Pitt

[CAARHawk]

Attendance last night was 40,025. Capacity at Heintz is 65,050. So there were 25,025 empty seats for a Thursday night conference game. The Panthers did sell out against Notre Dame, but are averaging only 48,666 for their four home games.

People say the Big Ten should admit Pitt with expansion. Why? It would be another athletic program that Nebraska, Iowa & others would have to subsidize. Iowa loses about $750,000 in revenue a year because of the Big Ten's ticket revenue sharing plan. That number would only go up with the admission of Pitt.

Don't bring up their basketball program. There is no money in basketball. ESPN only pays the Big East $38 million a year for football & basketball. Admitting Kansas would even be worse. Kansas draws even less than Pitt.

Well, THIS, seems to make all this rather moot.

But I agree with your basic premise. Pitt has a very Miami kind of fan base. Also, PSU brings the B1G Pennsylvania anyway. Never thought that was an option.

 

[AIRHAWK]

Wow, seeing Pitt destroy the 16th ranked team in the country raises more questions about Iowa. Imagine if ISU beats Texas then we will all be shaking our heads.

The only decent game left for Pitt is at West Virginia. They might wind up winning the Big East and getting into a BCS bowl.

I really think Texas dominates the clones. Too much depth/talent. I take
Texas to cover the 10...easily
Texas 35
ISU 7 (Garbage time TD)
Clones not ready for prime time. Get smoked.

 

[jbuch26]

In a different thread earlier this week, I posted how I thought people weren't giving us enough credit for playing a pretty tough schedule. Obviously T-Tech is a warm-up, but on the road against ISU (especially considering its a rival), win against a suddenly tough 3-2 Pitt team, and L-Monore who had TCU down in the 2nd half...this is a pretty tough slate.

Could you make a case that we've played the toughest non-conference game in the B1G? I'd say Penn State is tougher...but are we right after them?

I think we're forced to cheer for ISU tomorrow night. Don't throw eggs at me...

 

[papahawk]

Agree on hoping ISU wins. However I do not believe we have played the toughest non-conference schedule. Actually I believe a weak one would be a more realistic evaluation.

At the same time I do agree our D may be better than previously thought. Guess we will find out next Saturday.

With what I have seen so far I believe anything better than a 6-6 or 7-5 record will be a good coaching year. I began thinking they would go 8-4 or 9-3.

Z says 10-2 and I hope he is correct.

 

[imported_ankle23]

I think everyone knew USF was overrated. Also, how does Pitt constantly have some of the best RB's in football.

Look at their recruiting base. Then look at ours. Then appreciate the job the current staff has done!

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

With the power of hindsight ... I think that it shows you just how good of a job the Iowa D did to contain Graham. Were it not for one poor tackle attempt ... we could have even held him to less.

I was looking through this thread for someone to point this out. Our run defense was very good against these guys. they have a big ten offensive line size wise and they are experienced. Our D made them earn every yard and Graham got 20 of those completely on his own during one run.

I think we can stop the run...can we get a pass rush...that's the big question as dropping 8 against an accurate QB when he has all day...is a tough way to go.

 

[jbuch26]

Agree on hoping ISU wins. However I do not believe we have played the toughest non-conference schedule. Actually I believe a weak one would be a more realistic evaluation.

At the same time I do agree our D may be better than previously thought. Guess we will find out next Saturday.

With what I have seen so far I believe anything better than a 6-6 or 7-5 record will be a good coaching year. I began thinking they would go 8-4 or 9-3.

Z says 10-2 and I hope he is correct.

I'm not trying to say we've played LSU or Clemson schedule through the first 4 games. I'm just saying that you'd think Pitt was a 'bottom of the MAC' team the way some people were talking about them...that's a BCS conference team (albeit the Big LEast) in a decent recruiting area.

I'm mostly comparing Iowa's non-conf schedule to other teams in the B1G and I think the Hawks are more battle-tested. It would behoove Wisconsin if they had played one tough team (like Pitt) and won 28-20 instead of all these blow-outs over bad teams. Nebraska has played Washington and Fresno State - Wisconsin hasn't played anybody close to the caliber of those two teams.

That is going to be a close game on Sat night...

 

[olddude]

I'm not trying to say we've played LSU or Clemson schedule through the first 4 games. I'm just saying that you'd think Pitt was a 'bottom of the MAC' team the way some people were talking about them...that's a BCS conference team (albeit the Big LEast) in a decent recruiting area.

I'm mostly comparing Iowa's non-conf schedule to other teams in the B1G and I think the Hawks are more battle-tested. It would behoove Wisconsin if they had played one tough team (like Pitt) and won 28-20 instead of all these blow-outs over bad teams. Nebraska has played Washington and Fresno State - Wisconsin hasn't played anybody close to the caliber of those two teams.

That is going to be a close game on Sat night...

I agree. They could be better than many thought. I also dont think it was so much a "closing" issue with them as much as it was a we decided to play some O. They have a bad name for not closing, but after we cut the score down a bit, that had to have lit a fire (if there wasnt one). They played ND tough for the whole game as well. So I think people can stop saying they fell apart, it was our O who decided to take it to them and did so rather nicely. Look at the passses we had, how much more could they defend them? It's not like they could suddenly grow or be faster. We just decided to whoop them, and thats what we did.