Question about ISU Cancellation

It's often said a team improves the most between game 1 and game 2. The flip side is we have no film on ISU, they have some on us.

True, but we really didn't show much against NIU. Everything we ran was very familiar and, for the most part, pretty vanilla. So I like the fact that we have a game under our belts and they don't. You could see our first game jitters in the form of dropped passes, inaccurate passes, penalties, etc. I think we'll be much better for it next week.
 
Vegas requires the game to be played 55 minutes for it to count.

Do those 5 minutes count as a game? The NCAA has the 4 game rule now. Would this count against that for redshirting purposes?

Interesting stuff no one thought about.
 
Saturday when they meet Iowa it will be their first game so that's a bonus for Iowa. I doubt that the suspended clown players are going to be suspended for the Iowa game.
 
I can't decide if them cancelling the game hurts them or hurts Iowa? It can hurt ISU because they don't get a game in and help get in game shape and gel as a team. It can hurt Iowa because now our coaches can't scout them.

I think it definitely hurts ISU because a team's biggest improvement is usually between game 1 & 2. I think the teams were pretty even going into the game but I thought ISU had the advantage before Saturday because I thought Iowa had the more important suspension and their cohesion in game 2 would suffer especially in the offensive line. BUT I didn't realize ISU had Good-Jones their best OL suspended and for having both tackles suspended I thought Iowa played good. Now with the whole ISU team not having a game under their belt, I think its definitely an Iowa advantage.
 
Pollard said:


and



So my question is, it's not the players fault the game was cancelled, which, OK, would mean that they would only get 10 games, but they are looking to do whatever possible to add a 12th game back to the schedule, so...

The point of the suspension is for the player to miss a game and only play in 11 games, not watch others play and you sit on the sideline. Since the 12th game is questionable if they thought it was important to be a game if a 12th was scheduled, I would make it the makeup game.
 
The point of the suspension is for the player to miss a game and only play in 11 games, not watch others play and you sit on the sideline. Since the 12th game is questionable if they thought it was important to be a game if a 12th was scheduled, I would make it the makeup game.
No, it was for them to be suspended for one game. If it was about the number of games played in, then they wouldn't be allowed to play in the conf. champ game, the bowl game/or playoff game(s). The point was for them to miss a game. They won't miss a game.
 
I have a hard time believing Iowa wouldn't do the same thing given the situation.
Regardless, if ISU scheduals another game, hold them out for that one. Problem solved.
 
ISU has built in excuses either way. Had they been suspended against Iowa that would have been it. Now if Iowa wins it will because they didn't get to have a game in week 1 and Iowa did.
 
I want them at full strength so when we beat their azzes the only whine they'll have is "we're still rusty. Iowa got an extra game in." And you know they will cry about it. :D
 
Kirk wouldn't treat it any way, if the decision was made by the AD. You're deluding yourself if you believe that any coach would nobly decline to play players that had been officially cleared to play.
Your deluding yourself if you think pollard is making any decisions about football players, without Campbell's consent. The punishment was mutually decided upon. Same as this decision. Don't try and shield Campbell with that "AD's decision" bull shit. Nobody is buying that.
 
The point of the suspension is for the player to miss a game and only play in 11 games, not watch others play and you sit on the sideline. Since the 12th game is questionable if they thought it was important to be a game if a 12th was scheduled, I would make it the makeup game.

I would be curious to see how KF would do it. I would not be surprised to see him hold them out, and honestly, I wouldn't blame him. The suspensions are there to punish a player and teach them how to become upstanding adults.

I would hate to beat a team that isn't all there, but injuries happen all the time. And I don't see too many people complaining about beating a team with an injured player out.
 
I would be curious to see how KF would do it. I would not be surprised to see him hold them out, and honestly, I wouldn't blame him. The suspensions are there to punish a player and teach them how to become upstanding adults.

I would hate to beat a team that isn't all there, but injuries happen all the time. And I don't see too many people complaining about beating a team with an injured player out.

Part of what makes one team better than another is depth. Play the hand you're dealt.
 
Last edited:
ISU has built in excuses either way. Had they been suspended against Iowa that would have been it. Now if Iowa wins it will because they didn't get to have a game in week 1 and Iowa did.

Iowa wins, they have their suspended players back when they technically didn't sit out a game,
Isu wins, iowa had no tape on the game
Let's just play, stop looking for something to bitch about
 
I can't decide if them cancelling the game hurts them or hurts Iowa? It can hurt ISU because they don't get a game in and help get in game shape and gel as a team. It can hurt Iowa because now our coaches can't scout them.
Oh...I think the Iowa staff has scouted them plenty.....

beef-cattle-grazing-management-fescue-0501W3-1721A_1.jpg
 

Latest posts

Top