This team reminds me of '01 not '97

hawkfaninTX

hawkfaninTX

Well-Known Member
2001 Iowa Hawkeyes football team - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the difference between the two was the prior years success/failure. the only reason this season reminds you of '97 is the preseason expectations. while the losses in the '01 season mirror the results of this year better than that of '97. 1997 we lost all four games on the road. 2001 we lost our first road game (@ #18 Purdue 23-14) followed by second straight road game to (@ MSU 31-28). followed by a win against Indiana sandwiched between a loss at home against a top ten team (#8 Michigan 32-26). That season we lost 5 games by a total of 27 points.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3PlOSaAop0]YouTube - 2001: Michigan-32 Iowa-26[/ame]

off on a Tangent:
-Walkers catch happened right in front of me on a 3rd and goal from the 5 (yes, it was before the students moved to the SW corner). If he doesn't catch that, they settle for a FG to make it 17-20, then we score and not attempt the 2pt conversion to push the lead to 27-17, they score another TD and FG and make it 27-27. we then would have had a chance to march down the field for a Keading FG or force overtime. THAT ONE CATCH HAS HAUNTED ME FOR YEARS!!! and for the longest time was my only loss in person.
 




This is wrong because the 97 team had Rose Bowl expectations and the 01 team had just get to a bowl game expectations.

It also is wrong because the entire Iowa fanbase with the exception of KOK knew that Brad Banks was a better QB than Kyle McCann and we had him coming back with a ton of returning players. In 98, we lost all of our skill position players and began the swirl around the toilet.

So the proof in which year this will be rests in what happens next year. If we go 11-1 and go to the Rose Bowl, you are right. If we go 4-8, the 97's were right.

My hunch is we go 8-4 again.
 


hawkfaninTX said:
all those '97 people out there have not response?? figured it would trigger a halfway decent discussion
Click to expand...

You also thought you weren't being a d-bag at the beginning of the Coker Thread. We all make mistakes like that :D

I didn't see either the '97 or '01 seasons, so I can't really contribute.
 


I don't think it is as comparable due to expectations.

Also some notes as I watch that game high/low lights.

1. ST hurt (forgot Kaeding punted)
2. McCann was terrible (that 2nd Int should've been broken up by Dodge)
3. 4th and 1 and still go for it all. Why why why
4. what happened to the imagination of KF, a reverse on a punt return. Awesome
 


hawkfarmer said:
I don't think it is as comparable due to expectations.

Also some notes as I watch that game high/low lights.

1. ST hurt (forgot Kaeding punted)
2. McCann was terrible (that 2nd Int should've been broken up by Dodge)
3. 4th and 1 and still go for it all. Why why why
4. what happened to the imagination of KF, a reverse on a punt return. Awesome
Click to expand...

i know right? jeesh, would the dust be suspended in the air if we turned to that page in the playbook.
 


after looking at my OP, When was the last time a Big ten team opened up big ten play with two straight road games? we got screwed.
 


I think the 2010 team is superior to the 1997 team, but there are some similarities:

1. Both teams destroyed Iowa State.
2. Both teams suffered key injuries on defense.
3. Both teams lost to NW in close games.
4. Both teams lost to Wisc. in close games.
5. Both teams lost a total of at least 3 extremely close games.

Some differences:

1. The 2010 team defeated Michigan and Penn State. The 1997 team lost to Michigan and did not play Penn State.
2. Stanzi is a much better QB than Matt Sherman.
3. I think the 97 defense was far superior to the 2010 defense.

The seasons are similar because there were unrealistic expectations at the beginning of the year, even though there were gaping holes on both sides of the ball.

The mistake Iowa fans always make is that, after a special season, they automatically think that the next year will be even better. Every season is different in college football. There are always gaping holes that need to be replaced. If the new players do not play up to the caliber of the players who graduate, you get a fall off. If you don't get the breaks you had the previous year, there is a falloff (please don't tell me we weren't lucky in the UNI game and the Indiana games last year). It is not the coaching; it is the players and the breaks.
 


ChosenChildren said:
The mistake Iowa fans always make is that, after a special season, they automatically think that the next year will be even better. Every season is different in college football. There are always gaping holes that need to be replaced. If the new players do not play up to the caliber of the players who graduate, you get a fall off. If you don't get the breaks you had the previous year, there is a falloff (please don't tell me we weren't lucky in the UNI game and the Indiana games last year). It is not the coaching; it is the players and the breaks.
Click to expand...

This paragraph is perfect up until the last sentence. You can not deny that our coaching staff has put our team in the best possible position to win games this year. In both the Wisconsin and the N'Western date, the coaching staff blew decisions and calls that easily could have been difference makers.

Otherwise spot on.
 


I don't know about that comparison. But, I have to ask again, why is McCann the starter and not Banks in that Michigan game KOK and Kirk Ferentz???????????
 


ChosenChildren said:
I think the 2010 team is superior to the 1997 team, but there are some similarities:

1. Both teams destroyed Iowa State.
2. Both teams suffered key injuries on defense.
3. Both teams lost to NW in close games.
4. Both teams lost to Wisc. in close games.
5. Both teams lost a total of at least 3 extremely close games.

Some differences:

1. The 2010 team defeated Michigan and Penn State. The 1997 team lost to Michigan and did not play Penn State.
2. Stanzi is a much better QB than Matt Sherman.
3. I think the 97 defense was far superior to the 2010 defense.

The seasons are similar because there were unrealistic expectations at the beginning of the year, even though there were gaping holes on both sides of the ball.

The mistake Iowa fans always make is that, after a special season, they automatically think that the next year will be even better. Every season is different in college football. There are always gaping holes that need to be replaced. If the new players do not play up to the caliber of the players who graduate, you get a fall off. If you don't get the breaks you had the previous year, there is a falloff (please don't tell me we weren't lucky in the UNI game and the Indiana games last year). It is not the coaching; it is the players and the breaks.
Click to expand...


Good post but a couple of things.

-By your reasoning, no team should be good the following year because they lose key people. I think the reason why people thought Iowa would have a special year (and not just fans, media as well) was they returned the entrie D-Line that was one of the best in the Big Ten last year, along with a senior QB and many skill position players that usually = a great year add the fact that on paper all of our tough BT games were at Home.

-comparing the 97 Mich vs. the 2010 Mich is apples and oranges and doesn't really apply.

The main reason I think people compare the two have nothing to do with how the actual season played out but more the expectations that both teams had due to both having a TON of talent at many key positions and for that reason the records of both teams not showing talent wise how special those teams could have been.
 


As I put up the post comparing 2010 to 1997, the primary reason that I think 1997 is a better comparison than 2001 is expectations for the season.

In 2001, Iowa was coming off a 3-9 season in 2000 (though the team improved at the end of the year). In fact, Iowa was coming off a three-year stretch with a record of 7-27. There was not any expectation that the 2001 Hawks were Big Ten title contenders.

Whereas, in 1997, Iowa was coming off a 9-3 season in 1996, and had won their bowl game impressively for two straight years. Iowa was probably ranked about #15 in pre-season, but was ranked in the top 10 when they traveled to Ohio State in early October.

I will agree that in 97, 01 and 10, close losses have been a painful pattern (2010 Hawks are a dropped pass by the IU receiver from being 0-4 in close games this year).
 


You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top