I don't get on how Stanford gets a mulligan?

[#1hawkeyefan1983]

Stanford losing to Northwestern and while Iowa beat this same Northwestern soundly and in dominating fashion and is behind Stanford in the polls.

A lot of national pundits say Iowa's schedule is weak and Iowa has not beaten anyone, well if this is the case then the Stanford loss to Northwestern should be considered a bad loss, no?

 

[JRich52806]

Probably because of how early in the season the loss came and because of Stanfords preseason rankings.
We started with low expectations but have done better than anyone has expected.
We will catch up, all we have to do is keep winning. I can see Stanford getting another loss or 2 looking at their schedule.
We definitely have a better chance at winning out then they do.
It is nice to be ranked, but with so many teams in the rankings that are undefeated and that still have to play each other it is still too early to worry about this stuff.

Go Hawks

 

[And1Hawk]

IF we keep winning it will all take care of itself. I worry more about our opponents than our ranking and/or perception.

 

[Hawked]

IF we keep winning it will all take care of itself. I worry more about our opponents than our ranking and/or perception.

BUT what if it doesn't work itself out? There are some 1 loss teams ahead of Iowa now and a couple teams could probably lose and still stay ahead of Iowa. I don't want there to be any doubt that an undefeated Iowa makes the final 4. Each week after beating a low level big ten team Iowa is going to have a harder time justifying their ranking. There is no guarantee that we play an undefeated Ohio State in the CCG to shoot us back up the rankings. What if Iowa has to play a 1 loss MSU team that has been unimpressive or a 2 loss Michigan team? I think it's important that as many teams ahead of Iowa lose as possible.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

If the College Football Playoff is your goal for Iowa, Stanford is not a team that will stand in the way. 13-0 is the only way Iowa has a chance at the playoff. While I concede that a 12-1 Alabama team could get in ahead of Iowa, there is just absolutely no way Stanford would, given the Northwestern factor, plus the fact that Iowa's conference championship game win (no matter who it is against) will likely be much more impressive than theirs.

Bottom line is that as of now, the Pac-12 and Notre Dame are on the outside looking in, with undefeated teams from the other four Power-5 conferences (and Alabama) in positions of power. Lots of football left to be played, but I would say that Iowa controls their own destiny.

 

[Bill_D]

Stanford losing to Northwestern and while Iowa beat this same Northwestern soundly and in dominating fashion and is behind Stanford in the polls.

A lot of national pundits say Iowa's schedule is weak and Iowa has not beaten anyone, well if this is the case then the Stanford loss to Northwestern should be considered a bad loss, no?

The polls are political and the AP more so than the rest. The PAC12 States and the Big 12 have a large percent of the vote so they vote in such a manner as to have their conference leader with a high vote. When USC took the luster off of Utah then the PAC12 votes all swung to Stanford who they consider to be the front runner for the PAC12 Title.

 

[WORTHYWISH]

An undefeated B1G champion (B1G team is reigning national champion) will NOT be left out of the playoff.

 

[Eternal Return]

BUT what if it doesn't work itself out? There are some 1 loss teams ahead of Iowa now and a couple teams could probably lose and still stay ahead of Iowa. I don't want there to be any doubt that an undefeated Iowa makes the final 4. Each week after beating a low level big ten team Iowa is going to have a harder time justifying their ranking. There is no guarantee that we play an undefeated Ohio State in the CCG to shoot us back up the rankings. What if Iowa has to play a 1 loss MSU team that has been unimpressive or a 2 loss Michigan team? I think it's important that as many teams ahead of Iowa lose as possible.

What's most disturbing to me are the current bowl projections on almost every site that has them. OSU, MSU, and UM, regardless of how they finish, are projected to be in better bowls than Iowa. If Iowa finishes 12-1 with a loss against, say, OSU in the B10 championship game, a lot of projections have the Hawks playing in either the Citrus or Outback bowl. I have no idea how a 12-1 Iowa team winds up with the 4th best bowl for the B10 but obviously the B10 East is being perceived as heads and tails better than the West. If Iowa makes the B10 championship it has to win or at least play very, very competitively against whoever the opponent is otherwise it's a 12-1 Iowa team playing someone like Georgia or Ole Miss in the Outback Bowl ... which is insane, especially since Iowa has, so far, 3 wins against top 25 opponents (I have no doubt that UW and possibly NW could make it back into the top 25 by season's end). The whole situation is insane ... Iowa needs to win out and by BIG margins to make real gains in terms of bowl placement. Weird that we're having this conversation given the preseason projections for Iowa, but then again that's probably why. If there's one thing Iowa needs, it's improvement on the OL in terms of pass protection. That could make the difference between squeaking out a 12-0 record before the B10CG and blowing out the competition on the way to the B10CG.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

What's most disturbing to me are the current bowl projections on almost every site that has them. OSU, MSU, and UM, regardless of how they finish, are projected to be in better bowls than Iowa. If Iowa finishes 12-1 with a loss against, say, OSU in the B10 championship game, a lot of projections have the Hawks playing in either the Citrus or Outback bowl. I have no idea how a 12-1 Iowa team winds up with the 4th best bowl for the B10 but obviously the B10 East is being perceived as heads and tails better than the West. If Iowa makes the B10 championship it has to win or at least play very, very competitively against whoever the opponent is otherwise it's a 12-1 Iowa team playing someone like Georgia or Ole Miss in the Outback Bowl ... which is insane, especially since Iowa has, so far, 3 wins against top 25 opponents (I have no doubt that UW and possibly NW could make it back into the top 25 by season's end). The whole situation is insane ... Iowa needs to win out and by BIG margins to make real gains in terms of bowl placement. Weird that we're having this conversation given the preseason projections for Iowa, but then again that's probably why. If there's one thing Iowa needs, it's improvement on the OL in terms of pass protection. That could make the difference between squeaking out a 12-0 record before the B10CG and blowing out the competition on the way to the B10CG.

Any projection that doesn't have Iowa in the New Year's Six (most projections I see DO) is self-serving the prognosticator, who is either actually predicting Iowa to lose a minimum of 2 games, or, more likely, just thinks having Iowa in the New Year's Six doesn't fit his agenda, so it's easier to keep them out. Then, he can't lose in either scenario - 1) Iowa goes 13-0 or 12-1 - "Wow, Iowa surprised EVERYONE," or 2) Iowa drops 2 games - "I knew Iowa couldn't keep that up; look at how smart I am."

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

I don't want there to be any doubt that an undefeated Iowa makes the final 4.

Okay then.....an undefeated Iowa will make the final 4. There's your reassurance. Deal with it.

 

[OnceAhawk]

Probably because of how early in the season the loss came and because of Stanfords preseason rankings.
We started with low expectations but have done better than anyone has expected.
We will catch up, all we have to do is keep winning. I can see Stanford getting another loss or 2 looking at their schedule.
We definitely have a better chance at winning out then they do.
It is nice to be ranked, but with so many teams in the rankings that are undefeated and that still have to play each other it is still too early to worry about this stuff.

Go Hawks

I am sick of certain teams and certain conferences having excuses made for them but when it comes to Iowa, our N'western road win means nothing (because they are no longer ranked); our Wisconsin road win means nothing (because they are no longer ranked)

It just seems like there is a lot of politics involved where excuses are accepted for certain teams and certain conferences.

Can you imagine if we had 4 teams as part of the BCS era? I don't think the SEC would have been as dominant, just like we found out last year when the SEC champion got manhandled by the B1G champion

I agree with you, though; we have 5 weeks of regular season and another week of conference championship games; undefeated teams should start dropping like flies....

 

[OnceAhawk]

If the College Football Playoff is your goal for Iowa, Stanford is not a team that will stand in the way. 13-0 is the only way Iowa has a chance at the playoff. While I concede that a 12-1 Alabama team could get in ahead of Iowa, there is just absolutely no way Stanford would, given the Northwestern factor, plus the fact that Iowa's conference championship game win (no matter who it is against) will likely be much more impressive than theirs.

Bottom line is that as of now, the Pac-12 and Notre Dame are on the outside looking in, with undefeated teams from the other four Power-5 conferences (and Alabama) in positions of power. Lots of football left to be played, but I would say that Iowa controls their own destiny.

Bottom line for us fans: IF we win our next 6 games (gulp), we are in the Final 4

I just hope the team remains focused on one game at a time; IF they do,we should be 12-0 (on paper) and heading to Indy; and oh lord, it is probably means we play Ohio State, which is starting to get on a roll

But again, we are looking ahead 6 weeks; lots will happen from now until then

 

[HASTHAWK]

Does Ferentz 2.0 recognize that things are not as they once were when it comes to score differential? A W is not a W when it comes to sports journalists that don't evaluate teams beyond final score and reputation. If, and that is a big if, we can coast to victory in some of these games, will Ferentz keep his foot on the pedal for a bit longer recognizing style points count when it comes to ranking? Do we want him to?

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Stanford was expected to be very good and now their loss to NW is considered to be an anomaly.

Iowa was expected to be bad. The wins against Wisky and Pitt are really good wins, but they were clearly 50/50 games until the end.

The win against NW is the first dominant win against a respected opponent. I think the Hawks have been treated with the respect they have earned over the last few years, which isn't much.

Personally, I am worried about beating Maryland.

 

[Vroom_C14]

If the College Football Playoff is your goal for Iowa, Stanford is not a team that will stand in the way. 13-0 is the only way Iowa has a chance at the playoff. While I concede that a 12-1 Alabama team could get in ahead of Iowa, there is just absolutely no way Stanford would, given the Northwestern factor, plus the fact that Iowa's conference championship game win (no matter who it is against) will likely be much more impressive than theirs.

Bottom line is that as of now, the Pac-12 and Notre Dame are on the outside looking in, with undefeated teams from the other four Power-5 conferences (and Alabama) in positions of power. Lots of football left to be played, but I would say that Iowa controls their own destiny.

How is Alabama's loss to a (now) 2 loss Ole Miss team not seen as a "bad" loss? That should keep them out of the top 4 but alas, it is Alabama (SEC) and the pollsters have to love them some SEC...

 

[swagsurfer02]

Does Ferentz 2.0 recognize that things are not as they once were when it comes to score differential? A W is not a W when it comes to sports journalists that don't evaluate teams beyond final score and reputation. If, and that is a big if, we can coast to victory in some of these games, will Ferentz keep his foot on the pedal for a bit longer recognizing style points count when it comes to ranking? Do we want him to?

I think that drubbing OSU put on Wisconsin in the CCG is what got them in last year. I believe an undefeated Iowa team will get in, however someone called Clemson a pretender....I'm not sure how they came to that conclusion.

I think Clemson can also go undefeated, they have the horses to do it. The Stanford loss to NW was an anomaly, and I think it's reflected in the polls. Bama can beat LSU as they are almost 1 dimensional. I'm not sure anyone goes undefeated in the Big 12. My guess is that there are two unbeaten teams at the end of the year.

 

[revkev73]

It is nice to see a complaint/unfairness thread about Iowa not being higher up in the top ten rankings...

 

[mlb1399]

Once the media decides something to be true, they look for any reason to justify their "expert" opinion and will overlook evidence until it becomes too strong to overlook. Hence, a one loss Stanford team losing "early" in the season but now they are playing to their expectations.

It doesn't matter that Iowa throttled that same team and that Iowa is 7-0. Either way, if we keep on winning they won't be able to overlook the overwhelming evidence in our favor.

 

[millhawk]

Stanford was expected to be very good and now their loss to NW is considered to be an anomaly.

Iowa was expected to be bad. The wins against Wisky and Pitt are really good wins, but they were clearly 50/50 games until the end.

The win against NW is the first dominant win against a respected opponent. I think the Hawks have been treated with the respect they have earned over the last few years, which isn't much.

Personally, I am worried about beating Maryland.

But it shouldn't be considered an anomaly. Why do they get a pass? NW dominated their butts and now the talking heads say don't count that one. Ridiculous.

 

[revkev73]

"Favorite" teams get special treatment in the rankings...because of relationships with the coaching staff, love of the teams, "name" brand of the team, which network covers the teams, which coaches are more hated by the press than others...It is life...

 

[KuwaitHawk]

How can a 1-loss Alabama be in the top four when they can still not be in the sec championship game? How ironic/funny would it be for a 2-loss Mississippi to win the sec west, beat a 2 loss Florida (their second loss to FSU) in the sec championship game and neither team make the Top 4 since there will be an unbeaten Big 12 team, the unbeaten Clemson, a 1-loss ND and a 13-0 B1G team? WILL NOT HAPPEN!!!

 

[J_Heater]

IF we keep winning it will all take care of itself. I worry more about our opponents than our ranking and/or perception.

Pretty much this. 13-0 iowa is in playoffs. 12-1 iowa probably not.

 

[Teldar]

Don't worry about Stanford. If Iowa wins out, and Stanford wins out, we will leapfrog them. Look at the playoff criteria:

• Conference championships won,

• Strength of schedule,

• Head-to-head competition,

• Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory), and,

• Other relevant factors such as key injuries that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.

Notice the 4th bullet? The committee will look at the outcomes of common opponents. Now the committee could say Stanford's strength of schedule is tougher and that trumps that. However, I doubt it. Right now, Stanford's most impressive win is over a 4-3 USC team. Iowa has wins against a 6-2 Northwestern, 6-2 Wisconsin and 6-1 Pittsburgh.

Looking at each of their schedules, Stanford does have an opportunity to beat a very good Notre Dame team so that would be a huge win for them. However, Iowa will play a top 3 team in the Big Ten championship game.

Bottom line, a 13-0 Iowa team will get picked over a 12-1 Stanford team, and the reason will be Northwestern.

 

[83Hawk]

Pretty much this. 13-0 iowa is in playoffs. 12-1 iowa probably not.

This is correct. People need to stop worrying about rankings and strength of schedule.

 

[swagsurfer02]

How can a 1-loss Alabama be in the top four when they can still not be in the sec championship game? How ironic/funny would it be for a 2-loss Mississippi to win the sec west, beat a 2 loss Florida (their second loss to FSU) in the sec championship game and neither team make the Top 4 since there will be an unbeaten Big 12 team, the unbeaten Clemson, a 1-loss ND and a 13-0 B1G team? WILL NOT HAPPEN!!!

Remember the year Alabama beat LSU in the national championship game? Alabama didn't even play in the SEC championship game, nor did they win their division.

 

[MadDogC]

I don't buy the early game start crap excuse for their NW loss. Heck, didn't Iowa start morning practices because players are more alert then? Better to start a game 9am than midnight like we did in the dessert a decade or so ago...

 

[ichawk24]

Iowa had to play NW at the exact same time as Syanford and won by 30.

 

[Mohawkeye]

This is why preseason and early season rankings DO matter, at least if you care at all about the final rankings.

 

[Auger]

Stanford losing to Northwestern and while Iowa beat this same Northwestern soundly and in dominating fashion and is behind Stanford in the polls.

A lot of national pundits say Iowa's schedule is weak and Iowa has not beaten anyone, well if this is the case then the Stanford loss to Northwestern should be considered a bad loss, no?

If Iowa gets into the Rose Bowl Stanford is the team we want to play so I am fine if they are the highest ranked team in the PAC and I am fine if they keep winning.

 

[J_Heater]

Remember the year Alabama beat LSU in the national championship game? Alabama didn't even play in the SEC championship game, nor did they win their division.

Nebraska is the other team to play for a national title without winning their own division in the conference. It didn't work out as well for them but they did play probably the most talented team to ever assemble on a college football team.

 

[Ray Kinsella]

Remember the year Alabama beat LSU in the national championship game? Alabama didn't even play in the SEC championship game, nor did they win their division.

That was the BCS; the new voting committee frowns on teams that didn't even make it to the conference title game.

 

[Hawks_Rock_12]

Stanford losing to Northwestern and while Iowa beat this same Northwestern soundly and in dominating fashion and is behind Stanford in the polls.

A lot of national pundits say Iowa's schedule is weak and Iowa has not beaten anyone, well if this is the case then the Stanford loss to Northwestern should be considered a bad loss, no?

So if the polls had Stanford at 10 and the Hawks 9 would you feel better about Iowa ? You must be a middle child.

 

[swagsurfer02]

I don't buy the early game start crap excuse for their NW loss. Heck, didn't Iowa start morning practices because players are more alert then? Better to start a game 9am than midnight like we did in the dessert a decade or so ago...

Mistakes during practices don't count towards your W/L record tho either.

 

[IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life]

I see publications are predicting Stanford to make the playoff currently. Look, I don't think Iowa will run the table. However, at this point I would LOVE for Iowa to go undefeated and win the B1G championship game to blow this whole playoff/playoff committee up. Because quite frankly, I don't see how they could/would leave an undefeated B1G team out if it's Iowa. Delaney would end the current structure....

 

[Steve Waite]

I get the frustration and lack of respect that the OP is referring too.
Unfortunately, it is what it is.
The only poll that we need to be worried about is the first committee poll that will be coming out in two
weeks.
We will be ahead of Stanford in this poll.
ND goes to Temple and Pitt the next two weeks.
Alabama hosts LSU next week.
Clemson still has to play FSU.
OSU has MSU and Michigan.
TCU has Oklahoma, Oklahoma St. & Baylor
Baylor just list their starting QB to a broken bone in neck and they have
TCU, Oklahoma & OSU left.
A lot of football left to be played.
The committee will pick 4 pfrom the 5 conference champions.

 

[UncleChesterton]

OSU last year was a template for a 1 loss B1G team getting in. Granted, Iowa doesn't bring the TV market that OSU does, but I don't think you'd see much objection to Iowa getting in over, say, a one loss Baylor, TCU or Stanford. The reigning title holding conference is OSU's gift to all B1G teams. Obviously, being undefeated guarantees it, but 1 loss is not an automatic disqualifier by any means.

 

[gojojo]

Iowa controls its own destiny. Win out and we are in the playoff, lose a game and we are out. As mentioned my other posters an undefeated B1G Champ will never be left out of the playoff, EVER. It's really that simple. Next topic.

 

[BioHawk]

In 2002, Iowa lost to Iowa State in the 2nd week, however, by today's rules would have still qualified for the playoffs (and the Big Ten would have benefited by not having a CCG that year and gotten two teams in).

Early losses can be overcome with dominant play later in the season. It happens almost every year. Hell, you've still got people thinking Alabama has a legitimate shot at it.

 

[farhawks]

I liken the way I look at this season the way the team looks at this season. One game at a time. Don't worry about things we can't control. For me I am pumped for this coming saturday and dont even look or worry about the next week. I am going to enjoy this season one game at a time and whatever happens happens. So far this season has been a total joy ride that not too many previous seasons can match. No sense getting worked up about something that may or may not happen.

 

[bagdropper]

I have a feeling a 12-0 Iowa will be right where they deserve to be near the top of just about any poll you can think of.

At 7-0...there's no reason to stress about it yet. 7-0, ain't played anybody (pundits' words, not mine), and they're still 10-11 in the polls. There's undefeated teams with an "on the surface-similar" schedule ranked lower.

12-0 though, and still ranked 10-11? Then you have my attention.

One game at a time, folks. It'll sort itself out.