"if if's and but's were candy and nuts..."

I

IaCtyEase11

Member
I'm tired of hearing about IF Belcher would've caught that "game winning TD pass" against us on Saturday...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there would've still been time on the clock after that play, 20 seconds or better? That being said, doesn't it stand to reason that the game wasn't over, and even though it would have been a long shot, we could've gotten a good kick off return, hit a pass to DJK or McNutt and had a CHANCE to hit a long FG to win or tie?
 
IaCtyEase11 said:
I'm tired of hearing about IF Belcher would've caught that "game winning TD pass" against us on Saturday...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there would've still been time on the clock after that play, 20 seconds or better? That being said, doesn't it stand to reason that the game wasn't over, and even though it would have been a long shot, we could've gotten a good kick off return, hit a pass to DJK or McNutt and had a CHANCE to hit a long FG to win or tie?
Click to expand...

lol thought you were tired of the if's and but's???
 
IaCtyEase11 said:
I am tired of the "if and but" mentality...just trying to point out that the game wasn't over regardless.
Click to expand...

The only thing is, the pass to Belcher is caught 999 times out of 1,000. Scoring with the 20 seconds left after the kickoff? Considerably worse odds. You aunt might be your uncle if she had nuts, but your aunt should not have nuts, and Belcher should have caught the ball. It's not quite the same as saying something like if they'd recovered an onside kick, or if they'd made a 57-yard field goal.
 
tm3308 said:
The only thing is, the pass to Belcher is caught 999 times out of 1,000. Scoring with the 20 seconds left after the kickoff? Considerably worse odds. You aunt might be your uncle if she had nuts, but your aunt should not have nuts, and Belcher should have caught the ball. It's not quite the same as saying something like if they'd recovered an onside kick, or if they'd made a 57-yard field goal.
Click to expand...

wow...I don't know if i'd go that high on the reception %?!?!
 
IaCtyEase11 said:
wow...I don't know if i'd go that high on the reception %?!?!
Click to expand...

Perhaps a slight exaggeration, but a wide-open receiver and a pass that hits him in both hands (extremely easy pass to catch)? The percentage might not be THAT high, but it's quite high nonetheless.
 
tm3308 said:
Perhaps a slight exaggeration, but a wide-open receiver and a pass that hits him in both hands (extremely easy pass to catch)? The percentage might not be THAT high, but it's quite high nonetheless.
Click to expand...
As long as it wasn't 100% - and obviously, it wasn't. BTW, there were 28 seconds left, plenty of time to kick a field goal. :)
 
homes said:
As long as it wasn't 100% - and obviously, it wasn't. BTW, there were 28 seconds left, plenty of time to kick a field goal. :)
Click to expand...

Obviously it's not 100%. But you would expect a D1 wide receiver to make THAT catch every time. It's a routine play.

And like I said, that's different than saying we should have been able to get down the field and kick a field goal with 28 seconds left, because that's not routine. There's a lot of variables involved with that that we can't account for, whereas Belcher just had to make a routine play.

At any rate, the game is over, I'm glad we won, I'm getting over the hangover of an ugly win, and I'm ready for Northwestern. Hopefully we play a better overall game against the Cats.
 
I see what you are saying and kind of agree. I'd go on a different tangent though... Belcher didn't catch it, but Sandeman also had a pass hit him in the hands in the endzone & Stanzi missed wide open DJK and McNutt for what would have been TDs. Ifs and buts can go both ways. In the end, it played out the way it did. We won, they lose. Move on now.
 
hawkfan340 said:
I see what you are saying and kind of agree. I'd go on a different tangent though... Belcher didn't catch it, but Sandeman also had a pass hit him in the hands in the endzone & Stanzi missed wide open DJK and McNutt for what would have been TDs. Ifs and buts can go both ways. In the end, it played out the way it did. We won, they lose. Move on now.
Click to expand...

This is $. Let it be.
 
hawkfan340 said:
I see what you are saying and kind of agree. I'd go on a different tangent though... Belcher didn't catch it, but Sandeman also had a pass hit him in the hands in the endzone & Stanzi missed wide open DJK and McNutt for what would have been TDs. Ifs and buts can go both ways. In the end, it played out the way it did. We won, they lose. Move on now.
Click to expand...

that's exactly my point...alot of Hawkeye Nation and the popular media want to pin this as a loss on the Hawks because of "what if's"...Last I checked we still got credit for the W, We're not giving it back and just wanted to point out that even if he should've made the catch, he didn't and even if he would have, the game was still far from over. Had he made the catch for a winning TD it would be an entirely diferent story but i guess we will never know!!! Just saying...that's why we don't cencede until the clock runs out...Go Hawks!!!!
 
IaCtyEase11 said:
that's exactly my point...alot of Hawkeye Nation and the popular media want to pin this as a loss on the Hawks because of "what if's"...Last I checked we still got credit for the W, We're not giving it back and just wanted to point out that even if he should've made the catch, he didn't and even if he would have, the game was still far from over. Had he made the catch for a winning TD it would be an entirely diferent story but i guess we will never know!!! Just saying...that's why we don't cencede until the clock runs out...Go Hawks!!!!
Click to expand...

I've not been one of those who wants to pin this as a loss, don't get me wrong. I'm very happy that we won (relieved would have been a better word on Saturday). It just bothers me that he was THAT open. Not unlike how the poor kick coverage bothered me against ISU, even though those long returns didn't have any impact on that game; it was a bit of foreshadowing. With Northwestern being this week's game, I'm just afraid of something similar happening again, as they are a pretty similar team to Indiana.
 
tm3308 said:
I've not been one of those who wants to pin this as a loss, don't get me wrong. I'm very happy that we won (relieved would have been a better word on Saturday). It just bothers me that he was THAT open. Not unlike how the poor kick coverage bothered me against ISU, even though those long returns didn't have any impact on that game; it was a bit of foreshadowing. With Northwestern being this week's game, I'm just afraid of something similar happening again, as they are a pretty similar team to Indiana.[/QUOTE

It may come down to this again with NW, probably again agaisnt OSU. We could lose both games. Truth be told we are 7-2 right now and should not look back. I can bet LSU and Wisconsin don't care about games in the past!
Click to expand...
 
IaCtyEase11 said:
I'm tired of hearing about IF Belcher would've caught that "game winning TD pass" against us on Saturday...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there would've still been time on the clock after that play, 20 seconds or better? That being said, doesn't it stand to reason that the game wasn't over, and even though it would have been a long shot, we could've gotten a good kick off return, hit a pass to DJK or McNutt and had a CHANCE to hit a long FG to win or tie?
Click to expand...

you think 28 seconds to go nearly the length of the field to kick a game winning field goal was doable...........aren't you choosing to ignore that we aren't so good at clock management!
 
IaCtyEase11 said:
tm3308 said:
I've not been one of those who wants to pin this as a loss, don't get me wrong. I'm very happy that we won (relieved would have been a better word on Saturday). It just bothers me that he was THAT open. Not unlike how the poor kick coverage bothered me against ISU, even though those long returns didn't have any impact on that game; it was a bit of foreshadowing. With Northwestern being this week's game, I'm just afraid of something similar happening again, as they are a pretty similar team to Indiana.[/QUOTE

It may come down to this again with NW, probably again agaisnt OSU. We could lose both games. Truth be told we are 7-2 right now and should not look back. I can bet LSU and Wisconsin don't care about games in the past!
Click to expand...

I expect close games against both of those teams, no doubt. I just don't want to see Ebert or Dunsmore be THAT open if a similar situation arises. If Persa were to thread a needle for the go-ahead TD with 30 seconds left, that's easier to swallow than if his receiver is wide open.

The team shouldn't dwell on the past, I agree. But I do want them to look back enough to learn from mistakes. I'm just not wanting to see a similar mistake on Saturday.
Click to expand...
 
tomhawk80907 said:
you think 28 seconds to go nearly the length of the field to kick a game winning field goal was doable...........aren't you choosing to ignore that we aren't so good at clock management!
Click to expand...

I'm saying that we would have had a chance is all. Until they score the go ahead TD you never know what would've happend...A hawkeye kickoff return at that point might be nominated as a game changing performance...how can you say...stranger things will happen?
 
tm3308 said:
IaCtyEase11 said:
I expect close games against both of those teams, no doubt. I just don't want to see Ebert or Dunsmore be THAT open if a similar situation arises. If Persa were to thread a needle for the go-ahead TD with 30 seconds left, that's easier to swallow than if his receiver is wide open.

The team shouldn't dwell on the past, I agree. But I do want them to look back enough to learn from mistakes. I'm just not wanting to see a similar mistake on Saturday.
Click to expand...

it won't cause Norm is supposed to travel...never underestimate the power of the missing foot! he only needs one remember!
Click to expand...
 
IaCtyEase11 said:
tm3308 said:
it won't cause Norm is supposed to travel...never underestimate the power of the missing foot! he only needs one remember!
Click to expand...

I hadn't heard that he was making the trip. That changes my outlook considerably! I feel like his absence really had a pretty big impact on the special teams, as Wilson had to pull double duty (possibly triple? Or did Woods cover for the linebackers?). Having Norm makes this a much better overall team.
Click to expand...
 
not sure if it would have an impact on special teams or not, but definitely on play calling/personel on the D! Think it was on ESPN that I read Norm might make the trip to Evanston
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top