Ah, my stalker is back. Good to see you. Yes, Friday, not Saturday. That changes EVERYTHING.
Did ISU seriously run instead of kneeling and blow it?
- Thread starter El Simbolo
- Start date
How could isu have won when at no point in the 2nd half were they in scoring position? There was no deep threat from isu our DB's took the game over. isu couldn't run the ball either. So how exactly could have isu won the game when they couldn't score? Must we now enter the make believe arena where we tout things that didn't take place? No one will laugh LC just tell us what you really think.
So you Probobly don't respect Kirk much since in the past he has let the play clock run down on a punt to give Iowa's kicker more room? I mean he blatently cheated by not getting the punt off in the allowed 40 seconds.
IF Iowa fails to move the football with the regularity and routine that plagued isu in the second half of the game on September 12th in Ames, then there will be plenty of concerned Hawk fans.
(As opposed to overly optimistic fans thinking that simply because the score is tied that there is still a legitimate chance for the clones to win... I mean how many games has isu won in the second half/4th quarter recently?)
I see your point, but I think there's a distinction that's usually pretty clear. I wouldn't say what Bielema did is cheating, and you would have to go to the ends of the Earth to find someone who thinks less of that turd than LC does. It's borderline, though.
The holding under discussion is not borderline, IMHO. It's like a defensive back who knows he's been beaten grabbing a receiver to make sure he doesn't catch the ball, or a team intentionally getting a delay penalty to improve their kicking position
I have to defend LC a bit here regarding the Iowa-ISU game. Seems like any Hawk fan claiming they weren't worried about losing for most of that game is either fibbing or a bit dim. I mean, we were 1-0 going into that game and have lost how many times to ISU recently?
Knowing what we know now about this Iowa team's grit, we probably didn't need to be worried. But I - and the other Hawks watching with me - were absolutely worried at the time.
Knowing what we know now about this Iowa team's grit, we probably didn't need to be worried. But I - and the other Hawks watching with me - were absolutely worried at the time.
Iowa lost a three-point game on a last second kick in 2014. The year prior, with the game in Ames, Iowa won 27-21 and the final score truly did not reflect the tone (difference) of the two teams in that game. Looking back over history, Iowa has either won fairly handily of lost by the narrowest of margins to isu recently.
This year, it became fairly evident that Iowa's defense was controlling the line of scrimmage as the game wore on late in the first half and throughout the second half. The fact that isu failed to score given the opportunity presented to them with '9 minutes remaining' merely reinforces the reality of the entire situation.
No amount of fan 'worry' is going to alter the outcome of the game in Lincoln this Friday. That will be determined on the field. Fans will have varying degrees of confidence/angst, but it will be the players and coaches that ultimately decide the final result.
No stalking, just point out factual errors when I see them. Just seems that you have more than most.
I thought the argument from clone fans was that they just come to this site to make sure the facts that are shown for isu are correct. They never argue anything or are ever incorrect. Their only purpose for being on this site is to correct fallacies put forth by Hawk fans.
Sorry you have soiled your escutcheon by defending me, but we're right
I felt the same as you probably did about the game, only from the other perspective. Iowa was winning the game, despite the tie score. I was thinking ISU could get back some of the spark it had in the first half on offense, or maybe get a turnover or something. While Iowa was dominating the game, Iowa also was dodging bullets on offense. Beathard made several really big plays on third down. I assume you were thinking that if you just didn't screw up, you would win it.
With about 9 minutes to play when ISU punted, I was fairly optimistic. It was a good punt with excellent coverage. I expected King to fair-catch it; when he didn't signal, I thought there might be a fumble, and at worst Iowa would be pretty deep in its own territory. But the coverage guys overran him and he made a terrific return. Changed the situation.
Obviously, once Iowa had scored to take the lead with a couple of minutes to play, I thought it would take a big play for ISU to win it. Throwing an interception deep in our own territory wasn't what I had in mind.
Sorry you have soiled your escutcheon by defending me, but we're right
I felt the same as you probably did about the game, only from the other perspective. Iowa was winning the game, despite the tie score. I was thinking ISU could get back some of the spark it had in the first half on offense, or maybe get a turnover or something. While Iowa was dominating the game, Iowa also was dodging bullets on offense. Beathard made several really big plays on third down. I assume you were thinking that if you just didn't screw up, you would win it.
With about 9 minutes to play when ISU punted, I was fairly optimistic. It was a good punt with excellent coverage. I expected King to fair-catch it; when he didn't signal, I thought there might be a fumble, and at worst Iowa would be pretty deep in its own territory. But the coverage guys overran him and he made a terrific return. Changed the situation.
Obviously, once Iowa had scored to take the lead with a couple of minutes to play, I thought it would take a big play for ISU to win it. Throwing an interception deep in our own territory wasn't what I had in mind.
Yep there it is. We must ignore what clone fans tell us to ignore. Iowa controlled the entire 2nd half in all three phases of the game. Offense, Defense and Special Teams. The stats and score prove it.
Woulda coulda and Iowa coulda beat ISU 3 or 4 more times over the past few years.
Didn't you get the memo? Woulda, coulda and shoulda arguments can only be done by clone fans and only in certain/select situations that they alone dictate. All others must be ignored.
Don't laugh they are serious.
Last edited:
I think the difference is actively trying to get called for it (to run the clock), as opposed to doing it to get away with it, or similar reason.
I don't know how what Bielema dos could be anything but cheating? Because it exposed a poorly thought out rule? Then faking injuries isn't cheating either?
Well aren't you simple. Yes, every single penalty is cheating....THAT was my claim.....
If there was a rule that said false starts make clock run, regardless, would it be cheating to do so repeatedly for a 15 minute fourth quarter? According to some, apparently not? Because something happens once at the end of the game doesn't make it any less cheating than if done 40x/game.
Sorry you have soiled your escutcheon by defending me, but we're right
I felt the same as you probably did about the game, only from the other perspective. Iowa was winning the game, despite the tie score. I was thinking ISU could get back some of the spark it had in the first half on offense, or maybe get a turnover or something. While Iowa was dominating the game, Iowa also was dodging bullets on offense. Beathard made several really big plays on third down. I assume you were thinking that if you just didn't screw up, you would win it.
With about 9 minutes to play when ISU punted, I was fairly optimistic. It was a good punt with excellent coverage. I expected King to fair-catch it; when he didn't signal, I thought there might be a fumble, and at worst Iowa would be pretty deep in its own territory. But the coverage guys overran him and he made a terrific return. Changed the situation.
Obviously, once Iowa had scored to take the lead with a couple of minutes to play, I thought it would take a big play for ISU to win it. Throwing an interception deep in our own territory wasn't what I had in mind.
Put a reign on it... it did not happen and here is why:
isu scored twice in the 2nd quarter to take a 17-10 lead into half. When the teams came back onto the field, it was a different ballgame nearly altogether.
First possession of quarter 3 (receiving opening kickoff), isu goes three plays and out netting 7 yards on those three plays. Iowa takes the ball over sixty yards on six plays and the score is knotted at 17 all.
Next isu possession (receive KO following Iowa score), the clones go 21 yards on 7 plays before punting.
Third isu possession of 2nd half - more of the same; three plays and punt.
isu regains the ball one last time (via Iowa punt) at the 2:35 mark of the 3Q and proceeds to progress all of 13 yards on 7 plays before punting yet again.
At 9:09 of the 4th, Canzeri fumbles with isu recovering on their own 7. Eight plays, thirty yards later, isu punts to Iowa.
Next possession, isu executes three plays before turning the ball back to Iowa when Richardson throws the interception.
isu received the KO with 1:05 left in the game, went four incompletions and out.
Game over. Seven second half possessions, little of anything in the way of yards gained, no points and no real threat to score points. It was not close.
