We should send a thank you letter to Paul Rhoads

[89and91]

I agree with LC. I remember a few years ago CPR tried an onside kick and it failed and the Hawks went on to score and then dominate the game from there. The odds were with him and isu got a good punt.

Just in case folks missed my poor reading this post was my initial response to LC,

 

[I4cy]

I know, it's futile, but I've refrained from pointing out his ineptitude for a while and just had to this morning.

Regarding the actual topic, I was very surprised that they didn't go for it. I get the argument and logic behind punting, it was the safest route and at the time it looked like Iowa couldn't get anything going on offense. That said, I probably would have been pissed if it was Iowa and Ferentz punted. It shouldn't be that hard for a QB to fall forward a foot or two to get the first.

just as i have posted when 89 comments ALL hawks lose, so glad he is one of yours

 

[Lone Clone]

Please quote where LC said that Iowa St. was dominating for the entire first half, or mentions the entire half anywhere in his original post where his point is made.

Don't waste your time. I finally put him on "ignore" because he wasn't even amusing anymore. The guy needs professional help.

At the point we're talking about, Iowa had had four possessions.
1 -- three plays, 7 yards, punt.
2 -- 10 plays, 51 yards, 48 yard field goal
3 -- three plays, minus 10 yards, punt
4 -- three plays, 9 yards, punt

 

[89and91]

Don't waste your time. I finally put him on "ignore" because he wasn't even amusing anymore. The guy needs professional help.

At the point we're talking about, Iowa had had four possessions.
1 -- three plays, 7 yards, punt.
2 -- 10 plays, 51 yards, 48 yard field goal
3 -- three plays, minus 10 yards, punt
4 -- three plays, 9 yards, punt

Yep and I agreed with LC that isu should have punted. But of course all clone fans ignore that part.

This is funny. Anyone who reads a thread from the top down now needs help.

 

[89and91]

just as i have posted when 89 comments ALL hawks lose, so glad he is one of yours

What, no links Linky Boy. Why not?

We want more. We want more. We want more.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

Yep and I agreed with LC that isu should have punted. But of course all clone fans ignore that part.

This is funny. Anyone who reads a thread from the top down now needs help.

Sorry 89, but I am going to have to side with the Clone fans and others bc it is obvious that you are having trouble comprehending what everybody is talking about. Long story short, the issue they are talking about is when ISU decided to punt at midfield and at that time ISU had been in control of the game, therefore not a horrible call to punt at that point.....

 

[89and91]

Sorry 89, but I am going to have to side with the Clone fans and others bc it is obvious that you are having trouble comprehending what everybody is talking about. Long story short, the issue they are talking about is when ISU decided to punt at midfield and at that time ISU had been in control of the game, therefore not a horrible call to punt at that point.....

Which is why on my response I agreed with LC. Just go to the top of the thread and read down. LC has the fourth post in the thread and my first post was the 5th in the thread. I later replied to a different poster that said isu dominated the first half.

But of course clone fans can't follow a thread from the top down. That is simply too complicated.

 

[anon_2zMXH429BhxV1Npk]

Which is why on my response I agreed with LC. Just go to the top of the thread and read down. LC has the fourth post in the thread and my first post was the 5th in the thread. I later replied to a different poster that said isu dominated the first half.

But of course clone fans can't follow a thread from the top down. That is simply too complicated.

An Iowa poster (with the name of ih8st8) called out LC for saying Iowa St. was dominating Iowa at that point, mockingly asking if he was watching the same game on 9/12/15.

You then quoted the Iowa poster (ih8st8) by saying Iowa St. had 1 more yard than Iowa at the half.

So we went from LC stating that at the time of the 4th and 1 Iowa St. was dominating Iowa on defense (which they pretty much were) to you shifting the goal posts back to saying it wasn't dominating because Iowa St. only had 1 more yard at half. So you essentially created an entire argument by yourself that no Iowa St. fan brought up.

 

[J_Heater]

Which is why on my response I agreed with LC. Just go to the top of the thread and read down. LC has the fourth post in the thread and my first post was the 5th in the thread. I later replied to a different poster that said isu dominated the first half.

But of course clone fans can't follow a thread from the top down. That is simply too complicated.

The word dominate and/or dominated appears in this thread 8 times (well 9 and 10 now thanks to me) not counting quotes. All of them were used by you.

I appreciate your enthusiasm for hating on Iowa St but I would let this one go partner.

 

[anon_2zMXH429BhxV1Npk]

Yea, I'm all for Iowa St. jokes and reminding them of our supremacy in football, but let's at least be correct when we do it.

 

[89and91]

An Iowa poster (with the name of ih8st8) called out LC for saying Iowa St. was dominating Iowa at that point, mockingly asking if he was watching the same game on 9/12/15.

You then quoted the Iowa poster (ih8st8) by saying Iowa St. had 1 more yard than Iowa at the half.

So we went from LC stating that at the time of the 4th and 1 Iowa St. was dominating Iowa on defense (which they pretty much were) to you shifting the goal posts back to saying it wasn't dominating because Iowa St. only had 1 more yard at half. So you essentially created an entire argument by yourself that no Iowa St. fan brought up.

Again I agreed with LC that isu should have punted and couldn't have been any clearer.

 

[the24fan]

Wow 89! Epic fail on actually grasping the point.
Absolutely the right call by PR. State had been solid defensively up to this point and had us seemingly backed inside our 10 yard line all day. Any HC worth a damn surely sees this as well.

 

[nick21ia]

Again I agreed with LC that isu should have punted and couldn't have been any clearer.

You still haven't grasped why you were wrong. When other hawk fans are calling you out, maybe it is time to reconsider. But, to the point of the thread I would of went for it. LC was right that our offense was doing nothing at that point. I saw more reward going for it then not. But, then again I am sitting at home on my butt watching and not coaching.

 

[89and91]

You still haven't grasped why you were wrong. When other hawk fans are calling you out, maybe it is time to reconsider. But, to the point of the thread I would of went for it. LC was right that our offense was doing nothing at that point. I saw more reward going for it then not. But, then again I am sitting at home on my butt watching and not coaching.

So now LC is wrong in agreeing with the punt?

 

[nick21ia]

So now LC is wrong in agreeing with the punt?

My personal opinion is he is wrong on agreeing with the punt. But, he is not wrong on his assessment of how the ISU defense was playing up to that point. Is this really that hard to understand????

 

[89and91]

My personal opinion is he is wrong on agreeing with the punt. But, he is not wrong on his assessment of how the ISU defense was playing up to that point. Is this really that hard to understand????

Not at all which is why I agreed with the punt in the first place.

 

[nick21ia]

Not at all which is why I agreed with the punt in the first place.

I am done on this subject. I think the punt was dumb, and would of gambled. The punt didn't happen, and we took control later on, end of story. Iowa beat ISU , and I am looking forward to Saturday night!