Next year?

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

If they beat Stanford there is no way they won't be preseason top ten next year.

Maybe. But OSU, ND, USC, Oregon and Baylor and Michigan will all be in the group of highly ranked preseason teams in addition to the Top 4 (all of whom will be a shoo-in for the Top 10). Not to mention the SEC will get their regular dose of grossly inflated preseason rankings.

 

[David1979]

Maybe. But OSU, ND, USC, Oregon and Baylor and Michigan will all be in the group of highly ranked preseason teams in addition to the Top 4 (all of whom will be a shoo-in for the Top 10). Not to mention the SEC will get their regular dose of grossly inflated preseason rankings.

True although I don't agree on Michigan.

 

[WWDMHawkeye]

The defense could be outstanding next year, especially if King stays and Ott gets medical redshirt. If Parker trusts the corners to cover like he did tonight, Taylor will be free to be a roving playmaker.

Finding/developing a kicker and punter is key.

Pretty much agree here. Our D could be scary good next year if those two come back. Should be OK on the offensive side of the ball, although Blythe, especially, will be tough to replace. That kid is special, not only because of his physical skills, but because of his intelligence and leadership.

Still, if we can maintain a pretty consistent kicking game, I think we'll have a great shot at making it back to Indy. . . and I'll be there again, guaranteed, in that case.

 

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

True although I don't agree on Michigan.

You and I don't. but the voters will be falling all over themselves all summer hoping to see khakis take care of unfinished business and get them back to the REAL old fashioned scUM. They'll be pre-season top 10 every year unless they somehow end up being absolutely horrible.

 

[LarryMullenJr.]

You and I don't. but the voters will be falling all over themselves all summer hoping to see khakis take care of unfinished business and get them back to the REAL old fashioned scUM. They'll be pre-season top 10 every year unless they somehow end up being absolutely horrible.

Technically, do we need to start capitalizing "Khakis"?

 

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

Technically, do we need to start capitalizing "Khakis"?

::searches "sweatervest"::

 

[Cushawk]

Sorry but it doesn't matter what happens in the bowl games or during the next month in regards to the preseason top 10. I can already predict it for you:
1. Alabama (any doubt?)
2. LSU (Fournettte love)
3. Ole Miss (hey, they are SEC and beat Alabama this year. They must be good)
4. Ohio State (Urban)
5. Clemson (Dabo love)
6. Michigan (Harbaugh)
7. Baylor (sexy explosive offense and will start 7-0 again next year before playing anyone)
8. USC (most talent on a 5 loss team and so sexy)
9. Pick another SEC team. I will go with Auburn or Georgia. They're SEC = Better than anyone else
10. The other team from SEC I didn't pick at #9.
***Bonus pick*** 11. Notre Dame (because they were really good in 1987)

 

[CF_93]

Schedule-wise, we may play @ PSU, Michigan, and @ Rutgers, it should be a much more manageable crossover schedule than the likes of Wisconsin. Sconnies play OSU, @ Michigan, @ MSU! Can't see any way we don't win the West again next year.

 

[IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life]

Iowa will have a chance, as others have said the schedule is a bit more difficult with our crossover games. The key will be replacing Blythe and Walsh IMO. I think Daniels will be a solid guard for Iowa, who plays center?

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

I have high expectations for next year, as I think most will. However, I also don't see much reason why a team like Minnesota, Illinois, or Nebraska couldn't have a great turn around year like Iowa did this year, and I also expect Wisconsin and Northwestern to be good next year too. There's very few certainties from year-to-year in college football.

 

[TheHawkeyeDudeAbides]

I have high expectations for next year, as I think most will. However, I also don't see much reason why a team like Minnesota, Illinois, or Nebraska couldn't have a great turn around year like Iowa did this year, and I also expect Wisconsin and Northwestern to be good next year too. There's very few certainties from year-to-year in college football.

Reasons>> 1 ) Minnesota will return its QB Leidner and Brooks the good young RB but Minnesota graduated its 3 interior OL starters. HC Tracy Claeys burned bridges and fired the OC who exploited Iowa's defense. 2 DL and 4 secondary starters graduate. Minnesota is not rich is 3/4 star replacements. Similar results next year.

2) ILL-annoy is ILL-Annoy. QB starter Lunt will miss Geronimo Allison and Josh Ferguson. Whole new secondary starting unit. Trouble ahead. ILL-annoy lucky to beat Nebraska this year. Bill Cubit as head coach (yawn!).

3) Nebby will have T-Arm QB and WR Jordan Westerkamp back with TE Carter. Average RBs for Nebby. 3 or 4 new starters for secondary if Nate Gerry goes pro. Expect next season losses to Oregon, Wisky, and Ohio State before Iowa matchup. Even, Northwestern might beat lil nebby again!

No soup for you!

 

[goodbyebobby]

Iowa will have a chance, as others have said the schedule is a bit more difficult with our crossover games. The key will be replacing Blythe and Walsh IMO. I think Daniels will be a solid guard for Iowa, who plays center?

Daniels came to school as a center.

 

[Freyvet]

KF will face a nagging challenge that so far he has not handled well, and that is, the challenge of high expectations.

By he you mean the players who play???

 

[hawkster03]

Michigan has to replace their veteran starting qb. I don't see them super high.

 

[sloehawk]

10 wins would be a great season next year.
To expect a repeat of this season's lightning strike is an invitation to be disappointed.

I'm certainly not expecting it, you have to be good and you have to be lucky unless you're extremely good. That said, we should be Top Ten out of the chute I believe, and that is territory where a playoff run isn't a pipe dream, it's a real possibility with some solid play, something we are capable of doing with C.J. Beathard at the helm.

C.J. Beathard has entered the ranks of one of the 3 best QB's at Iowa in my lifetime in 1 years time. Chuck Long, Brad Banks and C.J. Beathard. He makes plays. Period. He'd make more if allowed to, IMO.

We lose Kirk Ferentz and this team would be just fine. We lose C.J. Beathard and you can forget about it. He is without a doubt in my mind that important to whatever success this team will have next year, and he's a bonafide Professional QB as well, again IMO. Great arm, elusive, tough in the pocket, great decision maker, everything you could ask for in a QB. I don't think it's outside of the realm of possibility that he could turn himself into a 1st round draft pick. I believe he is that good. If he stays healthy, we shall see.

 

[Eternal Return]

You will mean revert next year and with a nobody schedule be 7-5 ish. Man you only had to beat one half decent team - no way this is even a top 25 team.

Oh good lord, already one of these douchebags. May you rot in hell, Nebraska or whatever fan. Surely you suck and Iowa will own you again next year. Buh bye.

 

[LarryMullenJr.]

Is it just me or does it seem like Westercamp has been there for like 17 years? He's like the Granville Waiters of this generation.

 

[David1979]

Iowa should be in a good position to repeat as division champs. I think Nebraska will be the second best team followed by Wisconsin and Northwestern. Of course a lot could change too depending who decides to come back for each team.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Reasons>> 1 ) Minnesota will return its QB Leidner and Brooks the good young RB but Minnesota graduated its 3 interior OL starters. HC Tracy Claeys burned bridges and fired the OC who exploited Iowa's defense. 2 DL and 4 secondary starters graduate. Minnesota is not rich is 3/4 star replacements. Similar results next year.

2) ILL-annoy is ILL-Annoy. QB starter Lunt will miss Geronimo Allison and Josh Ferguson. Whole new secondary starting unit. Trouble ahead. ILL-annoy lucky to beat Nebraska this year. Bill Cubit as head coach (yawn!).

3) Nebby will have T-Arm QB and WR Jordan Westerkamp back with TE Carter. Average RBs for Nebby. 3 or 4 new starters for secondary if Nate Gerry goes pro. Expect next season losses to Oregon, Wisky, and Ohio State before Iowa matchup. Even, Northwestern might beat lil nebby again!

No soup for you!

Most Iowa fans wanted Ferentz fired before the season began. Many thought Iowa would lose to an FCS team at home (Illinois State).

Predicting Iowa to start the year 12-0 this year would have been just as crazy as predicting Nebraska to go 12-0 next year. It also would have been crazy to predict Northwestern to go 10-2 after their struggles in the past few seasons.

The point I'm trying to make is that college football is extremely difficult to predict, and it isn't smart to rule anything out.

 

[hawkeyemark]

I'm certainly not expecting it, you have to be good and you have to be lucky unless you're extremely good. That said, we should be Top Ten out of the chute I believe, and that is territory where a playoff run isn't a pipe dream, it's a real possibility with some solid play, something we are capable of doing with C.J. Beathard at the helm.

C.J. Beathard has entered the ranks of one of the 3 best QB's at Iowa in my lifetime in 1 years time. Chuck Long, Brad Banks and C.J. Beathard. He makes plays. Period. He'd make more if allowed to, IMO.

We lose Kirk Ferentz and this team would be just fine. We lose C.J. Beathard and you can forget about it. He is without a doubt in my mind that important to whatever success this team will have next year, and he's a bonafide Professional QB as well, again IMO. Great arm, elusive, tough in the pocket, great decision maker, everything you could ask for in a QB. I don't think it's outside of the realm of possibility that he could turn himself into a 1st round draft pick. I believe he is that good. If he stays healthy, we shall see.

+ 1 At a year shy of the big Six 0 I may never see another quarterback at Iowa who has the "it" factor like Beathard. He seems like a really together young man who understands that he plays for a coach not really offensive minded at heart but feels comfortable with the system he plays in and bleeds black and gold. I suspect we will come back down to earth a bit after he graduates and moves on to the NFL.

 

[MadDogC]

Could be a great year--not quite like this one. ALL our great years come in a QB's first full season as a starter--no exceptions...

2002 Banks
2003 Chandler
2004 Tate
2009 Stanzi
2015 CJB

Even years we didn't finish in the top ten win totals fell in following seasons with an incumbant QB...

I guess the real test of New Kirk may come next year: Is veteran CJB to take fewer risks like other veteran QB's--like Old Kirk? Hope not. I'd rather CJB be more of a weapon--but what do i know?

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Could be a great year--not quite like this one. ALL our great years come in a QB's first full season as a starter--no exceptions...

2002 Banks
2003 Chandler
2004 Tate
2009 Stanzi
2015 CJB

Even years we didn't finish in the top ten win totals fell in following seasons with an incumbant QB...

I guess the real test of New Kirk may come next year: Is veteran CJB to take fewer risks like other veteran QB's--like Old Kirk? Hope not. I'd rather CJB be more of a weapon--but what do i know?

Do you think the 2009 version of Stanzi was better than the 2010 version?

 

[hawkeyemark]

Do you think the 2009 version of Stanzi was better than the 2010 version?

I did but just IMO. Stanzi in his junior season just made plays much like Beathard did this season without maybe quite all the other intangibles. In his senior year you could see the obvious emphasis on cutting down on interceptions and he played more controlled but I thought less effectively.

I've had the feeling that Kirk had changed course with Beathard but not sure what we will see next season. As I've written previously we saw more of the old Kirk in the championship game and not sure where things go from here. When we get in big games like we will in the regular season with Michigan I suspect we will see more of the default setting as far as playing conservatively.

 

[sloehawk]

I did but just IMO. Stanzi in his junior season just made plays much like Beathard did this season without maybe quite all the other intangibles. In his senior year you could see the obvious emphasis on cutting down on interceptions and he played more controlled but I thought less effectively.

I've had the feeling that Kirk had changed course with Beathard but not sure what we will see next season. As I've written previously we saw more of the old Kirk in the championship game and not sure where things go from here. When we get in big games like we will in the regular season with Michigan I suspect we will see more of the default setting as far as playing conservatively.

That is the main reason I am not a big fan of Kirk Ferentz, regardless of the year we just had. I honestly believe this team could have racked up 40 a game on Offense, and never sniffed an onside kick attempt (remember all the "Iowa hangs on" headlines people on here loved to bitch about? It matters). It may not matter to some, but "style points" have always mattered, and you could argue they matter even more now. Do you think if Iowa wins by 20 every single week they have the "doubters" they have this year? Not a chance. People sit up and take notice. Iowa absolutely had the horses this year to attack and score much more than they did. Not a doubt in my mind.

Yeah, we most likely have to win the Big Ten Title game regardless, to make the Playoff. But think about this............. what if Iowa rolls all season long and makes it to #1 with a bullet, then loses a narrow great game like they just did for the Big Ten Title? You potentially make the Playoff anyway with a banner year like that. It absolutely would be doable under those circumstances, IMO.

I get it, you keep winning it doesn't matter, but these decisions are made by a "committee", who as you can clearly see, can pull any reason out of their collective asses to assign somebody a spot in the Final Four to have a shot at a National Title. Give them reasons to "love" you all year long and it will absolutely keep you in the conversation if you have a "minor" hiccup (Oklahoma lost to pathetic Texas for God's sake!). There is no criteria to get in. Kick ass and make their decision harder if you stumble.

 

[MadDogC]

Do you think the 2009 version of Stanzi was better than the 2010 version?

If what You are wondering is do QB's statistically play better at Iowa while the team's losses keep dropping in later years--that answer is yes. Tate got better, we won less and less. JC was JC, we won less. Stanzi got better, we won less and less. MVB presumably woulda gotten better, but we transitioned OC's and QB and Team suffered. JR got better, we won less.

I'd love to see the season where our QB gets better and we win more...

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

That is the main reason I am not a big fan of Kirk Ferentz, regardless of the year we just had. I honestly believe this team could have racked up 40 a game on Offense, and never sniffed an onside kick attempt (remember all the "Iowa hangs on" headlines people on here loved to bitch about? It matters). It may not matter to some, but "style points" have always mattered, and you could argue they matter even more now. Do you think if Iowa wins by 20 every single week they have the "doubters" they have this year? Not a chance. People sit up and take notice. Iowa absolutely had the horses this year to attack and score much more than they did. Not a doubt in my mind.

I know that a lot of fans want to view this Hawkeye team as more than it is - but the team needed complete TEAM efforts to win most games. We're a good team, but we played to our strengths ... possessing the ball and forcing the opposition to possess the ball if they wanted to score.

Even though we actually DID play pretty aggressively on O ... if we increase our pass-to-run ratio, then we run the risk of short drives AND too much time left on the clock. This not only gives our opponent more opportunities to score but it also forces our D to play even more snaps.

We shouldn't try to put lipstick on this pig ... it looks plenty pretty as it is. If we force our D to play too many snaps ... then we're forced to have to take more chances on D in order to get off the field. When you take those extra chances ... you increase the likelihood of giving up big plays. If you didn't notice, we weren't exactly living in our opponents backfield. Once Ott got injured ... our firepower got significantly limited. Once Meier nicked his wing ... we were even more limited. On top of that, even with Meier on the field, we were playing 3 first year starters on the field on the DL.

You change the way we played through the season ... you likely actually HURT our chances of winning game more than help them.

Lastly, if you watched Beathard ... playing under cold and/or windy conditions visibly impacts his play. Two of his worst performances, not surprisingly coincided with 2 of the most windy games of the season.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

I did but just IMO. Stanzi in his junior season just made plays much like Beathard did this season without maybe quite all the other intangibles. In his senior year you could see the obvious emphasis on cutting down on interceptions and he played more controlled but I thought less effectively.

I've had the feeling that Kirk had changed course with Beathard but not sure what we will see next season. As I've written previously we saw more of the old Kirk in the championship game and not sure where things go from here. When we get in big games like we will in the regular season with Michigan I suspect we will see more of the default setting as far as playing conservatively.

Quite frankly it is ridiculous to think Stanzi was better in 2009 than 2010. He improved his completion percentage, had more touchdowns, less interceptions, and averaged more yards per attempt in 2010. His stats really aren't even close - he was much, much better in 2010.

The bounces didn't go our way in 2010 like they did in 2009, and our defense didn't make big stops to close out games like they did in 2009. There is much more to winning and losing football games than the play of your QB. We had much better QB play in 2010.

 

[hawkeyemark]

Quite frankly it is ridiculous to think Stanzi was better in 2009 than 2010. He improved his completion percentage, had more touchdowns, less interceptions, and averaged more yards per attempt in 2010. His stats really aren't even close - he was much, much better in 2010.

The bounces didn't go our way in 2010 like they did in 2009, and our defense didn't make big stops to close out games like they did in 2009. There is much more to winning and losing football games than the play of your QB. We had much better QB play in 2010.

I certainly respect your opinion and many share your view. Stanzi his junior year seemed a little more willing to take risks and with risk comes greater rewards- especially remember him making some big plays in the Michigan game at home that year that he probably wouldn't have made as a senior. At the end of the day I think defense wins games but having a playmaker and leader at quarterback plays a really big part in it.

 

[Kjd0604]

Oh good lord, already one of these douchebags. May you rot in hell, Nebraska or whatever fan. Surely you suck and Iowa will own you again next year. Buh bye.

Owned? You barely beat Wisconsin, beat Illinois by 9, Indiana by 8, Minnesota by just 5, and a horrible Nebraska by 8.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

I certainly respect your opinion and many share your view. Stanzi his junior year seemed a little more willing to take risks and with risk comes greater rewards- especially remember him making some big plays in the Michigan game at home that year that he probably wouldn't have made as a senior. At the end of the day I think defense wins games but having a playmaker and leader at quarterback plays a really big part in it.

In 2009 Stanzi averaged 7.5 yards per attempt against Michigan and also threw a pick-6. In 2010 he averaged over 10 yards per attempt and threw for 3 touchdowns and no interceptions against Michigan.

I don't see how it is even debatable to say that Stanzi played better his junior season when he threw 17 touchdowns and 15 interceptions (5 of which I believe resulted in TD's for the opponent) than his senior season in which he threw for 25 touchdowns and just 6 interceptions.

I don't buy the argument that Stanzi was more aggressive his junior year. On a per attempt basis, Stanzi averaged more touchdown passes as a senior than a junior.

The only way you could conceivably make an argument that Stanzi was better his junior season is to simply look at the final record of the team, but that is extremely short-sighted. There are many other factors at play. For example, the wins against UNI, Penn State, and Michigan in 2009 are all directly attributable to plays made by the defense and special teams late in the game. If our defense/special teams do not make huge plays in those games, we finish the year 7-5. Conversely, in 2010 if our defense/special teams can make stops against Wisconsin, Northwestern, Ohio State, and Minnesota we finish the season 11-1. All of these plays happened with Stanzi on the bench.

Football is a team game, and the 2009 team was a perfect example of that. Stanzi did not win those games on his own, and it's foolish to say that he played better in 2009 simply because that team won more games. He made huge improvements in between his junior and senior years, but unfortunately that team did not manage to win its close games like the 2009 team did.

 

[General Tso]

Owned? You barely beat Wisconsin, beat Illinois by 9, Indiana by 8, Minnesota by just 5, and a horrible Nebraska by 8.

Yes, and any one of those teams would have preferred to 'barely beat' us this year vs the outcome they had.

 

[hawkeyemark]

In 2009 Stanzi averaged 7.5 yards per attempt against Michigan and also threw a pick-6. In 2010 he averaged over 10 yards per attempt and threw for 3 touchdowns and no interceptions against Michigan.

I don't see how it is even debatable to say that Stanzi played better his junior season when he threw 17 touchdowns and 15 interceptions (5 of which I believe resulted in TD's for the opponent) than his senior season in which he threw for 25 touchdowns and just 6 interceptions.

I don't buy the argument that Stanzi was more aggressive his junior year. On a per attempt basis, Stanzi averaged more touchdown passes as a senior than a junior.

The only way you could conceivably make an argument that Stanzi was better his junior season is to simply look at the final record of the team, but that is extremely short-sighted. There are many other factors at play. For example, the wins against UNI, Penn State, and Michigan in 2009 are all directly attributable to plays made by the defense and special teams late in the game. If our defense/special teams do not make huge plays in those games, we finish the year 7-5. Conversely, in 2010 if our defense/special teams can make stops against Wisconsin, Northwestern, Ohio State, and Minnesota we finish the season 11-1. All of these plays happened with Stanzi on the bench.

Football is a team game, and the 2009 team was a perfect example of that. Stanzi did not win those games on his own, and it's foolish to say that he played better in 2009 simply because that team won more games. He made huge improvements in between his junior and senior years, but unfortunately that team did not manage to win its close games like the 2009 team did.

You certainly have done a good job making your point- nice post. I enjoyed watching Stanzi play his junior season more than his senior season. Does that mean he played better or he seemed to play better because the team won more- hell I don't know He obviously improved his game enough to make a living in the NFL which I feel very happy about as I always liked him.

The stuff about Stanzi obviously makes no difference one way or the other. You see the way that Beathard took control of this team this season and I think it points to the impact that a strong leader at quarterback can make on a team. He wants to win so badly and played his guts out when injured willing the team to win. When the defense sees him on the sideline cheering them on that sends a message. When he can make good decisions and flat out play like he can it just adds to what he can bring to the table. As you say you win as a team which IMO starts with defense and the right guy at quarterback IMO pulls it all together.

 

[BubsFinn]

Let’s be serious. High expectations, lots of experience at skill positions returning, early season ranking, senior QB? We’ll be lucky to win 7 games.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

3rd times a charm for Kirk, he keeps the momentum after this year....I said 9+ this year, next year I am going with 10 plus....defensive front 7 with Ott will have at least 4 who suit up on Sunday's....Blythe and Smith and HCK are big losses but plent of talent at OL, Smith being injuries built depth, and Kittle/outsey/wisenski(sp?) will be pretty damn good too....Snyder/gair replace lomax, King stays, and Bower replaces Fisher...Canzeri will be missed but often injured, Daniels/Wadley are great 1-2 with Mitchell 3rd RB.....FB,punter, and kicker are areas of concern to replace.....sounds pretty damn nice to me!

 

[mazda1]

Kirk always plays his top 5 o-linemen. The case could be made for Ike, Croston, Welsh, Daniels, and Boone being the starting 5. Who are there kids that have generated buzz and could break into the line-up?

I haven't heard much about the frosh other then Daniels or the redshirt frosh. Looking forward to hearing bowl practice info. Is someone close to the program hearing about anyone separating themselves?

Who do you think will be first off the bench?
Render, Steve F., Paulsons, Newborg or......

 

[the24fan]

Sorry but it doesn't matter what happens in the bowl games or during the next month in regards to the preseason top 10. I can already predict it for you:
1. Alabama (any doubt?)
2. LSU (Fournettte love)
3. Ole Miss (hey, they are SEC and beat Alabama this year. They must be good)
4. Ohio State (Urban)
5. Clemson (Dabo love)
6. Michigan (Harbaugh)
7. Baylor (sexy explosive offense and will start 7-0 again next year before playing anyone)
8. USC (most talent on a 5 loss team and so sexy)
9. Pick another SEC team. I will go with Auburn or Georgia. They're SEC = Better than anyone else
10. The other team from SEC I didn't pick at #9.
***Bonus pick*** 11. Notre Dame (because they were really good in 1987)

LOL...This is pretty much spot on in todays BS college football landscape.
The so called "blue bloods" getting run based on nothing. Preseason polls pretty much are a joke

 

[the24fan]

But in all seriousness,key to next year despite talent potential is the good captains ability to keep these guys hungry and continue to play the disrespected card. Hawks most certainly play better when they have that big fat chip on their shoulders. Need to recapture that us vs the world mentality for next year as well.

 

[IaHawk44]

Daniels came to school as a center.

As long as Brian Ferentz is OL/RCoord Iowa will always have quality OLs and a punishing running game. I would love to see him as an offensive coordinator.

 

[IaHawk44]

That is the main reason I am not a big fan of Kirk Ferentz, regardless of the year we just had. I honestly believe this team could have racked up 40 a game on Offense, and never sniffed an onside kick attempt (remember all the "Iowa hangs on" headlines people on here loved to bitch about? It matters). It may not matter to some, but "style points" have always mattered, and you could argue they matter even more now. Do you think if Iowa wins by 20 every single week they have the "doubters" they have this year? Not a chance. People sit up and take notice. Iowa absolutely had the horses this year to attack and score much more than they did. Not a doubt in my mind.

Yeah, we most likely have to win the Big Ten Title game regardless, to make the Playoff. But think about this............. what if Iowa rolls all season long and makes it to #1 with a bullet, then loses a narrow great game like they just did for the Big Ten Title? You potentially make the Playoff anyway with a banner year like that. It absolutely would be doable under those circumstances, IMO.

I get it, you keep winning it doesn't matter, but these decisions are made by a "committee", who as you can clearly see, can pull any reason out of their collective asses to assign somebody a spot in the Final Four to have a shot at a National Title. Give them reasons to "love" you all year long and it will absolutely keep you in the conversation if you have a "minor" hiccup (Oklahoma lost to pathetic Texas for God's sake!). There is no criteria to get in. Kick ass and make their decision harder if you stumble.

The playoff committee has done a great job so far and they're setting the precedent that conference champions belong in the playoffs. Kirk Ferentz is a great coach and Iowa's been fortunate to have him as their coach. He builds champions on and especially off, the field and his coaching philosophy focuses on the players development in an NFL environment with discipline.

 

[freemanbrenner]

Kirk always plays his top 5 o-linemen. The case could be made for Ike, Croston, Welsh, Daniels, and Boone being the starting 5. Who are there kids that have generated buzz and could break into the line-up?

I haven't heard much about the frosh other then Daniels or the redshirt frosh. Looking forward to hearing bowl practice info. Is someone close to the program hearing about anyone separating themselves?

Who do you think will be first off the bench?
Render, Steve F., Paulsons, Newborg or......

If Iowa could get farniok and/or Alaric Jackson wouldn't be that surprising if they play right away.