Who would win: 85 Iowa v 09 Iowa

[ChosenChildren]

I think Miller staged some type of hypothetical "tournament" on this topic a few years ago.

With a healthy Stanzi, I take the 09 team. Parker's defense would slow down the 85 team and Stanzi would score some passing TDs against a relatively porous 85 defense. I will opine that if the two teams played 10 games, it might be 5-5.

I do think Fry/Snyder was a much more imaginative offense than Ferentz/O'Keefe, so the game would be very close.

 

[DrKnipe]

I'd take '85.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

I think Miller staged some type of hypothetical "tournament" on this topic a few years ago.

With a healthy Stanzi, I take the 09 team. Parker's defense would slow down the 85 team and Stanzi would score some passing TDs against a relatively porous 85 defense. I will opine that if the two teams played 10 games, it might be 5-5.

I do think Fry/Snyder was a much more imaginative offense than Ferentz/O'Keefe, so the game would be very close.

The 1985 defense wasn't "porous", but, like any defense, offense, ST unit, etc., it had its vulnerabilities.

The skill players for both were solid. I would give the WR edge to 2009 (DJK, McNutt), the backfied edge to 1985 (Harmon/Hudson/Long), while TEs in any given year are pretty much a wash. When have we ever said, "Boy our TEs have never been this weak before"? Never. Literally.

On the D side, 1985 may have had the "best" LB, but I would say the 2009 team, as a unit, was better. The 1985 d-backfield was pretty solid, but did not have a Spievey-like talent, perhaps.

Lines might be tougher to compare. In 1985, it would have been rare to have multiple 300-pounders on the same line. Now, it's rarer when you DON'T.

I'd give it to 1985, Houghtlin with a game-winner (of course).

 

[PCHawk]

One team would have a big advantage because they would be trying to win big while the other team would be trying to win by 1 point.

 

[FCAS]

Depends on which Ronnie Harmon showed up, if you know what I mean.

 

[trj]

One team would have a big advantage because they would be trying to win big while the other team would be trying to win by 1 point.

Pretty much this that is why I would take the '85 team. Play the game in '85 and the '09 team may get blown out because you are going have to score 28+ points to win. Despite the '09 team having 9 of 11 starters on D being NFL draft picks the '85 Iowa O was that explosive even with the lack of speed.


Play the game now and Hayden would play it similar to Northwestern or ISU normally does.....just kill'em with a 1000 paper cuts. Chuck Long would nickel and dime them to death.

 

[thetrza]

Strength and conditioning and all around speed are so much different today than they were thirty years ago.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

One team would have a big advantage because they would be trying to win big while the other team would be trying to win by 1 point.

And this is why I'd take '85

 

[clim]

85. No doubt.

 

[bigjim]

Give me Chuck Long and the 85 Hawks. If it came down to the Xs & Os I'll take Hayden over Ferentz.

 

[docholihawk]

85 team would win simply because of coaching. Not just head coach but all the way down the line. The 85 team would make adjustments on offense and defense. Kirk wouldn't be able to keep up.

 

[FBletterman]

Minus the UCLA tape id say '85 wins. UCLA really exploited our weakness which was slow LBs Station could run a 4.9 with is butt on fire. So we got killed on the edge by Eric Ball. Doubt current staff would know how to exploit it even given the info. What I like is Hapel, Halverson, Flag, Early's Smiths and Harmons route running so precise and unbelievable hands. I'm afraid it would be pitch and catch for Long all day long. 85s line would be undersized bye today's standards but there technique was suburb guys like harmon and Hudson could get to the second level. Harmon as a receiving threat out of the back field would give 09 fits and more important Snyder knew how to use him.

Yes coaching in this one would come up huge. Snyder/ Hayden would keep his foot on the peddle but Ferments/ O Keefe would not. 85 Def despite physically limited do to the era could stop an conservative ran '09 Iowa offense.

I'd take 85 over 09 but not over 02

 

[hawkdrummer1]

85 team would win simply because of coaching. Not just head coach but all the way down the line. The 85 team would make adjustments on offense and defense. Kirk wouldn't be able to keep up.

Yep. I'll say what I've said 100 times before. Give Kirk and Hayden equal talent on opposing sidelines...and Hayden would win 8 out of 10. (and I'm being generous to Kirk)

But that should be a no brainer considering that even ISMoo can win 56% against him

 

[Hawknick]

Kirk would be a busy man. He would have to run from sideline to sideline coaching the 1985 offensive line and head coaching the 2009 team. So the next question is would he use that to his advantage knowing all his own offensive line blocking to help the 2009 defense out? Or knowing the 2009 defense would he help the 1985 offensive line? It would be an interesting paradox? Or in this scenario would there be a past Kirk and a present Kirk on the same field at the same time? Doesn't that mess up the entire time space condominium if you time travel and see the future or past version of yourself? Assuming those are the time travel rules being applied to this game, and it does not cause a great rift in time for him to see his past self he would at least know all his own offensive line calls anyways giving 2009 an inside perspective giving 2009 defense a huge advantage.

 

[PCHawk]

Kirk would be a busy man. He would have to run from sideline to sideline coaching the 1985 offensive line and head coaching the 2009 team. So the next question is would he use that to his advantage knowing all his own offensive line blocking to help the 2009 defense out? Or knowing the 2009 defense would he help the 1985 offensive line? It would be an interesting paradox? Or in this scenario would there be a past Kirk and a present Kirk on the same field at the same time? Doesn't that mess up the entire time space condominium if you time travel and see the future or past version of yourself? Assuming those are the time travel rules being applied to this game, and it does not cause a great rift in time for him to see his past self he would at least know all his own offensive line calls anyways giving 2009 an inside perspective giving 2009 defense a huge advantage.

They would be fine being on opposite sidelines (see Back to the Future ) but I would suggest them not shaking hands after the game (see Timecop).

 

[MoseSchrute]

Harmon would fumble five times, earning a big paycheck, and give Stanzi and Co. the win.

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

Gotta go with '85. But I think it'd be close. Edge, Mr. Fry.

 

[trj]

Harmon would fumble five times, earning a big paycheck, and give Stanzi and Co. the win.

I believe Norby Walters and Lloyd Bloom are both dead, so unless Harmon has some voodoo doll and can resurrect people from the grave...... There will be no money to funnel to him, so he would be on the up and up.

 

[uihawk82]

Strength and conditioning and all around speed are so much different today than they were thirty years ago.

I think if you could somehow "normalize" the difference is size and strength between the two teams separated by 25 years I would definitely take teh 1985 team. the 85 team passing game would have given Norm fits. Remember the 2009 team was behind and needed a lot of escapes to win.

 

[99topdawg]

Minus the UCLA tape id say '85 wins. UCLA really exploited our weakness which was slow LBs Station could run a 4.9 with is butt on fire. So we got killed on the edge by Eric Ball. Doubt current staff would know how to exploit it even given the info. What I like is Hapel, Halverson, Flag, Early's Smiths and Harmons route running so precise and unbelievable hands. I'm afraid it would be pitch and catch for Long all day long. 85s line would be undersized bye today's standards but there technique was suburb guys like harmon and Hudson could get to the second level. Harmon as a receiving threat out of the back field would give 09 fits and more important Snyder knew how to use him.

Yes coaching in this one would come up huge. Snyder/ Hayden would keep his foot on the peddle but Ferments/ O Keefe would not. 85 Def despite physically limited do to the era could stop an conservative ran '09 Iowa offense.

I'd take 85 over 09 but not over 02

Wasn't there something about one of our D-linemen tipping off something (slant direction maybe?) with his alignment that UCLA took advantage of? Reading the above reminded me of this and I was thinking it was this game.