Notebook: James Butler Back at Practice, Injury Report

InGoodCo said:
I think there's a pretty big difference. One - I think IKM is a tremendous athlete who is going to be a great Hawkeye. I am giant supporter of his and I hope he gets more touches and I can't wait support him for the next 4 years. He got himself into the dog house on his first big opportunity. I don't think that's criticizing him - it's what happened. He squandered it. If you think I shouldn't use the S word, then sure, you got a point. But I wasn't malicious or disrespectful in the least towards any player.
Click to expand...
That's fine but we disagree. You called out a 19 year old kid. Rob and Jon can't wait to chastise others for talking in general terms about recruits as a group but yet here you are calling out a specific player and...shocking (not shocked), Rob hasn't said a word. Hmmm, wonder what the differences are between you and this other poster?
 
Saying a player STB when given the opportunity - I do not believe is anywhere in the same neighborhood as maliciously attacking a players character or play... If I stepped out of bounds, that wasn't the intent. The intent was, it takes younger players time to grow, learn and mature. These guys will get their opportunities.
 
OkstHawk said:
That's fine but we disagree. You called out a 19 year old kid. Rob and Jon can't wait to chastise others for talking in general terms about recruits as a group but yet here you are calling out a specific player and...shocking (not shocked), Rob hasn't said a word. Hmmm, wonder what the differences are between you and this other poster?
Click to expand...

Yes, there is... I didn't call him anything. I said when given a big opportunity, he squandered it. Not even in the same boat buddy. Pretty sure Rob can read the difference as well. Nice try tho. I support the Iowa Hawkeyes. If it's as easy as it is for us posters to recognize it, it's probably even easier for Rob.

You add nothing to this board but negative towards players, coaches or program. Show me something different.
 
I agree that the wording was harsh. Could have been delivered better.

However, if you're comparing it to the thread started ripping Iowa's recruiting by linking stories on two specific high school kids, I don't see the parallel.
 
RobHowe said:
I agree that the wording was harsh. Could have been delivered better.

However, if you're comparing it to the thread started ripping Iowa's recruiting by linking stories on two specific high school kids, I don't see the parallel.
Click to expand...

100% apologize. It was a figure of speech that I used and in was in poor taste. Some of the guys when given opportunities have squandered them and benched themselves. I would never maliciously attack a player in the program or a recruit... or another poster. I have called some names in the past (like dumb or dummy, or ding dong) and I always end up apologizing. I am a defender of this program, the players, the coaches and really other people on this site. Go Hawks.
 
InGoodCo said:
IKM got the opportunity to START last week... right? That's a pretty good opportunity. How did he reward the coaches? Basically handed over momentum IMMEDIATELY to an inferior team that put Iowa in a hole from the word GO.

I want them to play more too - looks like we absolutely need it, but I don't know how you can put that on the staff when they were given the opportunity fairly early into their careers.
Click to expand...

Perfection or ride the pines. got it.
 
RobHowe said:
I agree that the wording was harsh. Could have been delivered better.

However, if you're comparing it to the thread started ripping Iowa's recruiting by linking stories on two specific high school kids, I don't see the parallel.
Click to expand...
Not what my post said, but either way it is good to see some consistency.
 
InGoodCo said:
Yes, there is... I didn't call him anything. I said when given a big opportunity, he squandered it. Not even in the same boat buddy. Pretty sure Rob can read the difference as well. Nice try tho. I support the Iowa Hawkeyes. If it's as easy as it is for us posters to recognize it, it's probably even easier for Rob.

You add nothing to this board but negative towards players, coaches or program. Show me something different.
Click to expand...
Sorry I think you meant objectivity not negativity. But point noted, perhaps I should stick to calling out players like you huh? Classy brah!
 
ArvadaHawk said:
i'm disappointed that TY and IKM weren't given more of an opportunity. I still believe that we must go with a 2 tb set (no fb) if we insist on being run heavy/priority. If neither is ready now, then what the hell were we going to do if JB hadn't transferred? sometimes, this iowa staff is down right illogical.
Click to expand...
Sometimes huh? Just a little no?
 
InGoodCo said:
Saying a player STB when given the opportunity - I do not believe is anywhere in the same neighborhood as maliciously attacking a players character or play... If I stepped out of bounds, that wasn't the intent. The intent was, it takes younger players time to grow, learn and mature. These guys will get their opportunities.
Click to expand...

And, this post is why it's not the same thing as the repetitive junk others post.
While I don't believe IKM "pooped the bed", he did mess up...and will get plenty of other chances. The kid looks very solid, runs hard.

I am super pumped about B. Smith as well, but his fumble also probably hurt his minutes.
 
Because of the KF offensive philosophy, turnovers are just killer. Iowa shortens the game, and therefore shortens the number of opportunities to touch the ball. If a player loses the ball, I don't think KF is comfortable enough putting him back out there. The exception is our QB
 
It's always a fine line with younger players in terms of ball security. You have to balance getting reps and experience with putting the team in a hole, and also have to be careful not to overreact and damage their self-esteem.

That said, I also think it's important to recognize that not every turnover is the same. On replay, IKM's turnover was not the result of poor ball security, but rather was a perfect helmet-on-ball hit, and probably would have happened to a veteran RB as well. Smith's and ISM's turnovers appeared more careless. I remember saying out loud after IKM's turnover, that I hope Kirk goes right back to him and doesn't put him in the doghouse.

It's also important to mention that the reluctance to use the younger running backs more may not have anything to do with turnover risk. I strongly suspect that reading blitzes and pass-pro are bigger concerns on the part of the coaches.
 
#1DieHardHawk said:
It's always a fine line with younger players in terms of ball security. You have to balance getting reps and experience with putting the team in a hole, and also have to be careful not to overreact and damage their self-esteem.

That said, I also think it's important to recognize that not every turnover is the same. On replay, IKM's turnover was not the result of poor ball security, but rather was a perfect helmet-on-ball hit, and probably would have happened to a veteran RB as well. Smith's and ISM's turnovers appeared more careless. I remember saying out loud after IKM's turnover, that I hope Kirk goes right back to him and doesn't put him in the doghouse.

It's also important to mention that the reluctance to use the younger running backs more may not have anything to do with turnover risk. I strongly suspect that reading blitzes and pass-pro are bigger concerns on the part of the coaches.
Click to expand...

Playing time is also connected to how the player is performing in practice as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top