Is Hat Party Related To KF?

I don't have a big problem with the article. I can see both angles (Rob's angle ... and frustrated fans' angle). All of the articles and comments and criticisms come up because (many, many) fans are just sort of tired of this version of Iowa football ... The vanilla approach ... conservative style ... going with (what appears to be) the "safe players" ... If Iowa was 10-2 last season and 9-3 the year before ... none of this would matter ... But we weren't 9-3 or 10-2 ... We were 4-8 and 8-5 ... and we HAVE YET TO PLAY A COMPLETE GAME IN 2014 ... (and week #6 is around the corner) ... The offense is not clicking ... Are we a run team? A pass team? Now we are talking about playing 2 QBs (which in itself is a head scratcher - ride CJ and keep him in there until he proves he should not be the starter) ... Bottomline, is we don't have an identity ... there "appears" to be a disconnect between Kirk and Davis ... We throw the ball 50+ times in a game ... We blow a game against a bad ISU team ... It's all of it ... This program is not clicking ... Yes, we are 4-1 ... and any win is a good win ... That being said ... we are not a good football team (yet). We are not a Top 25 team ... If we played Baylor, Okie State, Arkansas, Oregon, FSU, Alabama ... we would get ripped. We are not a 4-1 team ... We are a 4-1 team who happened to play ... Ball State (1-4); ISU (1-4); and Purdue (2-3) ... And we could have easily lost to UNI ... and Ball State absolutely should have beat us ... I love Iowa football ... I love having 4 wins ... I just don't think we are a 4-1 team ...
 
cecilB said:
He's a D1 coach, top 10 ever for big 10 wins. You just don't want to believe the truth b/c it doesn't fit your distorted view of reality. There isn't a d1 coach that would sacrifice the feelings of a player over the interest of their program... But I know this will fall on your deaf ears
Click to expand...

If I stay in 1 place coaching long enough regardless of my win% I can reach top 10. Tell me he is top 10 in win % then I would be impressed.
 
pmchawk said:
If I stay in 1 place coaching long enough regardless of my win% I can reach top 10. Tell me he is top 10 in win % then I would be impressed.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

Any anyone gullible to enough to believe that there's an "off the record" is just beggin for trouble.
 
doclee said:
Although I have not been a big fan of PH's stuff, I think he has absolutely nailed it in this article. At risk of being rude to those who disagree with him, the idea that KF would sacrifice what is best for the team and play favorites simply does not make any sense at all...yup, its silly. Simple fact: Its all about winning, baby.
Click to expand...

I think he's correct in that Kirk ferentz doesn't play favorites as much as Kirk ferentz believes in rewarding upperclassmen for time served in his program. Right or wrong, that's the absolute fact and anyone that's been paying attention knows this.
It's a Red Herring for Pat Harty to to phrase his argument this way.
Let me preface my above "fact" by saying that in most cases, upperclassmen know the systems, assignments and expectations better than underclassmen, so in his desire to give them the lions share of the playing time, you have to accept that there is a legitimate reason for his ways. The rub with most fans that are complaining is that they are of the "put the best talent on the field regardless" mentality. I fall on that side of the argument myself, so I get it. I'm of the opinion that you put the best talent on the field and it's the coaches responsibility to bring them up to speed quickly enough to play at their best. Obvious physical limitations not withstanding.
 
I can't believe how many times I read on here "it's stupid that people actually think Kirk doesn't want to play the best players". Someone needs to start a poll on here asking why people think the best players don't see the field. Is it because Kirk doesn't want to play the best players or is it because his decision making is flawed. I bet not one person says it's because he doesn't want to play the best players.

I see posts all the time where people point this out. I don't know if people don't read them or just ignore them. I think Boat pointed it out in this very thread. The post after this one will probably say "people who think Kirk doesn't want to play the best players are stupid".

End of rant
 
I don't think there is a big problem of Kirk playing upperclassmen over more talented underclassmen. I just think that once a player earns a starting spot he has a hard time giving it to someone else. It's a comfort thing with him.

It seems like there are times when we are thin at a position one year so a player gets the spot almost by default because of lack of options, that player keeps the spot until he graduates even if other better options come along.
 
cecilB said:
He's a D1 coach, top 10 ever for big 10 wins. You just don't want to believe the truth b/c it doesn't fit your distorted view of reality. There isn't a d1 coach that would sacrifice the feelings of a player over the interest of their program... But I know this will fall on your deaf ears
Click to expand...

Clearly, since continuing to start Rudock is probably going to get a lot more ugly from an emotional perspective for him than not starting him. It's not fair, and I don't like it, but the crowd will be ready to run Rudock out of town after the first underthrown deep ball or checkdown.
 
theboat said:
If Google maps tells you it takes 45 minutes to get to the stadium, do you leave exactly 46 minutes before kickoff? That is Kirk Ferentz football.
Click to expand...

No, Kirk Ferentz football would rely on that trusty 1980 Texaco map of Iowa City.

"Nothing wrong with it, thank you, except I still can't find Carver-Hawkeye Arena".
 
From Pat Harty's comments about Brad Banks and his results playing in 2001 I'm now more confused on why he wasn't the starter in 2001. It sounds like he was making things happen. To suggest Banks' running out of bounds as a reason to not start him is a ridiculous and embarrassing. He should be ashamed of himself for trotting that out. The team has clearly moved the ball better with CJ at qb. I have nothing against Jake but the results are clear to me. KF says he'll let the two decide who the starter is on the field. I wouldn't be surprised to see this last all season.
 
tm3308 said:
Clearly, since continuing to start Rudock is probably going to get a lot more ugly from an emotional perspective for him than not starting him. It's not fair, and I don't like it, but the crowd will be ready to run Rudock out of town after the first underthrown deep ball or checkdown.
Click to expand...

If the crowd boos, and they might, my belief (hope?) is it will be directed at Ferentz, not Rudock. Rudock does not deserve to be "run out of town". Anyone who would boo Rudock is an idiot. I won't pass that same judgment if someone is booing Ferentz, if Jake starts and struggles.
 
If a writer's opinion aligns with mine = great writer
If a writer's opinion differs from mine = hack

Same as it ever was.
 
JonDMiller said:
If a writer's opinion aligns with mine = great writer
If a writer's opinion differs from mine = hack

Same as it ever was.
Click to expand...

Some writers ask the tough questions. Some writers circle the wagons.

I can see his next article now, "Iowa fans shouldn't hate Ferentz because he is a good guy."

99% of fans don't think Ferentz would prefer to lose with his "favorites." What we do believe is that he consistently makes questionable decisions both in the game and with personnel.
 
docholihawk said:
From Pat Harty's comments about Brad Banks and his results playing in 2001 I'm now more confused on why he wasn't the starter in 2001. It sounds like he was making things happen. To suggest Banks' running out of bounds as a reason to not start him is a ridiculous and embarrassing. He should be ashamed of himself for trotting that out. The team has clearly moved the ball better with CJ at qb. I have nothing against Jake but the results are clear to me. KF says he'll let the two decide who the starter is on the field. I wouldn't be surprised to see this last all season.
Click to expand...

How bout the part where he threw a "costly interception". If that was the barometer for a qb being ready then no qb in the history of qb's have ever been ready.

Banks clearly should have been the guy even though he wasn't ready because the plays he made with his physical ability out weighed his mental mistakes. The problem is Kirk can stand physical mistakes all day but has zero tolerance for mental mistakes (which I find ironic). I think the main thing is Kirk doesn't want to make decisions that can cost us a game. If the starter makes it can be chalked up to execution. If he brings in the backup and he makes a mistake, then his decision cost us. That's why I'm glad Kirk is going for it more on 4th downs. I've had my fill of games like the ISU one where we kick a field goal late to tie only to lose to a field goal later. I want more of the msu game in '08 where he went for it on 4th and got stuffed. At least Kirk did something to try to win.
 
JonDMiller said:
If a writer's opinion aligns with mine = great writer
If a writer's opinion differs from mine = hack

Same as it ever was.
Click to expand...

If that writer's name rhymes with "Sandy beat her son", then 100% hack.

Also, having lived in Nebby during their 3 MNC's, the sportswriters out there were absolute hacks, because they let their emotions get in the way of telling a story. On the other hand, they were probably just catering to the delusional fan base, which was unlike any delusional fan base I've ever seen.

One more thought, is the same true about posters? If you agree with them, their good posters, but if you don't agree with them, they're hacks? I know of posters that used to post here that I know personally from coaching with/against them that want to talk X's and O's, but get shouted down here and have really taken a good thing away from here. Now we just get guys on here that talk about "button hooks", etc.
 
Last edited:
homes said:
If the crowd boos, and they might, my belief (hope?) is it will be directed at Ferentz, not Rudock. Rudock does not deserve to be "run out of town". Anyone who would boo Rudock is an idiot. I won't pass that same judgment if someone is booing Ferentz, if Jake starts and struggles.
Click to expand...

That's pretty hypocritical. If KF is so blind, and EVERYone can see that CJ is superior, isn't it incumbent on Rudock to voluntarily step aside?
 
DodgerHawki said:
I have found life much less stressful by not fixating on who plays. Or at least getting upset about it. The coaches literally see these guys perform 1,000 times more than we do. If you can't trust the coaches to play the best players, then there is no point in even following the team. Play-calling, overall offensive/defensive philosophy, clock management, etc. All of those seem much more open to fair criticism (and are).

But I don't get where people seem convinced that KF and the staff intentionally decide to play an inferior player over another. Like it or not, they make their decisions based on what they see in practices, meetings and the games. The overall angst of the Iowa fan base about the performance of the offense is being manifested in the QB comparison, but it really goes much deeper than that. The blending of the power running game and spread/horizontal passing game just has not worked in 2 1/2 years, and that issue will likely persist no matter who the QB is. If Rudock had been at the helm Saturday for no first downs into the second quarter, 8 3 and outs, a pick-six, etc., there would have been a meltdown of epic proportions among Iowa fans.

My guess (and this is only a guess) is that the coaches see the same things we fans do in games. Beathard has obvious advantages in arm strength, velocity and running ability. Rudock has a past history of some success (note, not overwhelming success, but some success). He did lead Iowa to comeback win over Michigan, made a money OT throw against Northwestern and was the starter for road wins against ISU, Minnesota and Nebraska. The comparisons between Rudock and Jake Christensen are silly and not correct. It appears that the current situation is at the place where the players are going to determine it with their play on the field.

When you say things like "the fact is that Ferentz has kept more talented players on the bench," how is that proved or disproved? When I see the amount of young players who receive early playing time opportunities, the only conclusion I can draw is that the staff plays the best guy (in their opinion). Just this year, Mabin is starting as a redshirt freshman, ahead of Fleming (sophomore) and Draper (junior). Bo Bower is starting at LB (older guy Travis Perry is not). Josey Jewell is playing a lot (and when he does play, guys like Alston go out, who is a senior). Nate Meier, a junior, unseated Hardy, a senior returning starter, at defensive end. On offense, a redshirt freshman (Welsh) is starting at LG ahead of lot of other older options. Parker, the redshirt RB, is making contributions. If he's in the game, it means other older guys are not. And the staff has stuck through him even with a bad, two-fumble game against Ball State. Why? Because he has shown ability and done well in practice. And their patience was rewarded with what he did against Purdue.

Is it possible that the coaches have a blind spot with Rudock/Beathard. The QB position is obviously more important than others.
Click to expand...

JR's pass against NW was freakin' clutch. When he threw it, I initially thought he was throwing it away due to the oncoming pressure. Perfect pass.
 
homes said:
If the crowd boos, and they might, my belief (hope?) is it will be directed at Ferentz, not Rudock. Rudock does not deserve to be "run out of town". Anyone who would boo Rudock is an idiot. I won't pass that same judgment if someone is booing Ferentz, if Jake starts and struggles.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine that it would be kind of hard for JR to distinguish which boos are directed at KF and which ones are directed at him. In fact, it is really a distinction without a difference since the boos directed at KF would be a direct result of JR being on the field.

I'd encourage fans not to boo the team or the coaches during the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top