Dumb things said to you about Iowa football
- Thread starter spbc7
- Start date
Almost anything said by southerniowacy. He wrote the book on stupid comments about Iowa.
Maybe we should just change the name of this thread to "Top Ten things Colin Cowerd said last year."
Thanks there packer, good to know I am appreciated around here. I would say about half of the stuff posted on here about Iowa, and boy if you say anything critical, you are either an ISU fan that's me, or stupid. Throw out a good question, or question a myth, and you are SOL.
What is the electronic message board equivalent of biting one's tongue?
Good,it only took 4 replies to turn this thread into a pissing match, well done
This isn't a dumb comment. KF has said this himself. It's part of the 'New Kirk', getting back to just football.
KF said nothing along those lines. He said he was going to spend more time on football and less time on other things. He didn't say that he didn't have enough time to focus on football, he simply chose to prioritize other things. This person said Iowa football had to struggle because of the new facilities, which couldn't be further from the truth. If that were the case, somebody would have been fired for not being able to do their job.
For the most part, New Kirk is a myth.
Quite alright to question a myth, people usually do it by introducing some type of pertinent facts. Not your typical MO.
That Coach Ferentz doesn't care about winning and that he just wants the check!
Had an ISU fan tell me after the 2002 ISU win, the reason was because ISU just dominated the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. Assumed he was joking. Turned out he was not.
An Iowa fan once told me that Drew Tate wasn't a play maker.
Anything said within 36 hours post spring games.
An Iowa fan once told me that Drew Tate wasn't a play maker.
Anything said within 36 hours post spring games.
This deserves recognition as a top contender. Although, I'm not sure I've ever actually heard someone say this. Definitely read it on this board.
Maybe "fundraising for facilities" isn't perfect phrasing, but he did say something "along those lines." He has spoken several times about how his media role, while important, had been given too much weight, at the expense of in-depth football duties. He chose to change his patterns. It's a perfectly legitimate comment.
Humor me, please? Because I agree, New Kirk is largely a myth. At least, in the sense of radical, gunslinging, risk-taking play calls. He certainly adjusted and refined some of his methods, there's no doubt. But most of those were really a return to what he did before.
New Kirk was born from a couple fake field goals that didn't work and never happened again.
As to the original question, any time someone questions a coach or player's level of effort when we're losing.
I like this one.
It is in the same family as "They just wanted it more." Man, I hate that cliche.
Almost anything said by the ignorant Red. It is very common that they think the University of Iowa is in Ames.
That if (insert their favorite team here) played in the B1G, they'd win the championship every year.
I was told by a Nebraska fan at work that Iowa got lucky with some questionable calls last year and that's why we beat them. The only questionable call he could name was when Nate Geary got ejected for helmet to helmet contact. I laughed and said Geary was our most valuable player in that game. He blew the coverage on George Kittle for our 1st TD.
I heard similar things from Hawk fans. Was I missing something? He was a solid QB IMO.
He was very good, but that isn't what makes the comment so dumb. If I had to describe Drew Tate as a QB as quickly as possible, I might say "He was a playmaker." To say Tate was not a playmaker, would be as dumb as saying "Adam Woodbury is short."
If only this thread was started exactly one year ago. Pick a favorite:
A) Iowa sucks because we only have MAC-level talent
B) Greg Davis is the worst offensive coordinator in the history of football
C) Ferentz loves money but hates winning
D) Iowa will be lucky to win 6 games in 2015
A) Iowa sucks because we only have MAC-level talent
B) Greg Davis is the worst offensive coordinator in the history of football
C) Ferentz loves money but hates winning
D) Iowa will be lucky to win 6 games in 2015
Could also add," I am done following Iowa football until they get rid of Ferentz".
North Dakota State will give Iowa a stiff challenge this year.
After the 1985 12-10 victory in the #1 vs #2 Iowa-Michigan game, I had a Michigan fan tell me in all seriousness that Michigan completely outplayed Iowa and we were lucky to win. Recall that we had a TD catch waived off by the refs and effectively doubled UM in most offensive categories.
Pre 2015 Season- "Rudock is better than CJ" and post 2015 season "Rudock is still better than CJ"
Both posted by Kilroy, Herbyhawk or what ever screen name he was using at the time. To this day I've never met or even seen a post agreeing with this. Even by my friends who are Michigan fans.
Both posted by Kilroy, Herbyhawk or what ever screen name he was using at the time. To this day I've never met or even seen a post agreeing with this. Even by my friends who are Michigan fans.
Letter in the Register saying that Iowa needs to upgrade its BiG schedule. Not non-conference, which Iowa could upgrade, but BiG. Dummy doesn't seem to know that the BiG makes the schedules.
Yes, that's what I mean by simple instructions. Don't ask questions when I tell you I'm not going to answer them.
P.S. New Kirk is still not a myth. Deal with it.
In my experience, it's usually things said by fellow Iowa fans or by ISU fans. The rest of the country doesn't care as much (including our Big Ten rivals.) The thing that pisses me off about ISU people is how they'll dog our current divisional situation without acknowledging the fact that they played in the Big XII North for a lot of years and they never broke through once. We now have the best team from that division in our division and we're 1 for 5 (also, Wisconsin is a better program by most metrics than MU, KSU, and CU). And MU/KSU have been about as consistent as Iowa in this century.
I get this type of rhetoric a lot living over in UN land.
Total yards are apparently an automatic win in their minds. The truth of the matter is that Iowa stayed 1-2 scores ahead of them the entire game (with a couple being home runs). What else was Iowa suppose to do?
