Missing Link to Next Level

Take out KF's first two rebuilding years, the last 18 yrs we avg 8.17 wins per year. The 7-5 myth is a myth. 81 wins in the past 10 yrs, 8.1 for you math majors. Anyone who says we avg 7-5 should be junk punched.
 
lightning1 said:
I'll watch next year. Care to place a friendly wager on next year's win/loss record? What is your prediction?
Click to expand...
Ill meet you back here for the prediction when i see who comes back. If Hock comes back and Fant is the only under-classman to leave. Minimum 10 wins. Id wager money on that. If Hock leaves, i wouldnt commit to more than 9.
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
Take out KF's first two rebuilding years, the last 18 yrs we avg 8.17 wins per year. The 7-5 myth is a myth. 81 wins in the past 10 yrs, 8.1 for you math majors. Anyone who says we avg 7-5 should be junk punched.
Click to expand...
The keep records for a reason. His record is what it is. I'm not concerned about his over all record. I'm concerned about his conference record. Can't schedule cup cakes there. Take out his first 2 years and tell us what his conference win % is.
 
lightning1 said:
If you said it, why did you bother to ask how STs hurt us? Did you think the fact that mentioning it would make it go away? Or make me not point out the fallacy of your post?
Click to expand...
One game isnt enough to call it a coaching issue. One kid had a very bad day. Thats just inaccurate to say its a bad coach when the entire rest of the season was good.
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
Ill meet you back here for the prediction when i see who comes back. If Hock comes back and Fant is the only under-classman to leave. Minimum 10 wins. Id wager money on that. If Hock leaves, i wouldnt commit to more than 9.
Click to expand...
10 wins of Hock comes back. 9 wins if he leaves? Over/under at 8 wins and you'll take the over?
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
One game isnt enough to call it a coaching issue. One kid had a very bad day. Thats just inaccurate to say its a bad coach when the entire rest of the season was good.
Click to expand...
It's only a coaching issue of the mistakes weren't elementary. But they were.
I will admit that the STs mistakes seem to have been corrected. I will say that.
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
Ill meet you back here for the prediction when i see who comes back. If Hock comes back and Fant is the only under-classman to leave. Minimum 10 wins. Id wager money on that. If Hock leaves, i wouldnt commit to more than 9.
Click to expand...
This is what we are losing for next season.
KR/PR - Groeneweg
S - Gervase
LB/ST - Mends
DE - Hesse
FB - Kelly
MLB - Hockaday
OG - Reynolds
C - Render
OG - Ferguson
WR - Easley
DT - Brinks
K - Recinos
DT - Matt Nelson
TE - Fant (he's leaving early, so don't get your hopes up).
That's 5 starters on offense and 5 on defense.
Maybe add Hockenson.
 
lightning1 said:
The keep records for a reason. His record is what it is. I'm not concerned about his over all record. I'm concerned about his conference record. Can't schedule cup cakes there. Take out his first 2 years and tell us what his conference win % is.
Click to expand...
All games count the last i checked. Name ALL of the big ten champs in the past 20 yrs. Two or three programs have won the great majority. We are 5th i believe in championships in the last 20 yrs..includes Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, Nebraska...traditional college football powerhouses of past and present. Why are we supposed to win more than those programs. Not even mentioning Michigan State. All have recruiting advantages and historical programs except possibly Wisky and Sparty. You are correct. We havent won enough big ten games or championships to be considered better than any of these programs. Its more than coaching.
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
All games count the last i checked. Name ALL of the big ten champs in the past 20 yrs. Two or three programs have won the great majority. We are 5th i believe in championships in the last 20 yrs..includes Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, Nebraska...traditional college football powerhouses of past and present. Why are we supposed to win more than those programs. Not even mentioning Michigan State. All have recruiting advantages and historical programs except possibly Wisky and Sparty. You are correct. We havent won enough big ten games or championships to be considered better than any of these programs. Its more than coaching.
Click to expand...
Would you like me to provide his BIG win%? .598 (without his first 2 seasons)
You sound like a Nebraska fan talking about ancient history. I ask about win % and you talk ancient history.
 
lightning1 said:
This is what we are losing for next season.
KR/PR - Groeneweg
S - Gervase
LB/ST - Mends
DE - Hesse
FB - Kelly
MLB - Hockaday
OG - Reynolds
C - Render
OG - Ferguson
WR - Easley
DT - Brinks
K - Recinos
DT - Matt Nelson
TE - Fant (he's leaving early, so don't get your hopes up).
That's 5 starters on offense and 5 on defense.
Maybe add Hockenson.
Click to expand...
Geno Smith and Hooker plus all CB's return, Hesse was great, Epenesa is better. Hockaday is easily replaceable. Nelson is the only loss. Good depth there. Defense essentially replaces 1 true starter lost based on this season as a whole.

Easley, avg at best. Definitely need younger guys to step up at WR. But Id say a couple took steps forward. Maintain at worst, predict improved. OL will probably have 0 all-big 10 this year. All replacement level after our tackles. Very talented younger players will step up as ready.

Gervase, Nelson, Render, Hesse. Losses, great Hawkeyes. None blue chip, big time losses with the talent at the positions they are leaving.

Stanley will be the difference.....up or down. Its 90% on Stanley next year. The rest of the puzzle is there. Same as this year. Stanley steps up, we win 10 or 11 minimum. Next year, we are in better position, and its still up to Stanley. I think 9 win minimum in spite of 2018 possibly showing up.
 
lightning1 said:
Would you like me to provide his BIG win%? .598 (without his first 2 seasons)
You sound like a Nebraska fan talking about ancient history. I ask about win % and you talk ancient history.
Click to expand...
.598 is close to Fry's all-time win pct. Was Fry a good coach? Your numbers dont mean anything. Iowa is a top 25-30 program in wins the past 20 yrs.
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
Geno Smith and Hooker plus all CB's return, Hesse was great, Epenesa is better. Hockaday is easily replaceable. Nelson is the only loss. Good depth there. Defense essentially replaces 1 true starter lost based on this season as a whole.

Easley, avg at best. Definitely need younger guys to step up at WR. But Id say a couple took steps forward. Maintain at worst, predict improved. OL will probably have 0 all-big 10 this year. All replacement level after our tackles. Very talented younger players will step up as ready.

Gervase, Nelson, Render, Hesse. Losses, great Hawkeyes. None blue chip, big time losses with the talent at the positions they are leaving.

Stanley will be the difference.....up or down. Its 90% on Stanley next year. The rest of the puzzle is there. Same as this year. Stanley steps up, we win 10 or 11 minimum. Next year, we are in better position, and its still up to Stanley. I think 9 win minimum in spite of 2018 possibly showing up.
Click to expand...
I'll take 8 wins or less. What's the bet? $100? $500?
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
.598 is close to Fry's all-time win pct. Was Fry a good coach? Your numbers dont mean anything. Iowa is a top 25-30 program in wins the past 20 yrs.
Click to expand...
You're the one that brought up numbers. Now they don't mean anything. Just explain to us what rules we are playing by and the rest of us will be happy to confine our arguments accordingly.
 
revkev73 said:
OK, Iowa is going low to mid level bowling this year, no surprises there, although this season was the one where things were to "align", with the schedule, tight ends, defensive linemen, experienced QB, talent in DB, deep RBs, to make this one of those "one in a decade" Kirk seasons. Didn't happen of course.

If one could name the "missing link," as to why this is more of a standard Kirk Year, than a contract upgrade year, what would it be?

Little threat or production out of the wide receivers? Smith and ISM have the tools. We need one or two more. And I (personal belief) would stop recruiting receivers that are "possession" receivers. At Iowa, those are called "Tight Ends".

Lack of a dynamic and reliable running back? RBs are fine. Need to allow one or two to get a rhythm, use 2nd and 3rd as tandem relief, not "rotation"

A non-clutch, deer in the head lights, QB during the 3-4 big games of the year? Consistency certainly hasn't been his hallmark

Poor coaching and preparation? Sometimes, but not as much as the Armchair Coaches Cabal thinks

Inexperienced LBs? To some extent, although we kinda knew this going in for 2018

Inexperienced OC? He has called some brilliant games and/or sequences. The last-drive-while-still-leading vs. Wisconsin certainly wasn't one of them. In fact, the last drives against NW and Purdue before blowing the leads were weak. In each of those games we threw. Incomplete passes stop the clock. Head-scratchers.

Underused talent, Fant? Epenesa? Hard to say. I personally think so, but Epenesa's own father says otherwise, while Fant's posse was pissed the game after he was possibly in concussion protocol. If Fant was merely used a decoy, it serves its purpose. But when he's not in the game, he has zero effect, so yes, he was underutilized.

Bone headed calls and plays/mistakes during those big plays in big games that mattered most? A mix. More bone-headed plays than bone-headed coaching from my vantage point.

An offensive line that couldn't consistently keep the running game going? Chicken vs. egg. Is it the RBs...or the OL?

There are probably multiple reasons of course, but my pick would be the lack of a dynamic and reliable RB that could be spelled with a somewhat reliable, yet average set of backups. This type of RB is the key to Kirk Ball, IMHO. Opinions?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Where is it etched in stone that Hooker returns? He would be a bigger loss than either (not both) TE's. I would hate to lose Hooker. While I don't know what his draft projections might be he is critical to our scheme and I don't see a Hooker type player coming up behind him.
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
How would you know?
Click to expand...
What's up, tough guy?

giphy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top