If you would have told me before the season ....

[okeefe4prez]

If you like ... I think that you're ordinarily a fine poster. One who is even capable of being reasonable. Unfortunately, I think that you're marginalizing yourself by simply being illogical and relying too much on emotional arguments.

I'll be an apologist for your own FAIL too .... unfortunately, you won't appreciate that I have your back too.

You mistake me for a fan who isn't disappointed. I am ... however, my own emotional response has argued against the FACTS ... and lost.

Please give us the facts. We obviously haven't seen the facts. Here are some other facts for your consideration, and these are just off the top of my head, with memories that may be somewhat clouded by inordinate amounts of spirituous beverages consumed before some of the games, so my list isn't complete and perhaps I am misremembering some things, like when I thought number 7 for the Illini was number for the Denver Broncos as he picked apart Norm's prevent defense back in 2008:

1) Ferentz versus Fitz

2006 (throwing out noncon because Fitz got tossed into job with death of Walker right before season)
Iowa 2-6 big ten
NU 2-6 big ten

2007
Iowa 6-6
NU 6-6

2008
Iowa 9-4
NU 9-4

2009
Iowa 11-2
NU 8-5

2010 through this week
Iowa 7-3
NU 7-3

Head to head - Fitz 4, Ferentz 1

2) Three year lookback on games where an opposing offense has marched down the field or the D has folded and given up winning TD or FG in waning moments of game

a) Illinois 2008
b) Purdue 2008 (Hawks still pulled it out)
c) UNI 2009 (once in a lifetime method of winning)
d) Arizona 2010
e) Indiana 2010 (dropped pass FTW)
f) Wisconsin 2010
g) Northwestern 2010
h) MSU 2009 (thank god for McNutt)

Granted, the defense was fairly stout in 2009 because we had two very good senior LBs who had a 6th sense for the ball, but do you think it is wise to base your whole defensive strategy on having that caliber of LBs every year?

3) Games in the last three years where the offense has made great drives at the end to tie games or get a W

a) MSU 2009
b) PSU 2008
c) Indiana 2010

4) Games where O crapped the bed at the end when we needed something clutch

a) MSU 2008
b) Pitt 2008
c) Northwestern 2008
d) OSU 2009
e) Arizona 2010
f) Wisconsin 2010
g) Northwestern 2010

5) Other than OSU, I highly doubt any of the foregoing teams has more NFL players on each of their respective rosters than the Hawks have had on their rosters. That is a testament to Kirk's eye for talent and his ability to develop guys, he is clearly VERY good at that. But when you have a team with more NFL level talent than the opposition and you are consistently left praying that last second passes are dropped, maybe something just might possibly be amiss.

Now I'm sure you can dial up your book of excuses and explain away every single one of those games, I know I can, but this staff's legacy is pretty clear, they are MUCH BETTER at choking away games or coming dangerously close to choking games away than they are at putting inferior teams away.

 

[Rawkhawk73]

Very good observations. Their O has controlled the ball very well against our D ... effectively playing "keep away." Furthermore, Hankwitz has really helped them significantly improve their run D. Between that and the fact that they've had some success blitzing ... they've been able to force enough stalled drives to prevent us from scoring too much.

Of course, for whatever reason, the empirical evidence still points to Stanzi not being a very consistent cold-weather QB. Of course, that is par for the course, when your O relies upon the long ball to spread the field. On a windy day, that really undermines a lot of what we like to do (at least with Stanzi at the helm).

What in the sam-heck are you talking about?!?! Stanzi's greatest win as a starting quarterback came in what was probably the coldest game I've ever been to at Kinnick in 2008 against Penn State. That is just crazy-talk.

I've stayed away for the most part since the debacle and have come back today to see you playing the part of Baghdad Bob once again. Even Jon Miller can't bring himself to defend the defense any longer, but here you remain, talking about injuries and graduation and everything else but the truth that's staring you in the face.

The fact is, every major college team has had major injuries to deal with. Every major college team has significant graduations. In fact, without looking at the exact statistics, I think we returned something around the top 3 number of starters in the conference. It isn't injuries that derailed the year (although I'd be willing to concede that Norm's "injury" was probably the most impactful), it isn't graduations that derailed the year, and it isn't this thing called "execution" that people keep referring to like some kind of jackalope. No team executes 100% of the time. But what separates the great teams from the not-so-great teams is their ability to regroup and make the big play when the execution isn't happening. Our coaches have failed time and time again this year to provide that leadership needed when the execution has been lacking. And our defense has failed time and time again when called up when the offense has failed to execute properly.

 

[tm3308]

What in the sam-heck are you talking about?!?! Stanzi's greatest win as a starting quarterback came in what was probably the coldest game I've ever been to at Kinnick in 2008 against Penn State. That is just crazy-talk.

I've stayed away for the most part since the debacle and have come back today to see you playing the part of Baghdad Bob once again. Even Jon Miller can't bring himself to defend the defense any longer, but here you remain, talking about injuries and graduation and everything else but the truth that's staring you in the face.

The fact is, every major college team has had major injuries to deal with. Every major college team has significant graduations. In fact, without looking at the exact statistics, I think we returned something around the top 3 number of starters in the conference. It isn't injuries that derailed the year (although I'd be willing to concede that Norm's "injury" was probably the most impactful), it isn't graduations that derailed the year, and it isn't this thing called "execution" that people keep referring to like some kind of jackalope. No team executes 100% of the time. But what separates the great teams from the not-so-great teams is their ability to regroup and make the big play when the execution isn't happening. Our coaches have failed time and time again this year to provide that leadership needed when the execution has been lacking. And our defense has failed time and time again when called up when the offense has failed to execute properly.

He may have won games in the cold, but his statistics haven't been good in cold-weather, typically. THAT'S what Homer was getting at.

 

[Rawkhawk73]

He may have won games in the cold, but his statistics haven't been good in cold-weather, typically. THAT'S what Homer was getting at.

Other than Favre, is there any quarterback in the history of football whose statistics are better in the depths of November than they are in the great weather of late September/early October? That isn't exactly earth-shattering news.

 

[SDK46]

LOL ... fans here are amusing.

It wasn't that long ago that fans were spouting that while Iowa's D could be "frustrating to watch" ... they couldn't argue with the end-product.

Now, we have 2 games in a row where the O puts up crappy performances ... and all of a sudden fans are bitchen' about the D. And, even sadder ... they're bitchen' about the D when the D is contending with adversity. Come on ... and use your damn brain!

The "end product" is that Iowa's D is still causing opposing Os to work VERY hard for their points. The result is very few points being scored by our opponents. The problem is that our O still has to score more.

Nothing like a few losses to start turning fans into idiots.

Huh?!

30 points vs Wisky - loss
27 points vs AZ - loss
17 vs NW should have been 24...I'll agree with you in the ONE loss.

The three losses were on the defense as far as I'm concerned and their inability to stop a game-winning drive.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

What in the sam-heck are you talking about?!?! Stanzi's greatest win as a starting quarterback came in what was probably the coldest game I've ever been to at Kinnick in 2008 against Penn State. That is just crazy-talk.

Stanzi had an AWESOME 4th quarter against PSU in '08. Remind me of how he played the rest of the game.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Huh?!

30 points vs Wisky - loss
27 points vs AZ - loss
17 vs NW should have been 24...I'll agree with you in the ONE loss.

The three losses were on the defense as far as I'm concerned and their inability to stop a game-winning drive.

Seth,

The D did it's job against Arizona ... effectively only giving up 13 points.

Yes, I grant you that the D had a "bad game" against Wisky. However, it's not exactly like Wisky is a "bad team" on O.

The reference about the D had more to do with fan uproar concerning the past 2 games ... and, in those games, the O has been more than a little off.

 

[sergeanthulka]

What in the sam-heck are you talking about?!?! Stanzi's greatest win as a starting quarterback came in what was probably the coldest game I've ever been to at Kinnick in 2008 against Penn State. That is just crazy-talk.

I've stayed away for the most part since the debacle and have come back today to see you playing the part of Baghdad Bob once again. Even Jon Miller can't bring himself to defend the defense any longer, but here you remain, talking about injuries and graduation and everything else but the truth that's staring you in the face.

The fact is, every major college team has had major injuries to deal with. Every major college team has significant graduations. In fact, without looking at the exact statistics, I think we returned something around the top 3 number of starters in the conference. It isn't injuries that derailed the year (although I'd be willing to concede that Norm's "injury" was probably the most impactful), it isn't graduations that derailed the year, and it isn't this thing called "execution" that people keep referring to like some kind of jackalope. No team executes 100% of the time. But what separates the great teams from the not-so-great teams is their ability to regroup and make the big play when the execution isn't happening. Our coaches have failed time and time again this year to provide that leadership needed when the execution has been lacking. And our defense has failed time and time again when called up when the offense has failed to execute properly.

Raw is all over it.

HH77 is making excuses & backpedaling. I think our defense executes our scheme almost to perfection (and even did so Saturday). The problem is - even when it's executed to near-perfection - it can still be picked apart with good execution.

For this particular team, we should be playing a more attacking style of defense. We have the horses. The scheme is limiting the impact of the front 4. The scheme is limiting the ability of Sash & Greenwood to have any meaningful impact in the game. Instead, we allow the oppnt to dicatate to us that the matchup is going to be determined by their WR's & QB against our LB's & CB's. Our strengths defensively are completely neutralized.

Next year when we're breaking in new starters up front & at safety...the current scheme will probably be the best choice...Not this year, however.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Other than Favre, is there any quarterback in the history of football whose statistics are better in the depths of November than they are in the great weather of late September/early October? That isn't exactly earth-shattering news.

Possibly inadvertently, you got a big part of my point there. I'm not "blaming" Stanzi outright. However, with a somewhat underdeveloped running game (due to injuries and lack of depth) ... we are necessarily FORCED to rely more upon our passing game. And, when we enter the depths of November ... we're seeing the toll it's taking on the O.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Raw is all over it.

HH77 is making excuses & backpedaling. I think our defense executes our scheme almost to perfection (and even did so Saturday). The problem is - even when it's executed to near-perfection - it can still be picked apart with good execution.

For this particular team, we should be playing a more attacking style of defense. We have the horses. The scheme is limiting the impact of the front 4. The scheme is limiting the ability of Sash & Greenwood to have any meaningful impact in the game. Instead, we allow the oppnt to dicatate to us that the matchup is going to be determined by their WR's & QB against our LB's & CB's. Our strengths defensively are completely neutralized.

Next year when we're breaking in new starters up front & at safety...the current scheme will probably be the best choice...Not this year, however.

We blitz the crap out of them ... and then their slant and screen game tears us a new one. You have to pick your poison. The Iowa coaches err on the side of minimizing the number of points that the opponent scores.

Iowa's O didn't NEED to execute to perfection ... we just needed fewer outright drops ... and definitely not such an unneccesary and untimely thrown INT.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Homer - sorry buddy - there is parity in college football and I know we're going to lose some games. Sometimes I get caught up in thinking a staff led by a guy pulling all that cash is going to be better at managing close game situations than he has been, but I am asking for too much. We're Iowa, this is as good as it gets and I should go back to my old self of not expecting too much and just hoping for wins rather than expecting them.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Other than OSU, I highly doubt any of the foregoing teams has more NFL players on each of their respective rosters than the Hawks have had on their rosters. That is a testament to Kirk's eye for talent and his ability to develop guys, he is clearly VERY good at that. But when you have a team with more NFL level talent than the opposition and you are consistently left praying that last second passes are dropped, maybe something just might possibly be amiss.

And why do you suppose Iowa does so well at placing team in the NFL?

The very schemes that Iowa utilizes forces the players to have to focus on fundamentals and development.

If it was necessarily due to the impressive innate talent that Iowa recruits, then certainly Iowa's recruiting classes would have been more highly rated.

If you don't like what Iowa does ... then how about Iowa instills Boise State-like schemes and rely more heavily upone "trickeration." It seems like some fans won't accept anything less than some sort of whole-sale change.

However, any sort of large-scale change will necessarily imply that Ferentz has left. Furthermore, it will imply that Iowa is placing more emphasis on finesse and less emphasis on fundamentals (and toughness). As a result, many of the "changes" that many of the fans here would wish for would lead to a LESS successful team who produces FEWER NFL-ready talent. And, the result of that would hurt Iowa's recruiting even more than having to just "settle" for an Outback or Cap One bowl.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Homer - sorry buddy - there is parity in college football and I know we're going to lose some games. Sometimes I get caught up in thinking a staff led by a guy pulling all that cash is going to be better at managing close game situations than he has been, but I am asking for too much. We're Iowa, this is as good as it gets and I should go back to my old self of not expecting too much and just hoping for wins rather than expecting them.

Yeah ... we ARE Iowa. Yeah ... we DO face more limitations than most every upper-echelon program. All the same, we can still usually compete with ANYBODY.

I understand wanting to compete every year for the NC game ... however, that's not reasonable ... even for fans of more "elite" programs.

Also, in light of the very parity that you speak of ... it's becoming increasingly ludicrous for nearly ANY fanbase to "expect" victories.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

That last paragraph is actually maybe part of the problem over the past 6 years. I was only 14-16 years old when Tate was here, so I may be remembering things wrongly. But I seem to remember that we were a more vertical passing attack with Tate as well, and not so much with Christensen. And I don't remember the weather being great in the 2 games that Tate lost either, pretty overcast. And then with Stanzi, this is the first NW game played in bad weather. He was inexperienced and forced to play the critical part of the game without his safety net (Greene) in 2008, and then he got hurt last year (but was playing well before the injury).

The good news is that I anticipate that our OL and stable of RBs will be much more capable of helping "power" our O in the cold months in 2011. Heck, with the experience that guys like Morris, DiBona, and Lowery are getting ... if the D can remain healthy, we might have more luck in coverage in 2011 too.

 

[ThunderHawk]

I'm sick and tired of the "we are just IOWA" crap. Have any of you spent any time in Lincoln, Nebraska? Iowa City is way more fun than Lincoln, Nebraska. Way better college experience. But you never hear Nebraska descending into the "we are just Nebraska" fail thought.

Ferentz has placed Iowa in a position to dominate. He needs to tweak the system now. It's all there for the taking.

 

[DesMoinesHawki]

I agree we have definitely been stricken with some unforeseen circumstances. However, that being said, losing to Indiana (we should have lost this game) and Northwestern is unacceptable. When you think about it, Indiana had our number last year in Iowa City. There is no excuse for coming out and taking (at the time) No. 5 Michigan State to the woodshed and then giving two very less than enthusiastic performances against Indiana and Northwestern. Every team suffers injuries throughout the year. That is the name of the game. We invest more in our program. We have better faciilities. We have a bigger fan base and we spend a lot more money on our coaches. With that comes expectations. Losing to Ohio State, Wisky, or Penn State is acceptable (every so often). Losing to Northwestern five of the last six years is not. Barely beating an Indiana team that gave up 83 points to Wisky falls in that unacceptable category.

This is about execution. This is about vanilla playcalling when we have as talented of receiving corp in the Big 10. This is about coaches not having the team mentally prepared the week after phoning in the Indiana game. Injuries? Sure, they factor in -- to a point. But injuries had nothing to do with our lackadaisical performances.

We were outcoached and mentally beat by lesser opponents. That is what fans are upset about.

 

[sergeanthulka]

We blitz the crap out of them ... and then their slant and screen game tears us a new one. You have to pick your poison. The Iowa coaches err on the side of minimizing the number of points that the opponent scores.

Iowa's O didn't NEED to execute to perfection ... we just needed fewer outright drops ... and definitely not such an unneccesary and untimely thrown INT.

The blitzes are ill-conceived for 1000 different reasons. Among thos reasons would be:

Predictable.
Given away pre-snap.
We don't play press coverage in concert with the blitz, (we might play MAN coverage, but we rarely if ever play PRESS coverage).
We NEVER back out of a blitz once someone starts to show we might be coming.
We don't give multiple looks pre-snap.

I know the way we play defense is all in the name of keeping it simple, but as a D-coordinator there are 8 million things you can do to create confusion, hesitancy, & throw off timing. We simply choose - generally - not to do any of those things...

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

I'm sick and tired of the "we are just IOWA" crap. Have any of you spent any time in Lincoln, Nebraska? Iowa City is way more fun than Lincoln, Nebraska. Way better college experience. But you never hear Nebraska descending into the "we are just Nebraska" fail thought.

Ferentz has placed Iowa in a position to dominate. He needs to tweak the system now. It's all there for the taking.

You actually COULD HAVE heard that sort of sentiment just a few years ago. Heck, there still are plenty of Nebby fans who acknowledge the limitations that their geography provides.

However, unlike Iowa, Nebraska was able to "exploit the game" when there were fewer restrictions in place. As a result, Nebby built an empire during the reign of Devany and Osborn. As a result, through the better part of 5 decades of consistency ... Nebraska enjoys the benefit of being a bit of a national "brand name."

Also, I wonder if Nebraska would have been able to build their "empire" had they been in the Big 10 over that same period. Heck, the same question is applicable to Penn State ... it took the better part of a decade for Penn State to truly become a more legit player in the Big 10 ... and, even now, the parity in the Big 10 is as great as ever!

Anyhow, the bottom line is that Iowa doesn't enjoy the "brand name" that Nebraska does. As a result ... we still have to contend with selling the brand we have.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Heck, the ridiculous hype that Notre Dame receives EVERY YEAR (regardless of performance) alone explains the inherent advantage that 'brand name' teams enjoy.