Bringing in guys from lower levels is apparently Iowa's best option since they seem unable to compete with peer programs.
For $1.5M, Penn St QB Beau Pribula has Committed to Missouri after Visiting IOWA Wed, Dec 18. Will Iowa add a 6th QB to the Roster?
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
Looks like we tried, and whiffed, on another one. To Oregon State 😢
brobible.com
Iowa Whiffed On Another Transfer Quarterback After He Already Committed To Play Somewhere Else
Even though Maalik Murphy committed to play the 2024 college football season at Oregon State earlier this month, Iowa remained in hot pursuit of the
brobible.com
Expectations should be that Iowa is a winning program.
And they've been just that more consistently than nearly everybody in the country since KF has been here.
If that's not good enough for you, it's a "you" problem, rather than a "Hawkeye football" problem.
Heck, how many fans claimed before the season that they would be satisfied with incremental improvement from the offense this season? Guess what folks, Iowa DOUBLED their scoring this season.
But was it enough for you guys? No, because they didn't do it in the fashion you wanted them to.
And it was never going to be enough because most of you are the same people who were bitching before the offense was ever broken.
Also should be noted that Iowa won more with the worst offense in the country.
The priority in sports is more clearly defined than just about any area of life I can think of. And some of you still can't figure it out
How's our record against top 25 teams in the last few years? Sure, we beat bottom feeders like Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, and Iowa State. But what about legitimately great programs?
To say that no one was satisfied that we averaged a higher score this year is disingenuous, but that's par for the course for you. I've seldom seen an Iowa fan say that Tim Lester wasn't a big improvement. His play calling is leagues better, even if he has to use Brian Ferentz leftovers instead of his own guys.
The "way we wanted them to" is a cute way to phrase wanting them to play better football. This year proved that Kirk's way of playing these last few years wasn't sustainable. We no longer have an All American kicker or lockdown Corner to save us.
We won more last year in spite of our offense being so bad. The teams we played this year were better than last year. And because we no longer have players like Cooper and Tory, the cracks are finally starting to show in Kirk's strategy. Having the mentality of "as long as we win nothing else matters", shows how short sighted and foolish it is when we play teams like Ohio State, Tennessee, and Penn State. Each loss being a bigger embarrassment than the last.
That's the kind of response I'd expect from you at this point. But I'm not surprised you're tired of getting spanked.
You need a new team to bitch about. Iowa is clearly not good enough for you. Avoid embarrassment.
Read better, bro.
Keep crying at the fact you can't address my points.
It is! I get to show everyone your unwillingness to respond to my points when I directly quote the actual words you say. Pretty embarrassing!
You couldn't have been more confused in your usage of the "direct quote", which was actually a paraphrase.
Doubled scoring output this season was not good enough for some fans, essentially because those points primarily came through running the ball, rather than passing it.
Trying to play it off as, "not playing good enough football", which is also a paraphrase rather than a direct quote, is completely inapplicable because 336 points = 336 points, no matter how you slice it. There is no path to scoring 336 points that is "better football", which was the point all along.
If you really want to get into it, if anything, scoring 28 points in a game primarily through the run is better than through the pass because it better compliments the defense, which makes it easier for 28 points to be a winning amount, which is what really matters.
But I was only using scoring output, in isolation from game result, to simplify a specific point.
Again, the rest of your post has nothing to do with my original post you responded to. So tell me I "don't have any balls" all you want, but it's 12:20 on Christmas morning and I'm going to bed.
Merry Christmas!
Go Hawks!
Ah, so now you go from "pretty much none of what you said is related to my post you attached" to finally addressing some of my points that were directly responding to what you said in your original post? Good job, buddy!
"Doubled scoring output this season was not good enough for some fans, essentially because those points primarily came through running the ball, rather than passing it."
This is an unfounded and laughable point. No one is angry that points came from the run, we're upset because a passing attack is needed when the run doesn't work, and we don't have one. See Ohio State, UCLA, and Nebraska as prime examples. If your only proof are some random users on a forum, then it might be time to log off.
"But was it enough for you guys? No, because they didn't do it in the fashion you wanted them to."
The implication in this sentence is that fans believed we weren't playing good enough football. Again and again, we can go round and round, the difference being is that I have legitimate statistical evidence that the offensive output and performance is what has caused us to lose to top programs. Your argument is nothing but a blanket statement supported by nothing. Very few are advocating for an air raid or an Oregon offense. Most want a competent passing attack that we can rely on when the run is being stopped. The Nebraska game was won thanks to a passing play, not a running play, as an example. Michigan (2023) and Penn State both prove that a solid run game can be successful and even win you a national championship. But guess what they have that we don't? A passing threat.
Your logic becomes more and more absurd the more we dig deeper into this. Most of it based not on statistics from the actual games, but off the cuff posts from randoms online. Well, at least I can rest easy knowing that the offensive output, and the direct results of that output, are all there for everyone to see. Lester will focus more on passing because that's what our offense desperately needs, and his frustration at the lack of production on that front during the last bye week was clear. Hope you can cope with that new reality when it arrives!
Free travel and tour, may have had an opportunity for guaranteed money, who knows.
He could have gotten that from dozens of schools.
Point is, the perception of Iowa's offense/past offense did not keep him from being interested enough in Iowa to have them on his short list.
This has already been covered in this thread
Because he’s our only chance in the near future, and the offense nearly doubled its PPG in one year under his system?
It seems there is reason to have some belief in him?
Last edited:
Looks like this is $1.5M for one year. Will they ever step in and allow schools to at least like these guys in for multi-year deals?
You've already said almost all of this. And again, very little of it do I understand why you are using as a response to one of my posts you've attached.
You keep referring to an argument I never made and you do not seem to have a clue what I was talking about in my original post you attached. This seems to be how every conversation between us goes. How many times have you been divorced, probably 3?
If you're going to badger me to respond to your points, at least keep a linear conversation once I have responded. I'm not obligated to respond to your posts even if they do relate to my post you've attached and responded to.
But I don't think you're intentionally trolling. Obviously there is disconnect at some point between us. So I will attempt once more clarify what I said in my original post. I've attached that post here for convenience.
That post was in response to Ron's post #480, in which he mentions "expectations".
-I first responded by making the point that the only expectation of a program that should matter (obviously outside of educational and citizenship standards) is that it is a winning program.
Sure, there are different definitions of a winning program. And most of them apply to Iowa. If you want to argue that Iowa is not a winning program, have fun with yourself. And do so knowing that any greater expectation of winning that you have of Iowa is only at all realistic because of the level of success that KF has established at Iowa.
-Next in the post I'm breaking down, I make the point that overall dissatisfaction with Iowa football is an "individual's problem", rather than an "Iowa football problem". If you expect Iowa football to provide in any way other than trying to win games, you are setting yourself up for disappointment. And again, by all reasonable accounts Iowa is clearly a winning football program.
-Next in referred post, I brought up fans who initially claimed they would be satisfied with incremental improvement from the offense this season, but are still dissatisfied with the offense after doubling their scoring output.
These fans are a reality, no matter what you try to make it into. 7 points = 7 points. How they got scored should not be big deal. But the fact that is has been makes my point that fans are going to complain, period.
I solidified that point by pointing out that many of these fans are the same people who were complaining about the offense before it was ever broken.
And I will further solidify that point now, by referring to all the fans who complain after wins.
Again, you've made it into something different. But my point that fans will always complain remains.
-Next in the post, I showed how all the fuss about the offense hasn't been nearly as big of a deal as people have made it, and thus not warranted at that level, by making the point that even with doubled scoring Iowa won two less games. There are other ways to win football games, which is the only thing that matters.
You did recognizably retort, that Iowa played a harder schedule this season.
1. I don't see this season's schedule to be all that more difficult. 3 rivalry games at home this season vs 3 on the road last season. At OSU this season vs at PSU last season is very similar. NW and MSU both seasons. Washington, UCLA, Maryland were a combined 15-21 with 1 of those games at home vs last season having played Purdue, Rutgers, Illinois with a combined record of 16-21 , and all of those games at home. 3 of the first 4 conference games on the road this season, and a Friday night game across country at UCLA, following a Saturday night rivalry game was certainly tough scheduling this season. But a case could definitely be made that last season's schedule was harder.
2. I don't buy as much into all this schedule rating. To me, all the schedules are hard.
3. Even if the schedule was substantially harder, how does that account for Iowa having two less wins with double the offense? A schedule is not going to make that drastic of a difference in a team's scoring output. And assuming better teams are being played not only includes the chance that Iowa's points won't be enough to win, but also includes the chance that Iowa won't score as many points as they would vs lesser teams. So I don't really see the correlation you've made.
4. Zero points vs Michigan and Tennessee were also factored into the scoring average from last season that was doubled. So including those teams clearly makes last season's schedule harder.
5. If you're claiming this year's schedule was that much more difficult than last year's, I hope to never hear you call this season's schedule "easy", as many people do.
-Finally in the post being analyzed, I made the point that winning is the number one priority in sports. Any problems with that statement?
I've just attempted to clarify my post you originally responded to. It's all pretty straightforward and I really don't see how any of it could be argued.
Again, I don't see how most of your response relates to my post. Given that, it's hard to even understand what your point is.
I will say that I just don't see most of what you've mentioned in the same way you do. But you have brought up several things that I am not going to spend any more of my time on Christmas to express my feelings about.
Merry Christmas!
Go Hawks!
Did he elaborate on this? What was better about the fit for him?
Devin Brown of OSU is in the Portal and he's a decent QB. I've watched him play a few times and he's just sandwiched between Will Howard and next year's projected starter - Julian Sayin whom the Buckeyes really like. Is Iowa looking at Brown. I think he'd come in and start for Iowa on day 1.
Unsustainable
1.5 million for the back up at PSU?
Unsustainable, the end of college football as we might have known it
1.5 million for the back up at PSU?
Unsustainable, the end of college football as we might have known it
I'm pretty much of the notion that when these unproven million dollar mercenaries don't produce championships we'll see the donor dollars start drying up. Many of these players are going to be busts.
Some very weird projection at the start of your post. Everything going ok at home? Personally, I could careless about your well being. But some very weird projection indeed.
Honestly, this post perfectly encapsulates your poor, base level arguments. You have this constant, poisonous mentality of "as long as we win, it doesn't matter how it's done". That has always been your point, which can be proven by reading you continue to insinuate that I, and other users, don't think Iowa is a "winning" program. The word "winning" is relative. You also seem to think your ace in the hole for arguments with offensive production is strictly points. When an offense, and by extension, the game itself, is more than about points averaged per game. Of course, it matters how a game is won. Using the same strategy against B1G West teams does not translate well against teams like Ohio State, Penn State, and Tennessee. So by judging an offense only by points scored, and then going after those who criticize the offense using that single statistic is painfully foolish. For example: "Sure, we scored 28, but the other team scored 48." Now the average 28 points per game doesn't matter much, now does it?
The whole schedule argument you make just kind of proves the weird points you cling on to, and how you always try to boil down something to a single point rather than acknowledge there's nuance to it. Most consider this year's schedule more difficult due to the West being dissolved. In fact, this is the popular national perception because of the B1G West's repuatation. But at the same time, many will still say it is "easy" because, again, this is a relative term. This was a winnable schedule for us. Certainly easier than what's to come in the next two years. But this goes back to the cracks showing in Kirk's philosophy. We can't survive on ground and pound forever when teams key on the run. They did so, and we were left floundering. Only once this year did the run not work and we still won, and that was against little debbie.
-Finally in the post being analyzed, I made the point that winning is the number one priority in sports. Any problems with that statement?
Breaking news: Spoon found in kitchen. It's a strange and obvious point you try and make. But this simply circles back to having the toxic mentality of "as long as we win, the way it's done doesn't matter." But ultimately, it hurts your argument, because if winning is the number one priority in sports, then changing our offense's scheme to a more pass friendly offense is a requirement for that priority.
Now I'm sure you'll retort with more accusations of not addressing your points, despite that not being true. Along with the dismissal of my other counterarguments, but I've come to realize that talking with you is like talking to the guy who's positive he's the smartest guy in the room and everyone else just "doesn't get it". There really much else to glean from what you say, or even trying to reason with it, because most of it just rings hollow. I suppose can only be thankful you aren't a part of Iowa's coaching staff, and that Tim Lester will continue to course correct from the decrepit scheme we've had the last few years. And luckily, he's already started to show improvement. You can keep thinking what you want, but the rest of the fans and I will be supporting Lester's changes.
You've got a lot more patience than I do 2D. I guess it was your turn to babysit? Can't believe he isn't universally blocked at this point. I've read nothing he's said, as usual, due to it being fruitless and unworthy of my time. Alas, you hit the money spot above with the bolded part. Really no sense in interacting with him as a result. This is literally how every exchange goes with nothing to show for it.
I can't think of anyone more stubborn than Eyes. It's got to be a ruse, no? I'm convinced when he looks in the mirror, he sees either Da Vinci, Hawking, or Einstein looking back at him. He's got to be approaching Kanye West territory for narcissism. It's mental health. It's got to be. I wonder what he does for a living honestly. It can't be easy being him truly.
All I know is that if I see a laughing emoji from him on one of my posts, I've probably said something right.
Glad I'm not the only one who feels that way. I think I'll just put him on ignore. He never says anything of value and when you try to counter anything he says, he just gaslights you. Tired of wasting my time on his nonsense.
Looks like we tried, and whiffed, on another one. To Oregon State 😢
Iowa Whiffed On Another Transfer Quarterback After He Already Committed To Play Somewhere Else
Even though Maalik Murphy committed to play the 2024 college football season at Oregon State earlier this month, Iowa remained in hot pursuit of the
Nope, you aren't alone. You're a good poster here. He's just gaslighting. I've always had trepidation when it came to ignoring people but Eyes was the one who finally made me do it. The board was honestly becoming difficult to peruse due to him. He's that bad imo.
You can’t ignore eyes now. He still has to explain the game of football to all of us.
Unfortunately this makes some sense.
It can happen anywhere. But probably more likely at Iowa, and making more of an impact, as there is less to.
Maybe more all the reason to be picky and developmental
A Christmas miracle!
Now I will no longer fall into the trap of engaging them.
Such anger from both. Sad they weren't able to put it down on and day like Christmas.
2Dense all over the map. So much mischaracterization from him. Confusion, inaccuracy, scatteredness, bullying, and denseness.
And AEG said it all, by saying he didn't read my post, but proceeded to butt in and forcefully express his position on the matter. I've often referred to this section of fans as the 7th grade girls' club going to the bathroom together.
Well, maybe blocking me was their way to find more peace in their life and was their Christmas miracle. I hope there is also a miracle out there that somehow blocks as much of their thoughts about Hawkeye football from ever being heard.
Because as many jerks are out there, me being one of them, I believe the Iowa Hawkeyes to be a miracle
Should also mention that a sharp and creative "money guy"/team makes sense these days.
It seems Barnes is in that role right now. It's my opinion that aggressive pursuit to fortify the money team can only be a good idea.
But I don't know the specifics of it. KF may have already been engaged in those efforts
I do not understand what these people expect? I don't recall Iowa ever seriously challenging for a MNC back in the day like `1985 with Chuck Long and mostly having decent years, aka a winning season with some better than others.
You have opinions not points. Sounds like you need a less embarrassing team to follow.
They just like to bitch. Drama queens seeking attention.
