Little Bro being little bro.....

[Lone Clone]

I was there and Iowa was by far the better team, back to back Banks possessions literally putting the ball down on the ground for an ISU recovery on the 20 yard line of Iowa was the difference. Period.

We will disagree on which was the better team that day. I've had this conversation before, so I understand where you're coming from, and I'm not trying to change your mind. No question that Banks' fumbles were key plays.

However, ISU should NEVER have been down as much as it was at halftime. Shot themselves in the foot time after time; ended up with three times the penalty yardage of Iowa.

Hawkeye fans forget that at the start of the second half, ISU took the kickoff and rammed it down Iowa's throat, driving 75 yards for a TD to cut the margin to 24-14. And that ISU outgained Iowa about 250-100 in the second half. And that the score was 36-24 with a little over a minute to go when Iowa tacked on its last score.

But if my team had blown a 17-point lead at home against a key rival, I would doubtless feel the same way you guys do. No harm done.

The point is, at the time it wasn't considered that big an upset. I think Iowa was a 2 or 3 point favorite in most lines, and I know ISU was favored in at least one. Hawks hadn't done much in previous games, while ISU had come within a whisker of #3 Florida State at Arrowhead, then clobbered Kansas and some double-directional non-conference foe. Cyclones were just outside the rankings, moving in at #21 after the Iowa game. Moreover, ISU came into the game with a 4-game winning streak over Iowa.

A considerably bigger win came two weeks later, 36-14 over #20 Nebraska, which ISU had only beaten once in the preceding 25 years.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

We will disagree on which was the better team that day. I've had this conversation before, so I understand where you're coming from, and I'm not trying to change your mind. No question that Banks' fumbles were key plays.

However, ISU should NEVER have been down as much as it was at halftime. Shot themselves in the foot time after time; ended up with three times the penalty yardage of Iowa.

Hawkeye fans forget that at the start of the second half, ISU took the kickoff and rammed it down Iowa's throat, driving 75 yards for a TD to cut the margin to 24-14. And that ISU outgained Iowa about 250-100 in the second half. And that the score was 36-24 with a little over a minute to go when Iowa tacked on its last score.

But if my team had blown a 17-point lead at home against a key rival, I would doubtless feel the same way you guys do. No harm done.

The point is, at the time it wasn't considered that big an upset. I think Iowa was a 2 or 3 point favorite in most lines, and I know ISU was favored in at least one. Hawks hadn't done much in previous games, while ISU had come within a whisker of #3 Florida State at Arrowhead, then clobbered Kansas and some double-directional non-conference foe. Cyclones were just outside the rankings, moving in at #21 after the Iowa game. Moreover, ISU came into the game with a 4-game winning streak over Iowa.

A considerably bigger win came two weeks later, 36-14 over #20 Nebraska, which ISU had only beaten once in the preceding 25 years.

I agree at the time the game was played it was not an upset in the least. Odd how both teams went in opposite directions after that game. We will never know, but it makes for interesting conjecture on how Iowa's season would have panned out had they held on to win that game. From a Hawkeye perspective, blowing that game against Iowa State might have generated the hunger and passion that the entire Iowa team rallied around to go undefeated the rest of the season (until the Orange Bowl of course). Had they beaten Iowa State, maybe they would have had just a good but not great season. Like I said, we will never know.

 

[HerkyFan]

We will disagree on which was the better team that day. I've had this conversation before, so I understand where you're coming from, and I'm not trying to change your mind. No question that Banks' fumbles were key plays.

However, ISU should NEVER have been down as much as it was at halftime. Shot themselves in the foot time after time; ended up with three times the penalty yardage of Iowa.

Hawkeye fans forget that at the start of the second half, ISU took the kickoff and rammed it down Iowa's throat, driving 75 yards for a TD to cut the margin to 24-14. And that ISU outgained Iowa about 250-100 in the second half. And that the score was 36-24 with a little over a minute to go when Iowa tacked on its last score.

But if my team had blown a 17-point lead at home against a key rival, I would doubtless feel the same way you guys do. No harm done.

The point is, at the time it wasn't considered that big an upset. I think Iowa was a 2 or 3 point favorite in most lines, and I know ISU was favored in at least one. Hawks hadn't done much in previous games, while ISU had come within a whisker of #3 Florida State at Arrowhead, then clobbered Kansas and some double-directional non-conference foe. Cyclones were just outside the rankings, moving in at #21 after the Iowa game. Moreover, ISU came into the game with a 4-game winning streak over Iowa.

A considerably bigger win came two weeks later, 36-14 over #20 Nebraska, which ISU had only beaten once in the preceding 25 years.

Yet the 2002 clowns ended up losing the Boise Bowl and was what 7-6? Always better than 11-2 because isu grads say so.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

Yet the 2002 clowns ended up losing the Boise Bowl and was what 7-6? Always better than 11-2 because isu grads say so.

It was the Smurf Bowl. Get it right!

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

I will take the blame for the 2002 game, was a senior at Iowa that year and was only game I missed all year b/c my boss was a dick! That being said, both Iowa and ISU had very talented teams that year. ISU had the ability for the first time to actually have a chance to recruit in state kids because of Iowa being down 98-2000. Unfortunately for ISU 2002 happened.

 

[hawkssox1]

What all isu grads ignore is that there are exactly ZERO isu coaches the last 30 years plus with a winning recruiting against big bro Iowa.

Hate to tell you pardner but a winning record is a winning record has 0 to do with recruiting who cares about that if you win?

 

[HerkyFan]

Is Dan McCarney recruiting for isu? While he had a winning record against KF he didn't have a winning record against Iowa. Hayden beat him like a red headed step child.

 

[Lone Clone]

technical glitch. ignore.

 

[Lone Clone]

I agree at the time the game was played it was not an upset in the least. Odd how both teams went in opposite directions after that game. We will never know, but it makes for interesting conjecture on how Iowa's season would have panned out had they held on to win that game. From a Hawkeye perspective, blowing that game against Iowa State might have generated the hunger and passion that the entire Iowa team rallied around to go undefeated the rest of the season (until the Orange Bowl of course). Had they beaten Iowa State, maybe they would have had just a good but not great season. Like I said, we will never know.

That's an interesting speculation about what effect a win would have had on Iowa's season. You could be right. On the other hand, Iowa's schedule was not very challenging; the Hawks faced only two ranked teams, #12 Penn State (a win in overtime) and #8 Michigan (a huge win in Ann Arbor).

But it's a little misleading to say "both teams went in opposite directions after that game." It's not like it happened immediately. ISU won its next three games, including Nebraska (which was #20 but went on to have a mediocre season) and Texas Tech (which was unranked but finished the year with 9 wins). It wasn't until six weeks after the ISU-Iowa game that Iowa first moved ahead of ISU in the rankings.

What killed ISU was a lack of depth and a truly brutal schedule. In the five weeks after the Texas Tech game, ISU played the #2, #7, #12 and #17 teams in the nation, all on the road. I realize some on this board (not you) don't think that makes any difference, but it does.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

That's an interesting speculation about what effect a win would have had on Iowa's season. You could be right. On the other hand, Iowa's schedule was not very challenging; the Hawks faced only two ranked teams, #12 Penn State (a win in overtime) and #8 Michigan (a huge win in Ann Arbor).

But it's a little misleading to say "both teams went in opposite directions after that game." It's not like it happened immediately. ISU won its next three games, including Nebraska (which was #20 but went on to have a mediocre season) and Texas Tech (which was unranked but finished the year with 9 wins). It wasn't until six weeks after the ISU-Iowa game that Iowa first moved ahead of ISU in the rankings.

What killed ISU was a lack of depth and a truly brutal schedule. In the five weeks after the Texas Tech game, ISU played the #2, #7, #12 and #17 teams in the nation, all on the road. I realize some on this board (not you) don't think that makes any difference, but it does.

Having played sports competitively and watched trends over the years, teams usually respond one or two ways to an ignominious loss: they become hungry and motivated or divisions get created (I would say Iowa's bball team this last season is a great example). Absolutely, it is speculation on my part, but again, you never know how the season would have panned out had Iowa held on to win that game against Iowa State.

The Big Ten was definitely down in 2002 and Iowa avoided Ohio State that year, as well. Winning at Penn State and Michigan were huge wins (The Michigan win was exceptionally big for me because I still am not over the 97 game at Ann Arbor where Iowa was up 21-7 at halftime. Of course, Michigan went undefeated that year and won a share of the NC). But there is no question, as good as Iowa ended up being in 2002, they would have struggled immensely with Iowa State's schedule. However, which was a trend during that time frame, KF's teams tended to get substantially better as the season progressed. In short, I think Iowa would have been a lot more competitive in those brutal Big XII games than Iowa State was.

But I agree Iowa State was beaten down after that brutal stretch of games which obviously factored in heavily with them limping through the rest of the season. And yes, poorly worded on my part, as far as the comment I wrote about the different directions the teams took after the Iowa/ISU game. ISU's decline came a few weeks later when they ran into the proverbial buzz saw of ranked conference opponents.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

That's an interesting speculation about what effect a win would have had on Iowa's season. You could be right. On the other hand, Iowa's schedule was not very challenging; the Hawks faced only two ranked teams, #12 Penn State (a win in overtime) and #8 Michigan (a huge win in Ann Arbor).

But it's a little misleading to say "both teams went in opposite directions after that game." It's not like it happened immediately. ISU won its next three games, including Nebraska (which was #20 but went on to have a mediocre season) and Texas Tech (which was unranked but finished the year with 9 wins). It wasn't until six weeks after the ISU-Iowa game that Iowa first moved ahead of ISU in the rankings.

What killed ISU was a lack of depth and a truly brutal schedule. In the five weeks after the Texas Tech game, ISU played the #2, #7, #12 and #17 teams in the nation, all on the road. I realize some on this board (not you) don't think that makes any difference, but it does.

Dear god, always the schedule. Amazing how blind you are to fitting your story to the narrative of your liking. First you talk about iowas ho hum two ranked opponents they beat like no big deal. Both on the road and Michigan finished ranked 9 with 10 win season and PSU finished 15th....and then wow you beat the 20th ranked Nebby team (at the time. and who got beat at home by that same PSU team ) who end up 7-7 (insert jack off emoji) . not to mention national champion came from the big ten that year.
The fact is it is not misleading at all, the teams went in different directions...Iowa went on to win 9 straight and ISU does what ISU does, they lose. It's not like it the games they lost were even close, if it were HS there would be a running clock. Furthermore explain the loss to 6-6 UCONN team, yes their football team. Seriously you need to just stop with the schedule excuse because that's all it is, an excuse. An excuse as why you are so damn pathetic, it just gets super old

 

[HerkyFan]

isu grads will never let their SOS myth die. How did all those so called awesome teams that isu lost to do in the post season?

Who wants to bet we get nothing but crickets?

 

[Lone Clone]

Dear god, always the schedule. Amazing how blind you are to fitting your story to the narrative of your liking. First you talk about iowas ho hum two ranked opponents they beat like no big deal. Both on the road and Michigan finished ranked 9 with 10 win season and PSU finished 15th....and then wow you beat the 20th ranked Nebby team (at the time. and who got beat at home by that same PSU team ) who end up 7-7 (insert jack off emoji) . not to mention national champion came from the big ten that year.
The fact is it is not misleading at all, the teams went in different directions...Iowa went on to win 9 straight and ISU does what ISU does, they lose. It's not like it the games they lost were even close, if it were HS there would be a running clock. Furthermore explain the loss to 6-6 UCONN team, yes their football team. Seriously you need to just stop with the schedule excuse because that's all it is, an excuse. An excuse as why you are so damn pathetic, it just gets super old

And here we have an example of the moronity of which I was writing.

 

[HerkyFan]

And here we have an example of the moronity of which I was writing.

When isu grads refuse to respond to his facts what we have is just another example of clown fans ignoring what they can't handle or what disproves their long standing myth with SOS.

 

[Lone Clone]

Having played sports competitively and watched trends over the years, teams usually respond one or two ways to an ignominious loss: they become hungry and motivated or divisions get created (I would say Iowa's bball team this last season is a great example). Absolutely, it is speculation on my part, but again, you never know how the season would have panned out had Iowa held on to win that game against Iowa State.

The Big Ten was definitely down in 2002 and Iowa avoided Ohio State that year, as well. Winning at Penn State and Michigan were huge wins (The Michigan win was exceptionally big for me because I still am not over the 97 game at Ann Arbor where Iowa was up 21-7 at halftime. Of course, Michigan went undefeated that year and won a share of the NC). But there is no question, as good as Iowa ended up being in 2002, they would have struggled immensely with Iowa State's schedule. However, which was a trend during that time frame, KF's teams tended to get substantially better as the season progressed. In short, I think Iowa would have been a lot more competitive in those brutal Big XII games than Iowa State was.

But I agree Iowa State was beaten down after that brutal stretch of games which obviously factored in heavily with them limping through the rest of the season. And yes, poorly worded on my part, as far as the comment I wrote about the different directions the teams took after the Iowa/ISU game. ISU's decline came a few weeks later when they ran into the proverbial buzz saw of ranked conference opponents.

Yeah, the "what if" thing is always fun but never definitive. You are obviously correct about KF's teams getting stronger as the season progresses, at least until the bowl game. I think you are right about Iowa being more competitive -- again, it goes to depth. Although a couple of those losses -- Texas and Colorado -- were actually very competitive -- the OU and KSU games were blowouts. The wheels had come off by the time they played UConn.

The appropriate ending came at Boise. I was there. First, on the eve of the game, an ISU starter was ruled ineligible because of what turned out to be a mistake by one of his professors (lost a term paper). Second, Wallace was injured on ISU's first possession; he came back after missing a few possessions, but was limping and posed no running threat, and his backup was just not very good.

 

[HerkyFan]

Yeah, the "what if" thing is always fun but never definitive. You are obviously correct about KF's teams getting stronger as the season progresses, at least until the bowl game. I think you are right about Iowa being more competitive -- again, it goes to depth. Although a couple of those losses -- Texas and Colorado -- were actually very competitive -- the OU and KSU games were blowouts. The wheels had come off by the time they played UConn.

The appropriate ending came at Boise. I was there. First, on the eve of the game, an ISU starter was ruled ineligible because of what turned out to be a mistake by one of his professors (lost a term paper). Second, Wallace was injured on ISU's first possession; he came back after missing a few possessions, but was limping and posed no running threat, and his backup was just not very good.

isu doesn't suck they just have had a tough schedule and fluke incidents that occured each year since 1912.

 

[hawkssox1]

Is Dan McCarney recruiting for isu? While he had a winning record against KF he didn't have a winning record against Iowa. Hayden beat him like a red headed step child.

His record vs Iowa in total was 6-6.

 

[HerkyFan]

His record vs Iowa in total was 6-6.

Is that a winning record?

 

[Tclone99]

Having played sports competitively and watched trends over the years, teams usually respond one or two ways to an ignominious loss: they become hungry and motivated or divisions get created (I would say Iowa's bball team this last season is a great example). Absolutely, it is speculation on my part, but again, you never know how the season would have panned out had Iowa held on to win that game against Iowa State.

The Big Ten was definitely down in 2002 and Iowa avoided Ohio State that year, as well. Winning at Penn State and Michigan were huge wins (The Michigan win was exceptionally big for me because I still am not over the 97 game at Ann Arbor where Iowa was up 21-7 at halftime. Of course, Michigan went undefeated that year and won a share of the NC). But there is no question, as good as Iowa ended up being in 2002, they would have struggled immensely with Iowa State's schedule. However, which was a trend during that time frame, KF's teams tended to get substantially better as the season progressed. In short, I think Iowa would have been a lot more competitive in those brutal Big XII games than Iowa State was.

But I agree Iowa State was beaten down after that brutal stretch of games which obviously factored in heavily with them limping through the rest of the season. And yes, poorly worded on my part, as far as the comment I wrote about the different directions the teams took after the Iowa/ISU game. ISU's decline came a few weeks later when they ran into the proverbial buzz saw of ranked conference opponents.

I have to say EZ you are probably the most level-headed Hawkeye poster on this board. I rarely disagree with you either way. You have real credibility which is rare on these forums. Kudos my friend.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

You are obviously correct about KF's teams getting stronger as the season progresses, at least until the bowl game.

Unless we are talking about a different time frame, I would disagree with that statement entirely. The 2002 Iowa team undoubtedly got blown out against USC, but if memory serves me correct, USC started the season 0-2 then went on a tear the rest of the year. In fact, one could argue that USC could have easily beaten Miami or Ohio State in the NC the way they were playing at the end of the year. Regardless, beyond that first Orange Bowl, Iowa has done pretty well in nearly all bowl games under Ferentz through the 2000s.

(Years based upon the season)
2001: Win over Texas Tech in Alamo Bowl
2003: Blow out win vs. Florida in Outback Bowl
2004: Led majority of the game vs. LSU in Capitol One Bowl before winning with miraculous Tate to Holloway last second TD.
2008: Win over South Carolina in Outback Bowl
2009: Win over Georgia Tech in Orange Bowl
2010: Win over Missouri in Insight Bowl

Iowa's bowl losses in that decade included USC, Florida, and Texas (Florida and Texas were close losses). In short, Iowa was 6-3 in bowl games that decade under Ferentz (4 of those wins being January bowls).

If you were talking about the last 5 years, I wouldn't have argued with you. But let's be real, the reputation of Ferentz's teams getting stronger once the calendar flipped to October and November was in the 2000s. So far, that has not been the case at all this current decade.

 

[Lone Clone]

Unless we are talking about a different time frame, I would disagree with that statement entirely. The 2002 Iowa team undoubtedly got blown out against USC, but if memory serves me correct, USC started the season 0-2 then went on a tear the rest of the year. In fact, one could argue that USC could have easily beaten Miami or Ohio State in the NC the way they were playing at the end of the year. Regardless, beyond that first Orange Bowl, Iowa has done pretty well in nearly all bowl games under Ferentz through the 2000s.

(Years based upon the season)
2001: Win over Texas Tech in Alamo Bowl
2003: Blow out win vs. Florida in Outback Bowl
2004: Led majority of the game vs. LSU in Capitol One Bowl before winning with miraculous Tate to Holloway last second TD.
2008: Win over South Carolina in Outback Bowl
2009: Win over Georgia Tech in Orange Bowl
2010: Win over Missouri in Insight Bowl

Iowa's bowl losses in that decade included USC, Florida, and Texas (Florida and Texas were close losses). In short, Iowa was 6-3 in bowl games that decade under Ferentz (4 of those wins being January bowls).

If you were talking about the last 5 years, I wouldn't have argued with you. But let's be real, the reputation of Ferentz's teams getting stronger once the calendar flipped to October and November was in the 2000s. So far, that has not been the case at all this current decade.

Good point, and I don't disagree.

In my defense, I was thinking about the seasons I mentioned, '81 and '02, as well as last season. Those three are years when a lot of non-Hawkeye fans thought the football gods didn't just smile on Iowa during the season, but slobbered all over them

There's no question KF's teams are easier to beat early in the season than late; that, IMHO, has more to do with ISU's success against him than the mythical "it's their Super Bowl" incantation.

I suspect this season ISU will improve more during the course of the season than it has in recent years, in large part because it's an entirely new staff and system, and in large part because the offensive line is so green.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

There's no question KF's teams are easier to beat early in the season than late; that, IMHO, has more to do with ISU's success against him than the mythical "it's their Super Bowl" incantation.

Yes, I couldn't agree more.

And the fact that unless there is a team clearly outmatched nearly all rivalry games are wildly unpredictable.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

Good point, and I don't disagree.

In my defense, I was thinking about the seasons I mentioned, '81 and '02, as well as last season. Those three are years when a lot of non-Hawkeye fans thought the football gods didn't just smile on Iowa during the season, but slobbered all over them

There's no question KF's teams are easier to beat early in the season than late; that, IMHO, has more to do with ISU's success against him than the mythical "it's their Super Bowl" incantation.

I suspect this season ISU will improve more during the course of the season than it has in recent years, in large part because it's an entirely new staff and system, and in large part because the offensive line is so green.

I can get on board with this, although I still think ISU plays up for Iowa game and I don't mean that disrespectfully. It's a compliment really BC as they should, it's instate rivalry game.

 

[Psyclone]

Actually, regarding 2002, looking back on it now, it makes sense to say Iowa was the biggest win for ISU. However, that wasn't the case at the time. Iowa was unranked, and ISU played a horrible first half.

That ISU team was eerily similar to the 1981 team. Both started strong, including some major victories, and moved into the top ten by mid-season; then the wheels came off. The schedule had a lot to do with that: In '02, ISU played 7 Top 20 teams, 6 of them on the road -- and that doesn't include Iowa, which went on to be a Top 5 team, or Texas Tech, which was ranked off-and-on during the year, but not the week they played ISU. But depth was, and remains, a crucial factor. I think it's one of the key differences between the Iowa and ISU programs. In many years, probably most years, the talent of the starters isn't all that much different. But when guys start to go down, ISU doesn't have comparable backups and Iowa does.

Like last year when Tucker went down in the Iowa game, that really hurt. People forget that game was tied until Iowa scores with 2:14 to go.

 

[Psyclone]

I was there and Iowa was by far the better team, back to back Banks possessions literally putting the ball down on the ground for an ISU recovery on the 20 yard line of Iowa was the difference. Period.

That 2002 team didn't defend the pass very well. I actually thought the 2003 team was better, but the 2002 team won some close game that went the other way in 2003.

 

[Lone Clone]

Like last year when Tucker went down in the Iowa game, that really hurt. People forget that game was tied until Iowa scores with 2:14 to go.

That's a pretty good illustration of the point I made earlier. Both teams lost their best defensive lineman fairly early in the game. Iowa was able to bring in an adequate replacement for Ott; ISU was not able to do the same for Tucker.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

That's a pretty good illustration of the point I made earlier. Both teams lost their best defensive lineman fairly early in the game. Iowa was able to bring in an adequate replacement for Ott; ISU was not able to do the same for Tucker.

I will agree/disagree with you on that LC. I think it was more of Phil Parker making right 2nd half changes with the D and Hesse held his own filling in for Ott. I'm not for sure who ISU plugged in for Tucker but on the last 2 scoring drives and and one where canzeri fumbled inside the ten you could tell the isu DL had gotten worn down and obviously not having extra man with best interior player in tucker really hurt them.

 

[HerkyFan]

Like last year when Tucker went down in the Iowa game, that really hurt. People forget that game was tied until Iowa scores with 2:14 to go.

The entire planet quakes in their boots at the awesome offense isu had last year. That whopping 67 yards in the entire second half of the Iowa game truly was amazing.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

I will agree/disagree with you on that LC. I think it was more of Phil Parker making right 2nd half changes with the D and Hesse held his own filling in for Ott. I'm not for sure who ISU plugged in for Tucker but on the last 2 scoring drives and and one where canzeri fumbled inside the ten you could tell the isu DL had gotten worn down and obviously not having extra man with best interior player in tucker really hurt them.

Yeah, I agree with this. I think it was a tale of two halfs. Iowa State outplayed Iowa the first half, but Iowa dominated defensively in the 2nd half and started to impose their will offensively in the 4th quarter. Many Iowa State fans like to omit the Canzeri fumble inside the 10 yard line from the discussion of the 2nd half. Iowa would likely have scored on that possession.

Also, Iowa had 475 yards offense that day compared to Iowa State's 310.

 

[Lone Clone]

Yeah, I agree with this. I think it was a tale of two halfs. Iowa State outplayed Iowa the first half, but Iowa dominated defensively in the 2nd half and started to impose their will offensively in the 4th quarter. Many Iowa State fans like to omit the Canzeri fumble inside the 10 yard line from the discussion of the 2nd half. Iowa would likely have scored on that possession.

Also, Iowa had 475 yards offense that day compared to Iowa State's 310.

You may well be right about adjustments. In fact, I think you probably are right. That was one of the complaints I heard about ISU from fans who know more about those things than I do. And at the risk of weakening my own argument (and pissing off a few posters), Ott was being handled fairly well prior to being hurt.

You're right about the Canzeri fumble. But I don't want to play that game. I'd be forced to mention the obvious hold in the end zone that wasn't called in the fourth quarter with the score tied; if that's called, instead of a first down at midfield, Iowa is trailing by two points and kicking away the ball.

I don't think the "what if" thing adds a lot to the discussion

There is no doubt Iowa dominated the second half to a greater degree than ISU's advantage in the first half, or that Iowa was the better team. But I will maintain to the end of my days that a game that was tied with three minutes to play was a close game.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

You may well be right about adjustments. In fact, I think you probably are right. That was one of the complaints I heard about ISU from fans who know more about those things than I do. And at the risk of weakening my own argument (and pissing off a few posters), Ott was being handled fairly well prior to being hurt.

You're right about the Canzeri fumble. But I don't want to play that game. I'd be forced to mention the obvious hold in the end zone that wasn't called in the fourth quarter with the score tied; if that's called, instead of a first down at midfield, Iowa is trailing by two points and kicking away the ball.

I don't think the "what if" thing adds a lot to the discussion

There is no doubt Iowa dominated the second half to a greater degree than ISU's advantage in the first half, or that Iowa was the better team. But I will maintain to the end of my days that a game that was tied with three minutes to play was a close game.

Yes, Ott was contained without issue. I'm not sure which "obvious hold" you are referring to, but I'm sure there were missed calls the entire game. The game was a close game. No doubt. Like I said in a previous post, a tale of two halfs.

 

[HerkyFan]

You may well be right about adjustments. In fact, I think you probably are right. That was one of the complaints I heard about ISU from fans who know more about those things than I do. And at the risk of weakening my own argument (and pissing off a few posters), Ott was being handled fairly well prior to being hurt.

You're right about the Canzeri fumble. But I don't want to play that game. I'd be forced to mention the obvious hold in the end zone that wasn't called in the fourth quarter with the score tied; if that's called, instead of a first down at midfield, Iowa is trailing by two points and kicking away the ball.

I don't think the "what if" thing adds a lot to the discussion

There is no doubt Iowa dominated the second half to a greater degree than ISU's advantage in the first half, or that Iowa was the better team. But I will maintain to the end of my days that a game that was tied with three minutes to play was a close game.

67 dazzling yards of total offense by isu's mighty offense in the second half against the Hawks.

Proof that it was close game according to isu grads.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

To his defense it was a close game and I didn't feel overly comfortable until pretty late in the game. We certainly dominated the game but it remained close until near the end.

 

[HerkyFan]

To his defense it was a close game and I didn't feel overly comfortable until pretty late in the game. We certainly dominated the game but it remained close until near the end.

isu wasn't a threat to win the game early into the second half. In fact from the 5 mins mark of the first half on, the Hawks were in control. The final score should have been 34-17 at least.

 

[Roy-munson]

Ferentz said going into half after the fake field goal he felt good about his team.. He knew he could make adjustments and "so proud" would just dance on the sidelines.. The better team showed up in the 2nd half.. And to the hold in the endzone comment proof? Or it's total biasis bull crap..(which it is).. And since Iowa state fans want to bring up the excuse of injury they are lucky leshun Daniels got hurt because he was running easily against that so proud defense..

 

[cidhawkeye]

I don't want to go there but I will.... Lone.... Again

 

[PCBHAWK]

You are correct that no one outside of Ames looks at Iowa State as a basketball juggernaut or the "Duke of the Midwest."

However, your last sentence is dubious at best. Prior to the 1990s, you would probably be accurate. Since that time, though, no way.

My statement holds water. Iowa is historically the better program.

Yes, I've been consistent in saying that I don't believe there was a huge discrepancy in talent between Iowa State and Iowa this last season. In fact, there have been only a few years under Ferentz in which I thought Iowa had significantly better overall team talent than Iowa State. Although far from perfect, it speaks volumes for how good of a coach Ferentz is, particularly with player development.

This is crazy. Iowa had better talent every year and Kirk did not use the talent to his advantage.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

My statement holds water. Iowa is historically the better program.



This is crazy. Iowa had better talent every year and Kirk did not use the talent to his advantage.

If we are talking basketball, I agreed with you that Iowa was historically the better program until the 1990s. Do you really believe Iowa has been better from the 90s on?

I'm not sure why my statement about there not being a huge discrepancy in talent a lot of years is so crazy. How many years has Iowa been considered having a top 10 or 25 recruiting class under Ferentz? Not many. In fact, how often have Iowa fans sounded off on this board about Ferentz only landing "MAC-level talent." A lot.

I do believe there have been a handful of years in which Iowa had significantly better talent than Iowa State. I just don't think that has been most years. What I think has frequently happened is Iowa has done a tremendous job of developing the kids whom they have gotten into the program. Of course, Ferentz and staff have landed a few prized, blue-chip caliber recruits over the years, but how many of those kids panned out or stayed on all four years? Not many. This is particularly true of our running backs lately. The four star kids we did get either 1) never saw the field and left or 2) played 1-2 seasons and either left or got booted.

 

[5Fan5]

Like last year when Tucker went down in the Iowa game, that really hurt. People forget that game was tied until Iowa scores with 2:14 to go.

Drew Ott did not even finish the first quarter, let alone play into the second half as did Tucker. While the score was tied, the direction and tenor of the game following halftime widely favored Iowa.

It was not a close game ala the three-point wins that isu has had recently in the series.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

If we are talking basketball, I agreed with you that Iowa was historically the better program until the 1990s. Do you really believe Iowa has been better from the 90s on?

I'm not sure why my statement about there not being a huge discrepancy in talent a lot of years is so crazy. How many years has Iowa been considered having a top 10 or 25 recruiting class under Ferentz? Not many. In fact, how often have Iowa fans sounded off on this board about Ferentz only landing "MAC-level talent." A lot.

I do believe there have been a handful of years in which Iowa had significantly better talent than Iowa State. I just don't think that has been most years. What I think has frequently happened is Iowa has done a tremendous job of developing the kids whom they have gotten into the program. Of course, Ferentz and staff have landed a few prized, blue-chip caliber recruits over the years, but how many of those kids panned out or stayed on all four years? Not many. This is particularly true of our running backs lately. The four star kids we did get either 1) never saw the field and left or 2) played 1-2 seasons and either left or got booted.

Well it doesn't really matter what the recruiting rankings say, because Iowa has historically been one of the best teams in the nation at sending guys to the NFL, so saying ISU and Iowa has similar talent is beyond stupid