Miller/Hardy/Kakert all pick 8-4

Would you care to elaborate upon those questions? Furthermore, precisely HOW do those questions end up translating to losses?

For example, between Iowa's new starters in the secondary and on the DL, one might believe that AT LEAST one of the two following situations will occur:

1. The youth in the secondary will lead to blown coverages ... and thus big plays and potentially "free" points to our opponents.

2. The lack of starting experience and/or "star-power" on the DL will lead us to struggle when it comes to getting pressure on the QB.

When you combine these "issues" with the fact that in EACH of Iowa's first 4 games we face off against teams that like to spread the field .... the immediate implications are that we'll either give up A LOT of yards through the air OR we'll be "soft" in the middle of the field (which makes us vulnerable to an interior running game).

However, when you break down those first 4 games ... you quickly realize that 2 of the 4 games are most likely victories (vs Tenn Tech and LA-Monroe). It's equally easy to recognize that ISU needs to find a new QB and needs to replace its two most consistent receivers (Franklin and Williams). ISU just graduated 2 of its starters on the interior line ... so I don't believe that it is automatic that ISU will be able to run at will against Iowa down the middle. Lastly, Pitt has a new coaching staff and will be implementing all-new schemes on both sides of the ball. Pitt also lost a lot of quality talent from the squad AND their new base-D will likely not match-up very well against Iowa's running game.

I honestly believe that IF the Hawks can remain adequately healthy and IF they can make it through their first 4 games unscathed .... then MANY of the questions on D will already have been answered. Furthermore, given the quality of Iowa's OL ... the O could potentially be hitting full steam right at the start of the conference play ... I'm not certain that we could ask for a better set-up.

Well, Iowa will have a new QB. Even though he has a little bit of starting experience, we don't really know how well he will do. The o-line should be good...he'll need it. There is not a lot of experience at RB (what if Coker gets hurt?) or receiver.

D-line lost a lot thru graduation....the secondary is younger, too. Teams that run the spread have been able to move the ball against Iowa in the past...and probably will continue to do so....but will the Hawks be able to keep teams out of the end zone?

Purdue and Michigan will be improved. Penn state won't be a pushover. Michigan State is far from a "gimmee". NW has our number. Nebraska will be difficult to beat.

I predicted 8-4 last season.....I have no reason to think a less experienced Iowa team will do any better.
 


Well, Iowa will have a new QB. Even though he has a little bit of starting experience, we don't really know how well he will do. The o-line should be good...he'll need it. There is not a lot of experience at RB (what if Coker gets hurt?) or receiver.

D-line lost a lot thru graduation....the secondary is younger, too. Teams that run the spread have been able to move the ball against Iowa in the past...and probably will continue to do so....but will the Hawks be able to keep teams out of the end zone?

Purdue and Michigan will be improved. Penn state won't be a pushover. Michigan State is far from a "gimmee". NW has our number. Nebraska will be difficult to beat.

I predicted 8-4 last season.....I have no reason to think a less experienced Iowa team will do any better.
Yes but the point is, how big of questions are they? How did the world begin? Or, What should I have for dinner?
 


I like answers much more than questions. The Defense will be fine and the offense will be too. First year QB= 10 win season at Iowa.
 


Well, Iowa will have a new QB. Even though he has a little bit of starting experience, we don't really know how well he will do. The o-line should be good...he'll need it. There is not a lot of experience at RB (what if Coker gets hurt?) or receiver.

D-line lost a lot thru graduation....the secondary is younger, too. Teams that run the spread have been able to move the ball against Iowa in the past...and probably will continue to do so....but will the Hawks be able to keep teams out of the end zone?

Purdue and Michigan will be improved. Penn state won't be a pushover. Michigan State is far from a "gimmee". NW has our number. Nebraska will be difficult to beat.

I predicted 8-4 last season.....I have no reason to think a less experienced Iowa team will do any better.

A few initial "quick hitters" ....

- The Big 10 slate is ALWAYS tough for the Hawks ... thus, your remark addressing that fact is rather a moot point. I never count on there being gimmes. Rather, I will look at match-ups and decide from there who owns more of the advantages.

- Iowa certainly has questions ... but are those questions bigger than those had by other teams? For example, the past 2 years has seen Purdue lose many of their top receivers. Admittedly, Purdue always seems to "reload" at WR ... however, that will still remain to be seen. Furthermore, Purdue lost guys like Kerrigan and Werner ... both of whom were quite talented and who were pretty big team leaders.

- The secondary is only somewhat young. Not unlike the 2008 season, there is a pretty nice mix of talent and experience there. I have absolutely NO worries about what Hyde, Prater, and Miller bring to the table. Also, I'm pretty confident that Castillo and Lowery will be able to adequately EITHER man the CB spot opposite Prater OR, at the very least, provide the starting CBs with excellent depth. As we witnessed in the 2nd half of the Mizzou game when Greenwood was out ... we were able to match-up pretty well against Mizzou's passing attack then. And, for that matter, we were using multi-DB formations quite a bit in the latter stretches of that game ... and WITH SUCCESS too. Given that Prater, Hyde, Miller, Castillo, and Bernstine all have experience executing those schemes now ... I anticipate that we'll be more capable in coverage in '11.


.... I'll address more issues later.
 


People are overvaluing Vandy. His lone bright spot came at OSU, and even in that game he had a few passes that should have been intercepted.
 


People are overvaluing Vandy. His lone bright spot came at OSU, and even in that game he had a few passes that should have been intercepted.

Well, if you don't think the QB position is the lynchpin of this season, you are incorrect. The QB is always the key to a successful season. JVB has had almost two years since that start at OSU and Minnesota...do people think he hasn't progressed in that time? He's light years ahead of where he was, and that's by the coaches assessments and comments. We have good reason to be very, very optimistic about how he will perform.

This kid was money in HS, has shown incredible moxie at this level very early in his career, and his teammates think the world of him. In my opinion, the fact that the other players are rallying around him is pretty exciting to me. He's earned their respect. I'm thinking there is a reason for that.

I just have a feeling that he is going light things up this year and our offense will be much, much better than anyone expects. If he is as accurate as I'm hearing, the chains they will be moving...and we will do what the 2002, and 2008 teams did...wear teams down. Then punish them in the 4th Quarter.

I think he's going to be better than Stanzi...this year.
 


Well, if you don't think the QB position is the lynchpin of this season, you are incorrect. The QB is always the key to a successful season. JVB has had almost two years since that start at OSU and Minnesota...do people think he hasn't progressed in that time? He's light years ahead of where he was, and that's by the coaches assessments and comments. We have good reason to be very, very optimistic about how he will perform.

This kid was money in HS, has shown incredible moxie at this level very early in his career, and his teammates think the world of him. In my opinion, the fact that the other players are rallying around him is pretty exciting to me. He's earned their respect. I'm thinking there is a reason for that.

I just have a feeling that he is going light things up this year and our offense will be much, much better than anyone expects. If he is as accurate as I'm hearing, the chains they will be moving...and we will do what the 2002, and 2008 teams did...wear teams down. Then punish them in the 4th Quarter.

I think he's going to be better than Stanzi...this year.

WinOneThisCentury -

I wouldn't necessarily go as far as to say that Vandenberg would be better than Stanzi this year ... however, I'd say that the rest of your point is SPOT ON!

It never fails to surprise me how so many fans seem to believe that so little would happen in the matter of a year and a half. From Vandenberg's last starts to the first game of the '11 season, he will have subsequently benefited from ...
- more playing time as a backup
- 2 bowl preps
- 2 spring-camps (one as the #1 QB)
- 2 pre-season two-a-days (one as the #1 QB)
- 1 full summer of working with his WRs (developing chemistry, timing, etc)

It's almost as though folks believe that we'll see a repeat of the Christensen fiasco. However, rest assured, the two scenarios are nothing like one another ...
- Jake NEVER generated the legit positive buzz that Vandenberg has
- Jake's confidence got absolutely massacred during the '07 season. In contrast, Vandenberg's play against tOSU has done nothing but provide him with confidence and a platform from which to further improve.
- Jake was stuck passing to a bunch of FR WRs and had a VERY green OL blocking for him. In contrast, Vandenberg has a pretty impressive upperclassmen WR duo in McNutt and Davis, a freak receiving TE in Fiedorowicz, and an exceptional OL blocking for him.

Even given the train-wreck that was the '07 season, Iowa still managed to pull off a 6-6 regular season and was bowl-eligible. I think that folks are rather crazy if they don't believe that Vandenberg and the '11 O aren't capable of a heck of a lot more.
 


The schedule favors Iowa in the defensive maturation process.

If the Hawks take care of business in the first half of the season allowing the defense to improve then Iowa should be in position to challenge for the division title come November.

The wild card is the injury/player availabilty factor. If the Hawks can stay relatively injury free then winning 9 or 10 games is doable. On the other hand a rash of injuries and/or players not playing for whatever reason then 6 or 7 wins may be the result.

I think there will be injuries to contend with and a surprise or two to the negative regarding player eligibility/availability. There usually are these factors to deal with before and during a season.

That said, I'm sticking with the prediction of a 7 win season until I see what the team consists of going into September. Losses to Penn State, to Northwestern, to a team in September, and losses in two of the final three games.
 


A few initial "quick hitters" ....

- The Big 10 slate is ALWAYS tough for the Hawks ... thus, your remark addressing that fact is rather a moot point. I never count on there being gimmes. Rather, I will look at match-ups and decide from there who owns more of the advantages.

- Iowa certainly has questions ... but are those questions bigger than those had by other teams? For example, the past 2 years has seen Purdue lose many of their top receivers. Admittedly, Purdue always seems to "reload" at WR ... however, that will still remain to be seen. Furthermore, Purdue lost guys like Kerrigan and Werner ... both of whom were quite talented and who were pretty big team leaders.

- The secondary is only somewhat young. Not unlike the 2008 season, there is a pretty nice mix of talent and experience there. I have absolutely NO worries about what Hyde, Prater, and Miller bring to the table. Also, I'm pretty confident that Castillo and Lowery will be able to adequately EITHER man the CB spot opposite Prater OR, at the very least, provide the starting CBs with excellent depth. As we witnessed in the 2nd half of the Mizzou game when Greenwood was out ... we were able to match-up pretty well against Mizzou's passing attack then. And, for that matter, we were using multi-DB formations quite a bit in the latter stretches of that game ... and WITH SUCCESS too. Given that Prater, Hyde, Miller, Castillo, and Bernstine all have experience executing those schemes now ... I anticipate that we'll be more capable in coverage in '11.


.... I'll address more issues later.

I realize the Big 10 is always tough...I was merely pointing out that Purdue and Michigan are going to be improved. And Nebraska is going to be tough to beat. Iowa could EASILY lose all 3 of those games. Not saying they will...but they could.

What happens if Coker goes down with an injury? What happens if no receivers step up and McNutt is forced to carry the receiving load? Will Vandenberg be able to carry the team on his back if need be? And Iowa's secondary could play lights out, but if the D-line doesn't get any pressure on the opposing QB's, they are going to get burned....you can't cover someone forever.

There are just too many "unknowns" heading into this season. The good thing is: the Hawks will be flying a little under the radar. The potential is there for a nice season. I'm anxious to see how it plays out.
 




I realize the Big 10 is always tough...I was merely pointing out that Purdue and Michigan are going to be improved. And Nebraska is going to be tough to beat. Iowa could EASILY lose all 3 of those games. Not saying they will...but they could.

What happens if Coker goes down with an injury? What happens if no receivers step up and McNutt is forced to carry the receiving load? Will Vandenberg be able to carry the team on his back if need be? And Iowa's secondary could play lights out, but if the D-line doesn't get any pressure on the opposing QB's, they are going to get burned....you can't cover someone forever.

There are just too many "unknowns" heading into this season. The good thing is: the Hawks will be flying a little under the radar. The potential is there for a nice season. I'm anxious to see how it plays out.

You're absolutely right with the remark about what happens if Coker gets injured. That's why I feel it's absolutely CRITICAL that a 2nd Iowa RB can step up and take some carries away from Coker. If somebody is capable of sharing the load, that reduces the chance of Coker getting injured.

As for the hypothetical about McNutt being the only receiving threat ... I'm sorry but that simply won't be the case. When Keenan Davis was given the chance ... he flashed just as we needed him to. Now you have to consider that not only is Keenan Davis a year more experienced, but also he's going to have Vandenberg throwing him the ball. I'm not certain that Hawk fans appreciate the significance of this latter point. Vandenberg has already been throwing to Keenan Davis for years .... the two ALREADY have a great chemistry ... and that equates to Vandenberg already trusting and feeling comfortable with Davis. Keenan Davis was the bright point of the spring scrimmage for a reason ... and we'll only see more of it come the season.

Lastly, as for the remark about the DL, there are a few points that give me reason to have hope:

1. We'll be facing max-pro a lot less. Because of the threat posed by Ballard, Klug, and Clayborn we say max-pro ALL THE TIME in '10 ... and that really slowed or pass rush. Although we don't have the same big-named guys ... our "no-namers" will at least be facing fewer blockers.

2. Let's assume for a moment that our starting DL will be Daniel, Daniels, Bigach, and Binns. That's a decent core group AND both Daniels and Binns have proven abilities to get penetration. If we don't face max-pro ... that means then that we'll only need one guy to take on a double-team and then the rest of our guys will only be contending with man-blocking. Daniels is a guy who is capable of beating man-blocking more often than not.

3. In addition to the aforementioned starters, that then implies that we'll likely be having guys like Alvis and Carl Davis as guys coming off the bench to give the group a "spark." I really like what those young guys bring to the table. Furthermore, since they're likely NOT going to be asked to be every-down players .... they will be able to focus more on playing fast and playing with confidence.

4. And, mind you, Alvis and Davis won't be the only guys contributing either. My guess is that we'll AT LEAST see a guy or two out of the group of Hardy, Heissel, Cooper, Nardo, and Forgy contribute too. The immediate implication there is that the guys on the DL might be a little bit more fresh than we usually see (although maybe not quite as talented and/or polished as last year).

5. Although our safeties aren't necessarily as experienced, our secondary seems MORE capable in 2011 of pulling off multi-DB looks. Against Mizzou, Prater, Hyde, Miller, Castillo, and Bernstine all received valuable reps in multi-DB sets (nickel/dime packages) ... AND they looked pretty good too! Given that all of those guys will have even more experience entering 2011 AND we'll also be having guys like Lowery, Sleeper, and Lomax/Campbell entering the picture ... it doesn't seem like it will necessarily take too much for the secondary to become a team strength for us.

6. In addition to facing a lot of max-pro in '10, another thing that hurt the Iowa DL in '10 was the fact that the group of LBs either lacked talent or experience in the latter part of the season. As a result, our LBs got pretty torched in coverage ... particularly in the latter part of the season. In 2011, things look a lot brighter for the Hawks at LB in coverage. While everybody yaps about Kirksey being undersized ... the off-shoot there is that he's also earned a lot of praise for his cover-skills. In fact, in playing time as a back-up that he received in '10 ... he looked pretty good in coverage! Thus, when you combine Kirksey with a healthy Morris and Nielsen .... you're looking a pretty darn solid group of LBs. I frankly believe that the '11 LBs will be as good, if not better, than our '08 LBs were in coverage.

7. Not that Iowa would necessarily choose to blitz much ... however, Morris appears to be pretty natural when blitzing the QB. Morris is so quick and fast and he gets to the QB so quickly ... I anticipate that Iowa will flash the blitz on occasion simply to keep the opposing O guessing. The threat of the blitz itself will help out the DL and its use will contribute to Iowa's ability to pressure the QB.

8. You don't always need to get sacks either. Iowa didn't get that many sacks in '08, however we forced so many QB hurries that, in turn, forced a ton of INTs. Given that Iowa's DL does not lack talent and given that Iowa's back 7 should develop to be a pretty good unit in coverage .... I think that the Iowa D is capable of benefitting from a good number of INTs.

9. Lastly, Iowa faced a lot more really veteran QBs in '10. Iowa will be facing more green or less-experienced QBs in '11 and that could give the DL a little bit more "wiggle room" in their development.
 


Homer, I can't fault your homework...you sure are thorough!

I don't necessarily disagree with what you say. Arguments can certainly be made supporting both the over and under on 8 wins. I tend to focus more on the negatives (that's just me). Looking at things simplisticly, one could say the overall talent level in 2011 is less than that of 2010, which is another reason why I am predicting 8-4 (same as I did last year). Of course, talent doesn't always mean squat (look at Michigan and Notre Dame the past few years).

On the plus side....replacing Wisconsin and Ohio State with Purdue and Nebraska would appear to be a net gain schedule-wise.

Whatever the Hawks' record is this year, there is one thing I DON'T want to see: not playing up to their ability. That was the biggest disappointment about last season.
 




Top