yards. If we take that out ( the same way you want to take ISU's big plays out of consideration ), the possession / plays are basically even.

You know what stats matter for a game? Points. The points stats for the game were 18-17, so the Hawks won. But, to say or imply any team dominated is silly.

 

[SpiderRico]

Anyone, from either side, trying to say that one team dominated another team is crazy.

Iowa played their game.....on offense they controlled the ball, didn't turn it over, played balanced (something like 36 runs and 36 passes), and converted it's opportunities in the redzone (although not into TDs, but they still converted their chances); on defense, with a depleted secondary, they gave up a couple of big plays but for the most part bent between the 20's and let ISU make the mistakes in/around the redzone.

In the end, it was enough to escape with a W.

 

[deanvogs]

I really can't decide what's more laughable ( or sad ): your "analysis", or the fact that you bash somebody else's version as a preface to yours, or the fact that so many people have commended this w/ a "like".

Basically, your point is that possession time & number of plays are more important than touchdowns? I can't believe it took so long for me to realize @deanvogs is a Ferentz!

If you don't count ISU's 2 big plays (meaning you take 2 possessions away from their stats), the Hawks dominated their offense to the tune of "only" 6 yards a play???

Possession time was Hawks 35 to 25 . Yards 313 to 418 ( 294 "non-big" ). Plays 72 to 54.

But, the Hawks' 1st drive was 15 plays, 7:30, and 68 yards. If we take that out ( the same way you want to take ISU's big plays out of consideration ), the possession / plays are basically even.

You know what stats matter for a game? Points. The points stats for the game were 18-17, so the Hawks won. But, to say or imply any team dominated is silly.

Weird thing is, that post about “dominating” was only to trigger ISU fans. Seems like you decided to get triggered as well. Little secret, I do that sometimes to get a rise out of Clown lurkers here, heck even @BryceC didn’t take the bait.

Yep points is all the matters. I had said about 10 times that all plays count. If you look past yards per play, and look at some other stats it is clear why Iowa won the game. Most the times is one team runs 72 plays to the opponents 54 and control the ball 10 more minutes, they win. Most of the time if a team converts 10 of 19 3rd downs to the opponents 3 of 9, they win. Most of the time when a team gets to the opponents 25 yd Lin 5 times and scores 5 times as compared to the opponents making 1 trip there and scoring 1 time they win. Most of the time when a team has 0 TO and the opponent has 2 TO they win.

Lots of stats point to why Iowa won the game. ISU “won” the yards per play stat, but for God’s sake don’t be a Clown fan and look deeper.

 

[judzeehawk]

No, he said Iowa "dominated" the game, a game Iowa never lead by more than 3, won by 1, and only had the lead for 9 minutes of game time. That's straight up CyTwins logic there.

Ok he's correct. You had 2 plays for 14 points. All the rest of the plays you had 3 points. Now if our young freshman hadn't been playing you wouldn't of had 2 plays for 14 points and we'd of never gotten to see the clown show at the end of the game.

 

[judzeehawk]

Anyone, from either side, trying to say that one team dominated another team is crazy.

Iowa played their game.....on offense they controlled the ball, didn't turn it over, played balanced (something like 36 runs and 36 passes), and converted it's opportunities in the redzone (although not into TDs, but they still converted their chances); on defense, with a depleted secondary, they gave up a couple of big plays but for the most part bent between the 20's and let ISU make the mistakes in/around the redzone.

In the end, it was enough to escape with a W.

Yes but it's fun pulling their chain.

 

[deanvogs]

Yes but it's fun pulling their chain.

Jebus, what is wrong with our fan base? It is like a stick is shoved so far up their ass that they can’t see an obvious poking the bear statement.

 

[washtu401]

I listened to 1 podcast long time ago and that did for me. Awful waste of my time. Cant stand Deace.

Agree and they are doing more and more of them. In most cases waste of tim.

 

[hawkeyes87]

Look at what the team did in the red zone (Iowa was 5 for 5 scoring 18 points when getting to ISU's 25 yard line). ISU got to the Iowa's 25 yard line 1 time and came away with 3 points.

​

Most of the time when a team gets to the opponents 25 yd Lin 5 times and scores 5 times as compared to the opponents making 1 trip there and scoring 1 time they win.

If you're going to keep describing "red-zone", you should really say 20 yard-line.

Or are you using some new @deanvogs red-zone stat?

 

[deanvogs]

​

If you're going to keep describing "red-zone", you should really say 20 yard-line.

Or are you using some new @deanvogs red-zone stat?

Meh, 20 yard line, 25 yard line all within field goal range.

Does that "trigger" you too? You seem very sensitive. I mean I know this internet stuff is seriouz business, but man lighten up some.