Danny Kanell and Paul Finebaum at odds

[ichawks]

On ESPN news channel. Danny likes him some Iowa and has them at #2. Finebaum said they (Iowa) just made it into his top 25. Said MSU is much better than Iowa and has much better wins and has them in the 3 spot.
Finebaum said Iowa is a good team but doesn't belong in the conversation.

 

[Herkmeister]

I do not care what some dirt dumb Alabama toothless redneck illiterate thinks about my team!

 

[KuwaitHawk]

I do not care what some dirt dumb Alabama toothless redneck illiterate thinks about my team!

You missed worthless, biased sec-lovin' and in denial

 

[Herkmeister]

You missed worthless, biased sec-lovin' and in denial

Sorry. I stand corrected.

 

[hawkbleeder]

Finebaum can go eff himself. I have little interest in the SEC and the South for that matter...which means Finebaum's opinion is irrelevant.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

Finebaum does admit though that if Iowa wins out then they'll be in the playoff. So basically, he'll be forced to move a team from somewhere in the bottom of his top 25 into the top 4 after one game (doubting he'd move us up from wherever the f*** he has us if we win on Friday).

I'm fine with that.

 

[Herky the Uruk-hai]

On Mike & Mike, Kanell asked one of them what was Iowa's worse lost, and the moment the reply was -"they don't have one", he simply said other than Clemson you cannot say that about any other team.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

I completely understand the argument some make that the rankings should reflect who you believe are the "best" teams in college football. For example, Finebaum brought up an argument last week that Iowa would be Vegas underdogs to every other team in ranked in the CFP top 17. However, if we go with that argument, Finebaum should have still had us in his top 25 before this past week.

I do not believe Iowa is one of the 4 best teams in the country. However, I also believe the rankings should reflect which teams are most deserving to be in the CFP, and you cannot argue that Iowa does not deserve to go. They are one of only two undefeated teams left, and despite a relatively soft schedule, they have quality wins over Pittsburgh, Wisconsin, and Northwestern. All three of those teams could be in the top 25 at the end of the season. Moreover, when we look at who other teams have lost to (e.g., Oklahoma lost to Texas, MSU lost to Nebraska) and how other teams have struggled against mediocre/bad opponents (e.g., Notre Dame beating BC by 3, OSU struggled with Northern Illinois and Indiana, Florida struggled with Vanderbilt and Florida Atlantic) illustrates that even with an easier schedule, being undefeated is a huge accomplishment. Moreover, Iowa has never trailed in the 4th quarter this year.

I hate the fact that if Iowa loses (which, statistically, is very likely) then all of these experts are going to use it as evidence to boast that they were right about Iowa all along. Analysts like Finebaum are going out of their way to dismiss Iowa, and they are doing so without any logical consistency when analyzing other teams.

 

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

The wins we have are fine but the only way in is to beat top 5 MSU. If you added that to what we already have it stacks up pretty nicely with anyone, especially if Oklahoma St and Baylor are winners this week.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

I completely understand the argument some make that the rankings should reflect who you believe are the "best" teams in college football. For example, Finebaum brought up an argument last week that Iowa would be Vegas underdogs to every other team in ranked in the CFP top 17. However, if we go with that argument, Finebaum should have still had us in his top 25 before this past week.

I do not believe Iowa is one of the 4 best teams in the country. However, I also believe the rankings should reflect which teams are most deserving to be in the CFP, and you cannot argue that Iowa does not deserve to go. They are one of only two undefeated teams left, and despite a relatively soft schedule, they have quality wins over Pittsburgh, Wisconsin, and Northwestern. All three of those teams could be in the top 25 at the end of the season. Moreover, when we look at who other teams have lost to (e.g., Oklahoma lost to Texas, MSU lost to Nebraska) and how other teams have struggled against mediocre/bad opponents (e.g., Notre Dame beating BC by 3, OSU struggled with Northern Illinois and Indiana, Florida struggled with Vanderbilt and Florida Atlantic) illustrates that even with an easier schedule, being undefeated is a huge accomplishment. Moreover, Iowa has never trailed in the 4th quarter this year.

I hate the fact that if Iowa loses (which, statistically, is very likely) then all of these experts are going to use it as evidence to boast that they were right about Iowa all along. Analysts like Finebaum are going out of their way to dismiss Iowa, and they are doing so without any logical consistency when analyzing other teams.

So what you're suggesting is that we just keep winning then?....

 

[Omahawkeyeguy]

so many of the blowhards like Finebaum most likely have not even seen Iowa play once this year. They just spew the rhetoric of who they expected to be relevant and are not going to give a team like Iowa any credit until they 'prove it'.

Luckily as Iowa has continued to win the group of doubters has continued to shrink. But the Finebaums and Cowherd's of the world aren't going to give Iowa even a little credit until they get to 13-0. Even then their rhetoric will turn to how badly the Hawks will be destroyed by whomever the playoff opponent will be.

Right now stat guru Nate silver has the Hawks with a 37% chance to win the B1G and 29% chance to make the playoffs, but only a 3% chance of winning it all. So it is real easy for these blowhards to be confident in saying the Hawks don't belong. But all the Hawks need to do is keep winning. 4 more wins and they are national champions.

 

[David1979]

I find it odd that people aren't complaining about Clemson. Maybe because they get better recruits but it's not like their conference is strong. It just seems like Notre Dame and Clemson are tied together because Clemson points to the Notre Dame win and Notre Dame points to the close loss on the road to Clemson. It will be really interesting to see what happens if Clemson loses to UNC and Notre Dame loses to Stanford.

 

[Herkmeister]

I completely understand the argument some make that the rankings should reflect who you believe are the "best" teams in college football. For example, Finebaum brought up an argument last week that Iowa would be Vegas underdogs to every other team in ranked in the CFP top 17. However, if we go with that argument, Finebaum should have still had us in his top 25 before this past week.

I do not believe Iowa is one of the 4 best teams in the country. However, I also believe the rankings should reflect which teams are most deserving to be in the CFP, and you cannot argue that Iowa does not deserve to go. They are one of only two undefeated teams left, and despite a relatively soft schedule, they have quality wins over Pittsburgh, Wisconsin, and Northwestern. All three of those teams could be in the top 25 at the end of the season. Moreover, when we look at who other teams have lost to (e.g., Oklahoma lost to Texas, MSU lost to Nebraska) and how other teams have struggled against mediocre/bad opponents (e.g., Notre Dame beating BC by 3, OSU struggled with Northern Illinois and Indiana, Florida struggled with Vanderbilt and Florida Atlantic) illustrates that even with an easier schedule, being undefeated is a huge accomplishment. Moreover, Iowa has never trailed in the 4th quarter this year.

I hate the fact that if Iowa loses (which, statistically, is very likely) then all of these experts are going to use it as evidence to boast that they were right about Iowa all along. Analysts like Finebaum are going out of their way to dismiss Iowa, and they are doing so without any logical consistency when analyzing other teams.

Well stated. Vert well stated with one exception; I think I The Iowa Hawkeyes are one of the best four teams in the country.

 

[gojojo]

It's interesting that all the ex players and coaches give Iowa respect on the airwaves, but the 120lb water boys and athletic managers in HS blast the hawks. I think I will go with the people that actually played the game

 

[whatsup13579er]

I don't really get the Clemson bias either. Clemson beats a bad Wake Forest team by 20 and Iowa beats a bad Purdue team by 20 (in tougher conditions) and the narrative is completely different. The ACC is not good.