The 2008 Iowa football team: Most talented ever?

[hawkdrummer1]

this may not be popular but banks was a product of the players he had around him. take stanzi or jvb or tate and put them on the 2002 team and they have better yrs than banks.

That offensive line would have made anybody a better QB, no doubt.

 

[hogeye]

Let's slow down a bit on the railroading Banks bus. No, he wasn't a conventional pocket QB, but he was a better raw athlete than JVB, Stanzi or Tate. This was a kid that was recruited by Miami, Washington who were big names at the time. No doubt a large part of the reason he sat as a backup was because he wasn't a conventional pro-style QB, but that shouldn't negate his success.

would have any of those QB's had better passing years than Banks? Sure, most likely, but I don't think that can translate into more wins. And it's certainly not fair to say he was simply a product of those around him any more than any of those other 3 QB's in the same situation.

 

[hawkfan2679]

Let's slow down a bit on the railroading Tavian Banks bus. No, he wasn't a conventional pocket QB, but he was a better raw athlete than JVB, Stanzi or Tate. This was a kid that was recruited by Miami, Washington who were big names at the time. No doubt a large part of the reason he sat as a backup was because he wasn't a conventional pro-style QB, but that shouldn't negate his success.

QFTavian.




My inclusion into this thread...what nags me about that season, in the midst of what I felt like was a very strong team to end the year, we lost yet another game we shouldn't have, dropping one to the fighting Zookers. Then having to relive it because it was on the B10 network ("The Journey" I think it was called...)...ugh.

 

[tm3308]

Let's slow down a bit on the railroading Tavian Banks bus. No, he wasn't a conventional pocket QB, but he was a better raw athlete than JVB, Stanzi or Tate. This was a kid that was recruited by Miami, Washington who were big names at the time. No doubt a large part of the reason he sat as a backup was because he wasn't a conventional pro-style QB, but that shouldn't negate his success.

would have any of those QB's had better passing years than Banks? Sure, most likely, but I don't think that can translate into more wins. And it's certainly not fair to say he was simply a product of those around him any more than any of those other 3 QB's in the same situation.

I think with Tate, that team is better. He worked without the benefit of McNutt/DJK/Moeaki, and in 2004 had ZERO support from the run game, yet he was able to have success.

Solomon, Hinkle, and Chandler were all solid, but they weren't on the level of Mo Brown, Dallas Clark, and C.J. Jones.

Banks may have been recruited by Miami, but not as a quarterback. There's no problem in saying that we've had better players at QB. It hardly qualifies as railroading.

 

[hogeye]

I think with Tate, that team is better. He worked without the benefit of McNutt/DJK/Moeaki, and in 2004 had ZERO support from the run game, yet he was able to have success.

Solomon, Hinkle, and Chandler were all solid, but they weren't on the level of Mo Brown, Dallas Clark, and C.J. Jones.

Banks may have been recruited by Miami, but not as a quarterback. There's no problem in saying that we've had better players at QB. It hardly qualifies as railroading.

May be better with Tate, I am not going to argue the impossible, it's a ridiculous argument. All I am saying is that people that want to dismiss what Banks did need to slow down and think it through. That's the point, do you disagree with that?

I never said he was recruited by Miami or Washington as a QB. The point was to emphasize that he was a highly recruited athlete, which is the word I used.

 

[whammer33024]

hogeye, you do know BRAD banks was iowa's qb in 2002, right? you keep mentioning tavian so i want to make sure you're on the same page

 

[hogeye]

Brad is what I meant, clearly. My apologies to all offended. The point remains the same.

I made that mistake once, btw.

 

[uihawk82]

2002 was the best of ken o'keefe. 2008 was in my opinion one of his 2 worst coaching jobs with 2010 being up there as well. 09 was miracle after miracle. I'll take 2002 ken o'keefe vs any other team we've had. I have 4 tapes from 2002 and would be happy to send a copy to anyone with any doubts. That offense was balanced and we spread the ball all over the field. Defenses had no clue.

Let me know how I can get copies of those videos from you.

I had that big win against mich at ann arbor on tape and then I stupidly taped over it.

I miss watching the hawks just utterly SMASH a pretty good wolves team and Jermelle just **** pounds some lbkers and dbacks in that game.

 

[whammer33024]

i don't think he was as highly recruited as you seem to think. he originally attended central florida, then transferred to a juco after his redshirt freshman season. sure, some of the major florida colleges showed interest early, but none offered a scholarship.

that said, i can't say any of the other qb's would have done better than banks. he was able to make more plays with his legs than any of those other qb's would have been able to.

 

[hogeye]

Again, that wasn't the main point of the post, whammer. I said he was recruited, I didn't say he was offered. I wasn't trying to imply he was a 4 or 5 star athlete. I was simply underscoring the fact that he was getting notice because of his athletic ability.

Saying he was simply a product of the players around him wasn't being fair to his athletic ability.

 

[JonDMiller]

In a heads up game, I think I'd still take the 2002 team...while the 2008 team had more overall talent on the roster, the 2002 team had that talent further along in their careers...The OL save Gallery were seniors...Clark's last year...Cole, Hodges, seniors...Barr, Sanders were seniors.

 

[hogeye]

In a heads up game, I think I'd still take the 2002 team...while the 2008 team had more overall talent on the roster, the 2002 team had that talent further along in their careers...The OL save Gallery were seniors...Clark's last year...Cole, Hodges, seniors...Barr, Sanders were seniors.

I can't argue with that. For me it's as simple as the fact that the 2002 team found a way to win and the 2008 teams wasn't able to close the deal on close games that were well within reach.

 

[herkeye]

I gotta give the 2002 team an edge over the 2008 team. The 2008 offense had a great running back and receivers that could put up some points, specifically the air attack against the 2002 D. But the 2002 D had one of the most stout run defenses in the country. The 2002 offense would have some trouble against the 2008 D, however. The wild card in this game would be the SPECIAL TEAMS play. 2002 scored more special teams points than any team I can remember. Blocked punts and field goals was the norm, not to mention Nate Kaeding hitting everything from 55 yards and in.
35 - 24. 2002 wins.

 

[tm3308]

I can't argue with that. For me it's as simple as the fact that the 2002 team found a way to win and the 2008 teams wasn't able to close the deal on close games that were well within reach.

Over the course of the season, sure. But I'd take the 2008 team that played the last month of the season and the Outback Bowl. They got over the hump eventually, and then were practically unstoppable in the clutch for the next 12 months.

And while that rush defense was very good in 2002, they didn't face Greene. And Iowa definitely didn't face a defense like the 2008 version, at least not until the Orange Bowl. Russell and Lewis would have had to work very hard for yardage; The receivers would face the best back 7 Iowa has had in the Ferentz Era (Edds and Angerer were excellent in coverage, and then the produced a pair of corners who now start in the NFL, and Sash will likely be a starter in the next couple years).

I initially took the 2002 team, but the more I think about it, the more I like the 2008 squad's chances.

 

[hogeye]

Over the course of the season, sure. But I'd take the 2008 team that played the last month of the season and the Outback Bowl. They got over the hump eventually, and then were practically unstoppable in the clutch for the next 12 months.

And while that rush defense was very good in 2002, they didn't face Greene. And Iowa definitely didn't face a defense like the 2008 version, at least not until the Orange Bowl. Russell and Lewis would have had to work very hard for yardage; The receivers would face the best back 7 Iowa has had in the Ferentz Era (Edds and Angerer were excellent in coverage, and then the produced a pair of corners who now start in the NFL, and Sash will likely be a starter in the next couple years).

I initially took the 2002 team, but the more I think about it, the more I like the 2008 squad's chances.

I guess the thought never occurred to me to try and dissect the seasons when the context of the discussion was a team from a particular season.

The last month of the season against Penn State, sure. I don't consider the Purdue (who had an atrocious team) or Minnesota (who was coming in with either a 3 or 4 game losing streak) games anything to crow about.

I also don't think that win over South Carolina was impressive. We were rightfully favored to win that game. The 2002 USC match-up was a true test of might, unfortunately we lost, but that was a damn good Trojan team.

We can disagree and leave it at that.

 

[hawkfan2679]

2008 final few games:

* L 24-27 to an Illinois team that didn't get to 6 wins to become bowl eligible (we had an extra week to prepare for this one too)

* W 24-23 vs. PSU - A great win.

* W 22-17 vs. Purdue - Pretty sure Purdue had the ball at least once with a chance to win, didn't they? Also think they finished with either 3 or 4 wins that year...

* W 55-0 vs. Minnesota - A good shellacking

* W 31-10 vs. South Carolina - SC finished the season 7-6...and I think they threw or fumbled us the ball 5 or 6 times in that game, several of them in their territory.

So were we really that impressive at the end of 2008, or did we allow the Penn State game to glaze over how we finished down the stretch (not counting the bowl game, against 3 of 4 teams that weren't even going bowling)?

 

[JonDMiller]

Over the course of the season, sure. But I'd take the 2008 team that played the last month of the season and the Outback Bowl. They got over the hump eventually, and then were practically unstoppable in the clutch for the next 12 months.

The 2002 Iowa team just crushed people after the Purdue game, which was game 6 of that year. The beating they gave a Top 10 Michigan team in Ann Arbor is one I will never forget. Yes, Iowa got on a roll late in 2008...but the 2002 team was on seek and destroy mode for half the season.

 

[Xerxes]

2008 final few games:

* L 24-27 to an Illinois team that didn't get to 6 wins to become bowl eligible (we had an extra week to prepare for this one too)

* W 24-23 vs. PSU - A great win.

* W 22-17 vs. Purdue - Pretty sure Purdue had the ball at least once with a chance to win, didn't they? Also think they finished with either 3 or 4 wins that year...

* W 55-0 vs. Minnesota - A good shellacking

* W 31-10 vs. South Carolina - SC finished the season 7-6...and I think they threw or fumbled us the ball 5 or 6 times in that game, several of them in their territory.

So were we really that impressive at the end of 2008, or did we allow the Penn State game to glaze over how we finished down the stretch (not counting the bowl game, against 3 of 4 teams that weren't even going bowling)?

I think they actually had two possessions in the final minutes to take the lead. One of which ended in the Iowa red zone.

That 2008 team really turned it around late but people often forget that Purdue was damn close to winning that game.

 

[Section136]

Over the course of the season, sure. But I'd take the 2008 team that played the last month of the season and the Outback Bowl. They got over the hump eventually, and then were practically unstoppable in the clutch for the next 12 months.

And while that rush defense was very good in 2002, they didn't face Greene. And Iowa definitely didn't face a defense like the 2008 version, at least not until the Orange Bowl. Russell and Lewis would have had to work very hard for yardage; The receivers would face the best back 7 Iowa has had in the Ferentz Era (Edds and Angerer were excellent in coverage, and then the produced a pair of corners who now start in the NFL, and Sash will likely be a starter in the next couple years).

I initially took the 2002 team, but the more I think about it, the more I like the 2008 squad's chances.

The 2002 squad did face Larry Johnson though and he only gained 68 yards on 18 carries. That was the 1st conference game as well and the 2002 defense got more and more nasty against the run as the year went on.

 

[Section136]

In a heads up game, I think I'd still take the 2002 team...while the 2008 team had more overall talent on the roster, the 2002 team had that talent further along in their careers...The OL save Gallery were seniors...Clark's last year...Cole, Hodges, seniors...Barr, Sanders were seniors.

Nitpicking but Bob Sanders was a junior in 2002.