ADVERTISEMENT

Offense / defense depth chart

Defense will be excellent. Offense will be improved because QB play and OL has to be better, simply by regression to the mean.

Here come 89 responses about we have the worst offense in the history of football and the dumbest coaches ever.

I'm expecting another division title.
 
Defense will be excellent. Offense will be improved because QB play and OL has to be better, simply by regression to the mean.

Here come 89 responses about we have the worst offense in the history of football and the dumbest coaches ever.

I'm expecting another division title.
I'd hold off on your Tix to Indy :(

But yes our offense is likely to be trash again.
I'd guess 5-4 in conf play.
 
My guess is by Game 3 Joe Labas will be starting and the OL will look like Richman, Stephens, Myslinski or Jones, Colby and Davidkov. Elsbury could well become a guy that can play all the OL positions competently. Britt may remain sufficiently healthy to give some depth at multiple positions.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: natchrlman
Just want to confirm that you are calling the poster who picked Iowa to go 5-4 in conference play f-ing blind or stupid before I respond. Thanks in advance.
Draft Kings has Iowa's O/U win total at 7.5. You figure probably 2.5 of that is related to the non-conference, which leaves 5 wins in the Big Ten. They must be f-ing blind and stupid as well.
 
5-4 would be below Kirk's .582 career conference winning ptg at Iowa.

Iowa went 7-2 last year.

Fans are ****ing blind or stupid, I'm not sure which.
Mr 20/20,
what is the blind of stupid loss?
OSU MI PU or WI?

OSU is OSU
MI won't be as good but completely dominated us
WI and PU dominated us last year and have each won 4 of the last 5 vs us.

You need to wake up....
 
My guess is by Game 3 Joe Labas will be starting and the OL will look like Richman, Stephens, Myslinski or Jones, Colby and Davidkov. Elsbury could well become a guy that can play all the OL positions competently. Britt may remain sufficiently healthy to give some depth at multiple positions.
I dont' see labas being our qb by then unless we lose one of our 1st 2 games....
 
  • Like
Reactions: mthawkeyes
I dont' see labas being our qb by then unless we lose one of our 1st 2 games....
You may be right, of course but sticking with Joe. Primarily because I don't think KF is really all that committed to Spencer anymore. Edit: There's a third possibility, albeit unlikely. Spencer could come out on fire and we get a single good year out of him.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kceasthawk
You may be right, of course but sticking with Joe. Primarily because I don't think KF is really all that committed to Spencer anymore. Edit: There's a third possibility, albeit unlikely. Spencer could come out on fire and we get a single good year out of him.
If Spencer plays pretty well, he’ll probably use his Covid year.
 
My guess is by Game 3 Joe Labas will be starting and the OL will look like Richman, Stephens, Myslinski or Jones, Colby and Davidkov. Elsbury could well become a guy that can play all the OL positions competently. Britt may remain sufficiently healthy to give some depth at multiple positions.
Lots of new names on OL. Is that good or Iowa nreds to do something after last year
 
My guess is by Game 3 Joe Labas will be starting and the OL will look like Richman, Stephens, Myslinski or Jones, Colby and Davidkov. Elsbury could well become a guy that can play all the OL positions competently. Britt may remain sufficiently healthy to give some depth at multiple positions.

Myslinski has a lot of ground to make up I believe it will be Jones at center.

Elsbury will be one of the guards, imo. Talented big guy that is ready.

We all tend to dismiss Britt, Dejong and Plumb. They all have some experience but need massive improvements. I've read reports that Dejong and Britt have taken big steps forward.
 
It’s all about staying on schedule and I believe the RBs are better this year. I got sick of TG taking losses as much as he did. Iowa needs backs that hit the hole whether it’s there or not and fall forward for a gain. I think the run game will be improved (although the explosive potential may be less).

you pound out yards on the ground to keep the clock moving, and by the 4th quarter you’ve got the advantage. This was KF’s formula for years. Play action passes, great D, solid ST.
 
It’s all about staying on schedule and I believe the RBs are better this year. I got sick of TG taking losses as much as he did. Iowa needs backs that hit the hole whether it’s there or not and fall forward for a gain. I think the run game will be improved (although the explosive potential may be less).

you pound out yards on the ground to keep the clock moving, and by the 4th quarter you’ve got the advantage. This was KF’s formula for years. Play action passes, great D, solid ST.
I expect a bit more Mehki Sargent type running this year as well. The two RBs from the bowl game looked solid and I expect 1 of the 2 new RBs will get some snaps also.
 
Myslinski has a lot of ground to make up I believe it will be Jones at center.

Elsbury will be one of the guards, imo. Talented big guy that is ready.

We all tend to dismiss Britt, Dejong and Plumb. They all have some experience but need massive improvements. I've read reports that Dejong and Britt have taken big steps forward.
Well Britt is perpetually injured and Plumb is way too slow to be a B1G lineman, so that’s probably why people are dismissing them.
 
Mr 20/20,
what is the blind of stupid loss?
OSU MI PU or WI?

OSU is OSU
MI won't be as good but completely dominated us
WI and PU dominated us last year and have each won 4 of the last 5 vs us.

You need to wake up....
While I agree that ichawk24's early reply was needlessly antagonistic - the premise that Iowa will likely still do (well) better than 5-4 is not wrong.

If you apply your football IQ to discern why Iowa was dominated in some of those games ... the most apt description is that we were "beat in the trenches." To ANYONE who is learning towards Iowa having a middling '22 campaign ... largely based on the precedent on what they saw last season AND based on Iowa's "harder schedule" ... I think those folks are forgetting that Iowa players are watching that tape too.

Do you-all know the pride that those young men have? Do you-all comprehend the sting that those young men feel for having gotten beaten in the trenches ... something that RARELY happens to Iowa squads? Those same young men have a year more of preparation under their belts ... and I venture to guess that they're more than a little motivated (by the need for redemption).

No doubt ... OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Purdue will all be fine teams ... hell, Minnesota may not be too bad either. However, to speculate that we'd lose to all but Minnesota seems closer to a worst-case scenario (barring having all the wheels fall off) - than a reasonable null hypothesis.

To me, the most reasonable null hypothesis would be a 6-3 conference record. Iowa is usually good for an upset (to me, that means beating either Michigan or Wisconsin) ... we'll likely lose to OSU (just as many suspect) ... and I'd venture to guess that we split our match-ups between Purdue and Minnesota. That doesn't mean that other teams won't be plenty challenging ... Illinois and Nebraska will probably BOTH be plenty plucky. Northwestern will be tough once they settle down to a new equilibrium on D ... however, I don't YET see that happening this year.

Why is 6-3 a reasonable null hypothesis?

The DL last year was, overall, quite green ... and our group of corners got decimated by injuries through the latter half of the season. All the same - would you disagree that our D still had plenty to be proud about?

As for the O ... it would be an understatement to say that we had issues. However, a lot of those issues seem linked to youth/inexperience at a number of positions ... especially OL and WR. Furthermore, we're a squad that is typically quite reliant on our TEs to help us create mismatches on O. Lachey was young last year AND LaPorta was continuing to round out his game. With Lachey having more experience and with the addition of Stilianos - the TE position might be a "better" position for us in '22.

The Hawks COULD do worse than 6-3 ... but they ALSO could do better than 6-3. In my estimation, by my choice of null hypothesis ... I clearly believe that deviations in EITHER direction are essentially equally likely.

With a 7-2 mark (or better) ... I think that the Hawks could win the West (again).
 
It’s all about staying on schedule and I believe the RBs are better this year. I got sick of TG taking losses as much as he did. Iowa needs backs that hit the hole whether it’s there or not and fall forward for a gain. I think the run game will be improved (although the explosive potential may be less).

you pound out yards on the ground to keep the clock moving, and by the 4th quarter you’ve got the advantage. This was KF’s formula for years. Play action passes, great D, solid ST.
Agree. I think many underestimate how important "staying on schedule" as you stated is in the KF book of winning football. I also agree we'll be significantly better at that this year both because we'll see a more mature and productive OL, and because our backs won't be losing us three yards on 2nd and 7, which we'll lead to more manageable third downs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ichawk24
Well Britt is perpetually injured and Plumb is way too slow to be a B1G lineman, so that’s probably why people are dismissing them.

There have been players before that have overcome the injury bug. Those same people won't admit they were wrong in dismissing them. Plumb is a senior and if you pay attention Iowa has a history of seniors becoming big contributors. I'm just sayn'.
 
until People see what the OL and QB perform like I would say it is pretty hard to give a prediction . Iowa will have a good D and STs with the only question really on STs being K .
 
While I agree that ichawk24's early reply was needlessly antagonistic - the premise that Iowa will likely still do (well) better than 5-4 is not wrong.

If you apply your football IQ to discern why Iowa was dominated in some of those games ... the most apt description is that we were "beat in the trenches." To ANYONE who is learning towards Iowa having a middling '22 campaign ... largely based on the precedent on what they saw last season AND based on Iowa's "harder schedule" ... I think those folks are forgetting that Iowa players are watching that tape too.

Do you-all know the pride that those young men have? Do you-all comprehend the sting that those young men feel for having gotten beaten in the trenches ... something that RARELY happens to Iowa squads? Those same young men have a year more of preparation under their belts ... and I venture to guess that they're more than a little motivated (by the need for redemption).

No doubt ... OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Purdue will all be fine teams ... hell, Minnesota may not be too bad either. However, to speculate that we'd lose to all but Minnesota seems closer to a worst-case scenario (barring having all the wheels fall off) - than a reasonable null hypothesis.

To me, the most reasonable null hypothesis would be a 6-3 conference record. Iowa is usually good for an upset (to me, that means beating either Michigan or Wisconsin) ... we'll likely lose to OSU (just as many suspect) ... and I'd venture to guess that we split our match-ups between Purdue and Minnesota. That doesn't mean that other teams won't be plenty challenging ... Illinois and Nebraska will probably BOTH be plenty plucky. Northwestern will be tough once they settle down to a new equilibrium on D ... however, I don't YET see that happening this year.

Why is 6-3 a reasonable null hypothesis?

The DL last year was, overall, quite green ... and our group of corners got decimated by injuries through the latter half of the season. All the same - would you disagree that our D still had plenty to be proud about?

As for the O ... it would be an understatement to say that we had issues. However, a lot of those issues seem linked to youth/inexperience at a number of positions ... especially OL and WR. Furthermore, we're a squad that is typically quite reliant on our TEs to help us create mismatches on O. Lachey was young last year AND LaPorta was continuing to round out his game. With Lachey having more experience and with the addition of Stilianos - the TE position might be a "better" position for us in '22.

The Hawks COULD do worse than 6-3 ... but they ALSO could do better than 6-3. In my estimation, by my choice of null hypothesis ... I clearly believe that deviations in EITHER direction are essentially equally likely.

With a 7-2 mark (or better) ... I think that the Hawks could win the West (again).
I'd say 7-2 makes a Indy trip highly likely I'd say us going 7-2 is quite unlikely though. If I felt the team improved throughout the year last season, then maybe. They didn't though.

You don't get spanked and only blame the OL. QB was, well, we all know. RB was mediocre and the got too many carries so they're still somewhat greens wr git worse and we lost needed depth. Has KJ even practiced this year? Any injury to our top 3 wr would be really bad.

The defense will be very nasty, but only for so long if the offense can't burn clock and keep them rested.

Your are right that we usually win one we shouldn't, but we usually lose one we shouldn't. So that doesn't count for much.

We certainly could finish above 5-4 but we could also go 4-5(although certainly less likely than 6-3) honestly. 5-4 is my guess.
 
5-4 would be below Kirk's .582 career conference winning ptg at Iowa.

Iowa went 7-2 last year.

Fans are ****ing blind or stupid, I'm not sure which.
Are announcers and "experts" blind and dumb as well? Allni heard last year and through Spring was how Iowa's O was horrible and needs to make big strides to compete this year as the schedule is much tougher. D is solid. ST are solid.

Maybe not drinking the Kool Aid allows folks to see through the haze.
 
There have been players before that have overcome the injury bug. Those same people won't admit they were wrong in dismissing them. Plumb is a senior and if you pay attention Iowa has a history of seniors becoming big contributors. I'm just sayn'.
Britt could be a surprise, he has talent, experience and size. The question is the same as it's always been. Will he be reliable? It's a bigger issue for him than past seasons because there is a lot of young talent who may be less injury prone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: millhawk
You may be right, of course but sticking with Joe. Primarily because I don't think KF is really all that committed to Spencer anymore. Edit: There's a third possibility, albeit unlikely. Spencer could come out on fire and we get a single good year out of him.
Petras certainly has the physical tools to do so and improved line play would give him a chance. Maybe a good sports psychologist could make the difference for him. Otherwise, someone else needs to step up and take the job. I don't think Padilla is that person.
 
Lots of new names on OL. Is that good or Iowa nreds to do something after last year
My thinking is the younger talent will start filling holes. DeJong and Plumb were terrible, utterly terrible last season. I've heard here and elsewhere that DeJong is making strides but Davidkov is now healthy and based at least on recruiting profile a 4* that's beginning his career at a level DeJong is trying to reach. I cannot imagine Plumb starting, he is just too slow. DeJong really did not show anything last year. If Britt goes down either Elsbury or Stephens is taking that spot and probably not giving it up-unless to each other.

Hopefully this is when the quality OL recruiting two seasons ago starts to pay off.
 
So who is the guaranteed win OSU mi wi or pu?
Uhhhmm…he was calling Iowa fans dumb or blind for predicting those losses. I flipped the script on him.

There are no guaranteed wins with this Iowa team. The offense is too atrocious (until proven otherwise) to think Iowa can waltz into any game and blow their opponent off the field, so I have no guarantees. With that said, I think Iowa will pull an upset or two and not lose to anyone they shouldn’t because of their defense and what I hope/expect will be more stable line play and powerful running backs to chew up yards and clock.

If Iowa can get average production out of the quarterback position this year, they will beat Wisconsin and Purdue. The Michigan game is the wild card. For me, I think this team’s ceiling is 11-1 and bottom 7-5. My money is on 10-2 IF Spencer Petras can be average.
 
While I agree that ichawk24's early reply was needlessly antagonistic - the premise that Iowa will likely still do (well) better than 5-4 is not wrong.

If you apply your football IQ to discern why Iowa was dominated in some of those games ... the most apt description is that we were "beat in the trenches." To ANYONE who is learning towards Iowa having a middling '22 campaign ... largely based on the precedent on what they saw last season AND based on Iowa's "harder schedule" ... I think those folks are forgetting that Iowa players are watching that tape too.

Do you-all know the pride that those young men have? Do you-all comprehend the sting that those young men feel for having gotten beaten in the trenches ... something that RARELY happens to Iowa squads? Those same young men have a year more of preparation under their belts ... and I venture to guess that they're more than a little motivated (by the need for redemption).

No doubt ... OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Purdue will all be fine teams ... hell, Minnesota may not be too bad either. However, to speculate that we'd lose to all but Minnesota seems closer to a worst-case scenario (barring having all the wheels fall off) - than a reasonable null hypothesis.

To me, the most reasonable null hypothesis would be a 6-3 conference record. Iowa is usually good for an upset (to me, that means beating either Michigan or Wisconsin) ... we'll likely lose to OSU (just as many suspect) ... and I'd venture to guess that we split our match-ups between Purdue and Minnesota. That doesn't mean that other teams won't be plenty challenging ... Illinois and Nebraska will probably BOTH be plenty plucky. Northwestern will be tough once they settle down to a new equilibrium on D ... however, I don't YET see that happening this year.

Why is 6-3 a reasonable null hypothesis?

The DL last year was, overall, quite green ... and our group of corners got decimated by injuries through the latter half of the season. All the same - would you disagree that our D still had plenty to be proud about?

As for the O ... it would be an understatement to say that we had issues. However, a lot of those issues seem linked to youth/inexperience at a number of positions ... especially OL and WR. Furthermore, we're a squad that is typically quite reliant on our TEs to help us create mismatches on O. Lachey was young last year AND LaPorta was continuing to round out his game. With Lachey having more experience and with the addition of Stilianos - the TE position might be a "better" position for us in '22.

The Hawks COULD do worse than 6-3 ... but they ALSO could do better than 6-3. In my estimation, by my choice of null hypothesis ... I clearly believe that deviations in EITHER direction are essentially equally likely.

With a 7-2 mark (or better) ... I think that the Hawks could win the West (again).
No offense, but the grammatically correct form of the term You-all is "y'all".
 
  • Like
Reactions: KatoHawk
If Iowa can get average production out of the quarterback position this year, they will beat Wisconsin and Purdue. The Michigan game is the wild card. For me, I think this team’s ceiling is 11-1 and bottom 7-5. My money is on 10-2 IF Spencer Petras can be average.

Bingo. Or we have a better QB than Spencer already on the roster.
 
Phil & LeVar are good for 7-8 wins.
The current offensive Offensive scheme: Not much.
Tough to win without an offense (in effect).
 
While I agree that ichawk24's early reply was needlessly antagonistic - the premise that Iowa will likely still do (well) better than 5-4 is not wrong.

If you apply your football IQ to discern why Iowa was dominated in some of those games ... the most apt description is that we were "beat in the trenches." To ANYONE who is learning towards Iowa having a middling '22 campaign ... largely based on the precedent on what they saw last season AND based on Iowa's "harder schedule" ... I think those folks are forgetting that Iowa players are watching that tape too.

Do you-all know the pride that those young men have? Do you-all comprehend the sting that those young men feel for having gotten beaten in the trenches ... something that RARELY happens to Iowa squads? Those same young men have a year more of preparation under their belts ... and I venture to guess that they're more than a little motivated (by the need for redemption).

No doubt ... OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Purdue will all be fine teams ... hell, Minnesota may not be too bad either. However, to speculate that we'd lose to all but Minnesota seems closer to a worst-case scenario (barring having all the wheels fall off) - than a reasonable null hypothesis.

To me, the most reasonable null hypothesis would be a 6-3 conference record. Iowa is usually good for an upset (to me, that means beating either Michigan or Wisconsin) ... we'll likely lose to OSU (just as many suspect) ... and I'd venture to guess that we split our match-ups between Purdue and Minnesota. That doesn't mean that other teams won't be plenty challenging ... Illinois and Nebraska will probably BOTH be plenty plucky. Northwestern will be tough once they settle down to a new equilibrium on D ... however, I don't YET see that happening this year.

Why is 6-3 a reasonable null hypothesis?

The DL last year was, overall, quite green ... and our group of corners got decimated by injuries through the latter half of the season. All the same - would you disagree that our D still had plenty to be proud about?

As for the O ... it would be an understatement to say that we had issues. However, a lot of those issues seem linked to youth/inexperience at a number of positions ... especially OL and WR. Furthermore, we're a squad that is typically quite reliant on our TEs to help us create mismatches on O. Lachey was young last year AND LaPorta was continuing to round out his game. With Lachey having more experience and with the addition of Stilianos - the TE position might be a "better" position for us in '22.

The Hawks COULD do worse than 6-3 ... but they ALSO could do better than 6-3. In my estimation, by my choice of null hypothesis ... I clearly believe that deviations in EITHER direction are essentially equally likely.

With a 7-2 mark (or better) ... I think that the Hawks could win the West (again).

So, instead of looking at past performance and a schedule that is tougher by any objective measure, we should look at pride?
 
Myslinski has a lot of ground to make up I believe it will be Jones at center.

Elsbury will be one of the guards, imo. Talented big guy that is ready.

We all tend to dismiss Britt, Dejong and Plumb. They all have some experience but need massive improvements. I've read reports that Dejong and Britt have taken big steps forward.

Phil & LeVar are good for 7-8 wins.
The current offensive Offensive scheme: Not much.
Tough to win without an offense (in effect).
How much credit do you give KF for the performance of the defense and special teams and how much blame do you give KF for the lack of an offens
 
There are a couple of teams that I'm not understanding the hype over. Iowa returning 17 starters should improve at most positions, Linderbaum is a killer obviously.

1.) Michigan: still has McNamara at the helm (hopefully he still is when they play Iowa). However, they are only returning 3 starts on defense. They will need to be an offensive team to win games this year.

2.) Wisconsin: wow, who knows what their QB play will actually be like, and they only return 8 starters from last years team.

Potentially under-rated:
1.) Purdue: Thank god both Bell and Klarafitis are gone, but they return a ton with the addition of grad transfers (let's not go into it)
 
  • Like
Reactions: LGEND24
ADVERTISEMENT