Reasons for cautious optimism?

[eyesofhawk]

I know, and I understand, where your argument is coming from..............you play to WIN THE GAME.

But here is the rub, college football is entertainment. Now would I be happy if Iowa plays for the National Championship and every game is 7-3, 10-9, etc.? Yeah, I would be. But they aren't winning to that level.

Fans who are invested in a team (both emotionally and financially) want to be entertained. The want to jump off of their Couch screaming on 50- yard TD passes........they want to find fellow Hawk fans close to them at away games for high 5's when the Hawks pick up a big 3rd and 10 in a late game situation. A pick 6 or a punt return TD that doesn't get called back (F-U Big 10) definitely evoke the same feelings.......but those are very infrequent, even for the Hawks. 10-12 splash plays on offense during a game make it more FUN.

Not sure how you can argue that. I love a 10-2 season, that's a great record. But I also have no problem admitting last year was not very much fun. Maybe that makes me a bad fan.

To me, winning is what's entertaining.

Competition itself is entertaining.

As an Iowa fan, the Hawkeyes are entertaining, period. In 39 years of closely following the Hawks, I've never not been entertained by one of their sporting events.

But I do get that there are various levels of entertainment. Some games/seasons are more fun than others (even though, to me, they are all fun). I can understand this because, to me, Iowa football last season was more entertaining than any I can remember in a while.

I would much rather watch a hard-hitting, physical, low-scoring game than a shootout.

But if Iowa were to have gone 10-4 last season by winning games 42-38, I wouldn't have any problem with it. Even if I did, why should anyone give a crap about my entertainment tastes?

Football teams are judged by their record. For fans to judge them by any other criteria is ridiculous. I get it, fans at times might want more offense. But all that is secondary, at best. Overall, Iowa fans should be happy about their football program because it's successful. (I would say that fans should be supportive of their team even if they aren't successful, but that's another story). But this isn't necessarily the case. There are so many fans that are voicing an overall dissatisfaction with Iowa football. And that's where my problem lies.

As for the argument that Iowa has to be more "entertaining" to not get left out of the playoff in situations when they are on the bubble, I don't necessarily buy it. Having the defense of Iowa go against a strong offensive team can present an entertaining, clash of styles storyline, if that's the type of thing they're looking for. If not, and they're looking strictly for "fun" offensive teams, so be it. Iowa has to be who they are. Shifting any amount of focus to become more "fun" offensively, will end up in Iowa not being good enough to put themselves in positioning for playoffs anyway.

Offense is not as important as winning. There has to come a point for fans where the lack of offense just isn't that big of a deal. Fans should be satisfied overall. Do you know how many football programs and fan bases would kill to have the success of Iowa football? At some point, you just have to stop the complaining. Iowa will not be changing its approach on account of you

 

[Fan In Black]

Is Lester going to call the games from the booth or sideline?

he said booth in an interview IIRC

 

[Greenway4Prez]

I’m optimistic because a coordinator change can have a huge impact on a team.

We saw examples in week 0. Tyler Santucci took an abysmal GT defense and they were the more physical, better-tackling defense on Saturday, and FSU was expected to have a really strong defense this year. Nevada and New Mexico, expected to be abysmal, showed a ton of life with new coaching staffs and mostly new starting 22’s.

I see all the concerns about the WR room, and I get it. But, how do we even know what we have? That position has been criminally misused for years. Charlie Jones transfers to Purdue and becomes an All-American. Arland Bruce shows promise and then his play nosedives in year 2. Bostick hits the portal and, contrary to the “MAC-level talent” tripe, ends up at Texas A&M on a roster that is loaded with talent. Someone on that staff clearly saw something, and I wish he would’ve stayed in IC. I think there are guys on the roster with the requisite athleticism that they can be molded into productive WR’s in the offense.

So if anyone has a 2021 or 2022 copy of Phil Steele’s magazine laying around, check out the roster that Lance Leipold inherited. And turned into a top 20 offense in two years. I’m not saying Lester is on that level, but it is absolutely possible to get this roster to a much better place.

 

[2D_]

To me, winning is what's entertaining.

Competition itself is entertaining.

As an Iowa fan, the Hawkeyes are entertaining, period. In 39 years of closely following the Hawks, I've never not been entertained by one of their sporting events.

But I do get that there are various levels of entertainment. Some games/seasons are more fun than others (even though, to me, they are all fun). I can understand this because, to me, Iowa football last season was more entertaining than any I can remember in a while.

I would much rather watch a hard-hitting, physical, low-scoring game than a shootout.

But if Iowa were to have gone 10-4 last season by winning games 42-38, I wouldn't have any problem with it. Even if I did, why should anyone give a crap about my entertainment tastes?

Football teams are judged by their record. For fans to judge them by any other criteria is ridiculous. I get it, fans at times might want more offense. But all that is secondary, at best. Overall, Iowa fans should be happy about their football program because it's successful. (I would say that fans should be supportive of their team even if they aren't successful, but that's another story). But this isn't necessarily the case. There are so many fans that are voicing an overall dissatisfaction with Iowa football. And that's where my problem lies.

As for the argument that Iowa has to be more "entertaining" to not get left out of the playoff in situations when they are on the bubble, I don't necessarily buy it. Having the defense of Iowa go against a strong offensive team can present an entertaining, clash of styles storyline, if that's the type of thing they're looking for. If not, and they're looking strictly for "fun" offensive teams, so be it. Iowa has to be who they are. Shifting any amount of focus to become more "fun" offensively, will end up in Iowa not being good enough to put themselves in positioning for playoffs anyway.

Offense is not as important as winning. There has to come a point for fans where the lack of offense just isn't that big of a deal. Fans should be satisfied overall. Do you know how many football programs and fan bases would kill to have the success of Iowa football? At some point, you just have to stop the complaining. Iowa will not be changing its approach on account of you

When the offense is a direct correlation to not winning, then offense is indeed the problem. We lost the last two games of the year without scoring a point. Yes, offense is the problem.

 

[AEG82]

I assume most people have you on ignore.

The arbiter of truth that one.

 

[BirdistheWord]

I’m asking.

I thought last season Iowa would take it up another level, and yet the offense was complete trash once again.

I am excited for the new season but don’t want to feel the same let down. Yes, Brian is gone, but what other reasons are there for cautious optimism?

TIA

1. No Deacon
2. A lot of experience at OL/RB/TE
3. No Brian

 

[herkyhawk00]

We have a new starter at RB that has beaten out two previous starters that were pretty good. That to me is pretty crazy and is intriguing.

 

[jonesy5960]

I’m optimistic because a coordinator change can have a huge impact on a team.

We saw examples in week 0. Tyler Santucci took an abysmal GT defense and they were the more physical, better-tackling defense on Saturday, and FSU was expected to have a really strong defense this year. Nevada and New Mexico, expected to be abysmal, showed a ton of life with new coaching staffs and mostly new starting 22’s.

I see all the concerns about the WR room, and I get it. But, how do we even know what we have? That position has been criminally misused for years. Charlie Jones transfers to Purdue and becomes an All-American. Arland Bruce shows promise and then his play nosedives in year 2. Bostick hits the portal and, contrary to the “MAC-level talent” tripe, ends up at Texas A&M on a roster that is loaded with talent. Someone on that staff clearly saw something, and I wish he would’ve stayed in IC. I think there are guys on the roster with the requisite athleticism that they can be molded into productive WR’s in the offense.

So if anyone has a 2021 or 2022 copy of Phil Steele’s magazine laying around, check out the roster that Lance Leipold inherited. And turned into a top 20 offense in two years. I’m not saying Lester is on that level, but it is absolutely possible to get this roster to a much better place.

I think one difference between Leipold and Lester is that Leipold didn't work for a head coach that has struggled to build an offense. Whatever philosophy and schemes he brought in weren't tempered or hindered by anybody else trying to exert influence. That's going to allow for a much more rapid change than might otherwise be possible.

 

[eyesofhawk]

When the offense is a direct correlation to not winning, then offense is indeed the problem. We lost the last two games of the year without scoring a point. Yes, offense is the problem.

Your post has pretty much nothing to do with mine.

But I'll bite.

Firstly, and in relation to my post, Iowa just won 10 games for the 11th time in program history. Is really anything a problem that's worth all the complaining?

Secondly, Iowa played most of last season with an emergency QB that was never in the plans to have played. He happened to be the worst QB I've seen take major snaps for Iowa in my 39 years of closely following the Hawks.

Given this, do complaints about last year not seem pretty silly? To have won 10 games under those conditions should be drawing immense praise from the fanbase. There are so many elements of the program that are soundly in place, if not elite, that fans should be absolutely gushing about Iowa football.

Simply, you guys need to get over your boner for offense

 

[jhawkinaz]

To me, winning is what's entertaining.

Competition itself is entertaining.

As an Iowa fan, the Hawkeyes are entertaining, period. In 39 years of closely following the Hawks, I've never not been entertained by one of their sporting events.

But I do get that there are various levels of entertainment. Some games/seasons are more fun than others (even though, to me, they are all fun). I can understand this because, to me, Iowa football last season was more entertaining than any I can remember in a while.

I would much rather watch a hard-hitting, physical, low-scoring game than a shootout.

But if Iowa were to have gone 10-4 last season by winning games 42-38, I wouldn't have any problem with it. Even if I did, why should anyone give a crap about my entertainment tastes?

Football teams are judged by their record. For fans to judge them by any other criteria is ridiculous. I get it, fans at times might want more offense. But all that is secondary, at best. Overall, Iowa fans should be happy about their football program because it's successful. (I would say that fans should be supportive of their team even if they aren't successful, but that's another story). But this isn't necessarily the case. There are so many fans that are voicing an overall dissatisfaction with Iowa football. And that's where my problem lies.

As for the argument that Iowa has to be more "entertaining" to not get left out of the playoff in situations when they are on the bubble, I don't necessarily buy it. Having the defense of Iowa go against a strong offensive team can present an entertaining, clash of styles storyline, if that's the type of thing they're looking for. If not, and they're looking strictly for "fun" offensive teams, so be it. Iowa has to be who they are. Shifting any amount of focus to become more "fun" offensively, will end up in Iowa not being good enough to put themselves in positioning for playoffs anyway.

Offense is not as important as winning. There has to come a point for fans where the lack of offense just isn't that big of a deal. Fans should be satisfied overall. Do you know how many football programs and fan bases would kill to have the success of Iowa football? At some point, you just have to stop the complaining. Iowa will not be changing its approach on account of you

Well, Iowa had three "entertaining, clash of styles storyline" games against good offensive teams last year...........the only problem is that those 3 teams also played some D, and the result was like 95-0 or something like that. If you want to hang your hat on 10 "hard-hitting, physical, low scoring" wins against average teams, and just accept the 3 absolute beat downs by good teams....... (yes I am excluding the Minny game because that was a win and F U Big 10)....... because Iowa can't move the football not even a bit, then that's great for you, but I don't like it.

And creating a competent environment on the offensive side of the ball isn't shifting focus, that's a dumb thing to say. I know they won't be the 1999 St. Louis Rams.......but come on, shifting focus from a disaster to a functional offense takes away what? Bull$h!t.

I am a life-long fan, have been since 1982. The Hawks have given me a lot of awesome memories as a fan, and I am grateful for that. I don't complain on here much either. I watch and support every chance I get.

You can write 5 more novels on here projecting your level of acceptance and gratitude on everyone else......and telling us all that "there has to come a point where the lack of offense is no big deal". OK, that point for me will be when they are losing to PSU 13-10, or beating Tennessee 7-6.......not losing those games by a combined 66-0.

And, BTW, they ARE changing their approach because of me. Do you really think that there would have been changes if all of the thousands and thousands of me's out there were just telling them "awww shucks......I know we have been an embarrassment the last 4 years on offense, and it's getting us our ass kicked in big games, but we won more than we lost so I am happy as hell....go Hawks!!!"

Bull$h!t, nothing would have changed.

 

[BirdistheWord]

If our offense can muster first downs, our defense will be well rested. Just think if the defense has an additional 9-12 plays off as the O is churning out more first downs. A fresh, rested defense will be even more dominant. How many 3 and outs did Iowa have last year?

Not to mention field position. The O made it even tougher on our D that gets overlooked. Tory helped for sure but he could only do so much kicking out of his own end zone.

 

[2D_]

Your post has pretty much nothing to do with mine.

But I'll bite.

Firstly, and in relation to my post, Iowa just won 10 games for the 11th time in program history. Is really anything a problem that's worth all the complaining?

Secondly, Iowa played most of last season with an emergency QB that was never in the plans to have played. He happened to be the worst QB I've seen take major snaps for Iowa in my 39 years of closely following the Hawks.

Given this, do complaints about last year not seem pretty silly? To have won 10 games under those conditions should be drawing immense praise from the fanbase. There are so many elements of the program that are soundly in place, if not elite, that fans should be absolutely gushing about Iowa football.

Simply, you guys need to get over your boner for offense

Nothing you said countered my point.

 

[JerseyCityHawki]

crickets

 

[93hawkeye]

my reasons for optimism: we don't play MIchigan or PSU or Tennessee

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

Things literally can’t get any worse

As far as the offense goes...true statement.

If the offense upgrades to mediocre we're in business. That's not an unreasonable expectation.

 

[F5n5]

Your post has pretty much nothing to do with mine.

But I'll bite.

Firstly, and in relation to my post, Iowa just won 10 games for the 11th time in program history. Is really anything a problem that's worth all the complaining?

Secondly, Iowa played most of last season with an emergency QB that was never in the plans to have played. He happened to be the worst QB I've seen take major snaps for Iowa in my 39 years of closely following the Hawks.

Given this, do complaints about last year not seem pretty silly? To have won 10 games under those conditions should be drawing immense praise from the fanbase. There are so many elements of the program that are soundly in place, if not elite, that fans should be absolutely gushing about Iowa football.

Simply, you guys need to get over your boner for offense

I think most people here are p*ssed off about last season because they think Iowa should have lost more games.
Kirk Ferentz should have easily been the National Coach of the Year... but he didn't get... so.. these folks here can be happy about that.

its interesting to me... Iowa played for a Championship last season... that's what its all about..
we had a great season.

who knows... we might have another good season this year

 

[Hawkbaby]

I would say the last two seasons have proven that.

Worst offense in the country has equaled an average of 9 wins. Conclusion: the poor offense hasn't had much to do with winning and losing.

Certainly the bad offense hasn't been as big a deal as fans have made it. Negativity everywhere. Wins everywhere. What doesn't add up?

Turn the lights up! It’s a little dim in here. They played 3 good teams last year and were out scores 93-0. Yeah, offense had nothing to do with it.

 

[Greenway4Prez]

I think one difference between Leipold and Lester is that Leipold didn't work for a head coach that has struggled to build an offense. Whatever philosophy and schemes he brought in weren't tempered or hindered by anybody else trying to exert influence. That's going to allow for a much more rapid change than might otherwise be possible.

Very true. And while they were in a major conference with some pretty good defensive teams, Kansas wasn’t playing the Big Ten.

I am in the minority though, in that I don’t think Kirk micromanages his coordinators.

 

[hawkjt]

The BIG has yet to release tiebreaker to determine who plays in Indy.
Looking at schedules I could easily see 2 or more teams tied for that 2nd slot.
Oregon, PSU, Mich and Iowa could vie for that slot behind OSU(unless Oregon orpsu or Mich or Iowa upset OSU).
I suspect the big will have the highest ranked team among the tied for 2nd teams to go to Indy.
Hawks lose to OSU a nd we probably do not go to Indy even at 11-1.
Good news is no 2nd loss to OSU which might knock us out of playoff contention. If Iowa goes 11-1 I presume they could not keep us out with that lone loss to #1 OSU.
C'mon BIG announce the tie-break rules!

Ok, just saw the BIG released their tie-break rules yesterday.
Not sure Iowa can emerge as the choice from a tie with those top teams under these rules.

 

[Bruceman44]

You’re aware it’s 12 teams now?

…I can see a path.

yes, I'm aware. The scenario is 2 ugly losses against the only ranked team they play, including in the championship game. I believe a 2-loss Oregon, Michigan and Penn State would leapfrog Iowa, depending how many Big Ten teams make the 12-team field if that happens.

 

[Birky]

yes, I'm aware. The scenario is 2 ugly losses against the only ranked team they play, including in the championship game. I believe a 2-loss Oregon, Michigan and Penn State would leapfrog Iowa, depending how many Big Ten teams make the 12-team field if that happens.

The B1G will likely get 3-4 teams in every year.

I can imagine a way in which they don’t get in, but you “don’t see a path.” It’s quite easy to see a path. You are suggesting there is no way Iowa could possibly be #12 in that scenario? It’s seems plausible.

Another thing people(you) should probably consider, since the preseason top 25 is not guaranteed to be the same top 25 December 1st. Iowa plays four teams currently ranked between 26-36. There is a better than 50% chance some of those teams end up being pretty good.

 

[jonesy5960]

.

Very true. And while they were in a major conference with some pretty good defensive teams, Kansas wasn’t playing the Big Ten.

I am in the minority though, in that I don’t think Kirk micromanages his coordinators.

I view football teams much like a business and Kirk is the CEO of that business. Kirk has 2 units that are continually operating at a high level. CEO's are supposed allocate the lions share of attention towards improving those areas that aren't performing at a high level. There is little doubt that Kirk like any good CEO has allocated most of his attention over the last several years towards fixing the offense. Call it micromanagement if you want. To not have done so would have been HC malpractice. He's even serving a suspension for being over-eager in trying to improve it and he's still looking for answers there. Hopefully Lester provides some but you can bet that Kirk is still way more involved with Lester's offense than Phil's defense, as he should be.

He definitely doesn't micromanage Phil because Phil has shown himself to be a top coach in all of CFB and the defense is already clicking on all cylinders. The trust is already there.

 

[jonesy5960]

The BIG has yet to release tiebreaker to determine who plays in Indy.
Looking at schedules I could easily see 2 or more teams tied for that 2nd slot.
Oregon, PSU, Mich and Iowa could vie for that slot behind OSU(unless Oregon orpsu or Mich or Iowa upset OSU).
I suspect the big will have the highest ranked team among the tied for 2nd teams to go to Indy.
Hawks lose to OSU a nd we probably do not go to Indy even at 11-1.
Good news is no 2nd loss to OSU which might knock us out of playoff contention. If Iowa goes 11-1 I presume they could not keep us out with that lone loss to #1 OSU.
C'mon BIG announce the tie-break rules!

Ok, just saw the BIG released their tie-break rules yesterday.
Not sure Iowa can emerge as the choice from a tie with those top teams under these rules.

There's looking good 11-1 and looking like a 2 legged stool 11-1. If Iowa’s offense looks similar to the Iowa offense of the last several years, people will be looking for reasons not to include Iowa in the CFP.

 

[eyesofhawk]

Well, Iowa had three "entertaining, clash of styles storyline" games against good offensive teams last year...........the only problem is that those 3 teams also played some D, and the result was like 95-0 or something like that. If you want to hang your hat on 10 "hard-hitting, physical, low scoring" wins against average teams, and just accept the 3 absolute beat downs by good teams....... (yes I am excluding the Minny game because that was a win and F U Big 10)....... because Iowa can't move the football not even a bit, then that's great for you, but I don't like it.

And creating a competent environment on the offensive side of the ball isn't shifting focus, that's a dumb thing to say. I know they won't be the 1999 St. Louis Rams.......but come on, shifting focus from a disaster to a functional offense takes away what? Bull$h!t.

I am a life-long fan, have been since 1982. The Hawks have given me a lot of awesome memories as a fan, and I am grateful for that. I don't complain on here much either. I watch and support every chance I get.

You can write 5 more novels on here projecting your level of acceptance and gratitude on everyone else......and telling us all that "there has to come a point where the lack of offense is no big deal". OK, that point for me will be when they are losing to PSU 13-10, or beating Tennessee 7-6.......not losing those games by a combined 66-0.

And, BTW, they ARE changing their approach because of me. Do you really think that there would have been changes if all of the thousands and thousands of me's out there were just telling them "awww shucks......I know we have been an embarrassment the last 4 years on offense, and it's getting us our ass kicked in big games, but we won more than we lost so I am happy as hell....go Hawks!!!"

Bull$h!t, nothing would have changed.

What I'm hanging my hat on is the fact that extensive complaining about a program that just had one of its most successful seasons ever is not warranted. This is pretty simple.

No, the Minnesota game was not a win.

I have no problem with the offense returning to competence. My point is that Iowa can't afford to be concerned with being "fun" on offense. The focus must remain on playing in a way that gives them the best chance to win. If they can do that, and some fun plays are a result of returning the offense to competence, then it sounds like everyone will be happy.

If you're going to quote someone, you should do it with accuracy. I didn't say "the lack of offense is no big deal". I said it "just isn't that big of a deal". "That big", meaning as big of a deal as fans have made it. Meaning it's not as important as winning. And fans shouldn't, overall, be dissatisfied with Iowa football.

Did you honestly say if Iowa lost to PSU by less, the lack of offense wouldn't be a big deal? WOW! Just wow. Right there, you just admitted that offense is more important to you than winning. And for that, I truly feel sorry for you.

And BTW, if Brian was as bad as everyone claimed, then clearly every AD in the country would have let him go. The fans had absolutely zero to do with it. All you've done is provided another example of how fans need to get over themselves

 

[eyesofhawk]

Nothing you said countered my point.

Read better

 

[HawksRule73]

Esp with KF out, I can easily see his marching orders to be "run the ball all game and get out."

I wondered that myself and I think that would normally be true. But given the fact that Cade has only played in 4 full games in two years, I think it's important to get him in the gameplan immediately and get him some confidence going into Week 2 against ISU. So I think there will be more passes than what many of us think for a normal Week 1 because of that. Nothing crazy, but I'm gonna guess there'll be a lot of short, easily completable pass plays called (slants, swings to the RB, boots to the TE, etc) to get him some game action and build his confidence.

 

[ClarindaA's]

I would say the last two seasons have proven that.

Worst offense in the country has equaled an average of 9 wins. Conclusion: the poor offense hasn't had much to do with winning and losing.

Certainly the bad offense hasn't been as big a deal as fans have made it. Negativity everywhere. Wins everywhere. What doesn't add up?

You dumb? If the offense was top 50 we were a playoff team three straight years

 

[jhawkinaz]

What I'm hanging my hat on is the fact that extensive complaining about a program that just had one of its most successful seasons ever is not warranted. This is pretty simple.

No, the Minnesota game was not a win.

I have no problem with the offense returning to competence. My point is that Iowa can't afford to be concerned with being "fun" on offense. The focus must remain on playing in a way that gives them the best chance to win. If they can do that, and some fun plays are a result of returning the offense to competence, then it sounds like everyone will be happy.

If you're going to quote someone, you should do it with accuracy. I didn't say "the lack of offense is no big deal". I said it "just isn't that big of a deal". "That big", meaning as big of a deal as fans have made it. Meaning it's not as important as winning. And fans shouldn't, overall, be dissatisfied with Iowa football.

Did you honestly say if Iowa lost to PSU by less, the lack of offense wouldn't be a big deal? WOW! Just wow. Right there, you just admitted that offense is more important to you than winning. And for that, I truly feel sorry for you.

And BTW, if Brian was as bad as everyone claimed, then clearly every AD in the country would have let him go. The fans had absolutely zero to do with it. All you've done is provided another example of how fans need to get over themselves

Uncle. You just go ahead and die on this hill. I think you sound ridiculous trying to call me out with semantics and defending a very weak position, but whatever. If Brian was so bad 2 years ago.....which he was.....then why wasn't he let go then? Because Kirk didn't want him let go that's why. Only when the uproar became too loud was his hand finally forced. If you think that isn't true......then you are truly naive or just ain't paying attention.

My point, which you missed completely, was that the lack of offense wouldn't be a big deal if the defense was holding teams like PSU to 13 points. I could have said if we beat PSU 13-10 instead of lose 13-10.....I simply included one loss and one win in my example with the understanding that we will not win them all. To be a complete team you need to be able to win in different ways. Write me a diatribe on how you disagree with that.

 

[eyesofhawk]

I

Turn the lights up! It’s a little dim in here. They played 3 good teams last year and were out scores 93-0. Yeah, offense had nothing to do with it.

It was 92-0.

And it's irrelevant to the point that was made.

An average of 9 wins over two seasons, in many ways, is considered a successful two year span.

The lack of offense has not prevented that success.

Somehow, I'm guessing you already understood this

 

[swihawk]

There's looking good 11-1 and looking like a 2 legged stool 11-1. If Iowa’s offense looks similar to the Iowa offense of the last several years, people will be looking for reasons not to include Iowa in the CFP.

11-1 is a wonderful season. Playoff or not. Might even get lucky in a bowl and 12-1.

 

[jonesy5960]

11-1 is a wonderful season. Playoff or not. Might even get lucky in a bowl and 12-1.

I'm not disagreeing with this. 11-1 is an excellent season. Still doesn't change the calculus that goes into CFP selections. Iowa will face significant headwinds reaching the field without a significant offensive improvement, even at 11-1, which they likely won't be without that anyway. They definitely won't compete with OSU or win a bowl game against a quality opponent without it. 93-0

 

[swihawk]

I'm not disagreeing with this. 11-1 is an excellent season. Still doesn't change the calculus that goes into CFP selections. Iowa will face significant headwinds reaching the field without a significant offensive improvement, even at 11-1, which they likely won't be without that anyway. They definitely won't compete with OSU or win a bowl game against a quality opponent without it. 93-0

Since we were dead last in lots of offensive stats last season, I expect to see improvement this season. For teams NOT named Ohio State, I expect scoring on our defense will be minimal.

 

[BonzoFury]

I think most people here are p*ssed off about last season because they think Iowa should have lost more games.
Kirk Ferentz should have easily been the National Coach of the Year... but he didn't get... so.. these folks here can be happy about that.

its interesting to me... Iowa played for a Championship last season... that's what its all about..
we had a great season.

who knows... we might have another good season this year

A guy is not gonna get national coach of the year with an offense that is the worst in football. The guy that deserved the award got it… Phil.

That said I’m optimistic about Lester. I think a huge factor is his temperament. Seems like the kind of guy who could win Kirk‘s confidence and get some latitude to do what he wants. Let’s just hope he has enough talent to work with, and the O line is improved.

 

[MeetTheFerentzes]

I

It was 92-0.

And it's irrelevant to the point that was made.

An average of 9 wins over two seasons, in many ways, is considered a successful two year span.

The lack of offense has not prevented that success.

Somehow, I'm guessing you already understood this

JFC. Why can't you concede that, despite Iowa's relative success, their horrible offense has precluded them from reaching the next level, when they have had the defense and special teams worthy of it? By next level I mean beating high-quality teams and truly competing for conference championships and playing in major bowl games, and not being embarrassed in games against good teams. No one is complaining about Iowa's wins. What is so damn frustrating is what's been a completely wasted opportunity of a narrow window that Iowa had to make noise on the national stage, largely due to KF knowing he could count on fans like you to be content with beating a bunch of average teams, while he could let his boy play coach.

 

[Birky]

JFC. Why can't you concede that, despite Iowa's relative success, their horrible offense has precluded them from reaching the next level, when they have had the defense and special teams worthy of it? By next level I mean beating high-quality teams and truly competing for conference championships and playing in major bowl games, and not being embarrassed in games against good teams. No one is complaining about Iowa's wins. What is so damn frustrating is what's been a completely wasted opportunity of a narrow window that Iowa had to make noise on the national stage, largely due to KF knowing he could count on fans like you to be content with beating a bunch of average teams, while he could let his boy play coach.

Because he’s a narcissist, and can’t lose.

 

[jonesy5960]

Since we were dead last in lots of offensive stats last season, I expect to see improvement this season. For teams NOT named Ohio State, I expect scoring on our defense will be minimal.

I agree. Improvement from historically bad is almost guaranteed. Being an average or even very below average offense is not. If they are, then watch out because the defense will be top 5 in the country IMO and a 7 point disadvantage won't look insurmountable like it has the last several years.

 

[jonesy5960]

JFC. Why can't you concede that, despite Iowa's relative success, their horrible offense has precluded them from reaching the next level, when they have had the defense and special teams worthy of it? By next level I mean beating high-quality teams and truly competing for conference championships and playing in major bowl games, and not being embarrassed in games against good teams. No one is complaining about Iowa's wins. What is so damn frustrating is what's been a completely wasted opportunity of a narrow window that Iowa had to make noise on the national stage, largely due to KF knowing he could count on fans like you to be content with beating a bunch of average teams, while he could let his boy play coach.

You do realize you're talking to a wall. Right?

 

[Iron Doc]

JFC. Why can't you concede that, despite Iowa's relative success, their horrible offense has precluded them from reaching the next level, when they have had the defense and special teams worthy of it? By next level I mean beating high-quality teams and truly competing for conference championships and playing in major bowl games, and not being embarrassed in games against good teams. No one is complaining about Iowa's wins. What is so damn frustrating is what's been a completely wasted opportunity of a narrow window that Iowa had to make noise on the national stage, largely due to KF knowing he could count on fans like you to be content with beating a bunch of average teams, while he could let his boy play coach.

THIS accurately sums up the reality of the situation.
Beginning to wonder if ol' eyesofthehawk is The Capt's burner account.

 

[2D_]

Read better

Argue my points better. You still won't address the fact the offense correlated to losses and less games in the year, which means less entertainment.

 

[TXHCHawk]

he said booth in an interview IIRC

TY