Congrats Iowa

**cyfanman** · 12-29-2010, 08:01 AM

Congrats to the Hawks. Overcoming all the bad pub and played a great game! Now go out and beat the fuskers next year.

**ca4cy** · 12-29-2010, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by cyfanman

Congrats to the Hawks. Overcoming all the bad pub and played a great game! Now go out and beat the fuskers next year.

You realize they brought all the bad pub on themselves, right?

**CloneIce** · 12-29-2010, 08:14 AM

NO such thing as overcoming bad publicity in football. All the bad pub in the world is irrelevant to the game of football. Iowa overcame missing a starting RB and WR, no more. Missouri also was missing their starting RB who missed all season for a major crime.

Fans, especially on message boards, continually overrate the effect that off-field problems and distractions have on the on field performance of a team. The only thing that actually affects the team is missing players for suspension.

**MC CrappinHawks** · 12-29-2010, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by cyfanman

Congrats to the Hawks. Overcoming all the bad pub and played a great game! Now go out and beat the fuskers next year.

Uh sure.........blah blah blah, who cares? They just beat one of our conference opponents if you didnt notice. It was a nice thought, but really who cares on this site? Not I. Thank you, I feel better now.

**jburke** · 12-29-2010, 08:16 AM

I still don't get the overturn on that Mizzouri first down....

**bos** · 12-29-2010, 08:18 AM

A hawk win erases all problems for them. What legal issues?

**mt85** · 12-29-2010, 08:20 AM

Originally Posted by jburke

I still don't get the overturn on that Mizzouri first down....

The replays didn't appear to provide conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field.

**snowcraig2.0** · 12-29-2010, 08:21 AM

Yep, so what that two of Iowa's starters are drug dealers, they won!

**CyinCo** · 12-29-2010, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by mt85

The replays didn't appear to provide conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field.

Are we talking about the 4th down catch near the end of the game? The call on the field was a catch. So apparently there was conclusive evidence to overturn the call.

**Wesley** · 12-29-2010, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by CyinCo

Are we talking about the 4th down catch near the end of the game? The call on the field was a catch. So apparently there was conclusive evidence to overturn the call.

Not what they showed on TV.

**cyson** · 12-29-2010, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley

Not what they showed on TV.

The 4th down ruling was quite the hose job. Irrefutable, hardly.

**mt85** · 12-29-2010, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by CyinCo

Are we talking about the 4th down catch near the end of the game? The call on the field was a catch. So apparently there was conclusive evidence to overturn the call.

I'm pretty sure the replay official factored in the fear that he and his family might be victims of drug violence if he didn't overturn the call.

**TruClone** · 12-29-2010, 08:29 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley

Not what they showed on TV.

I agree. The replay officials must of had a view of the play that tv did not have.

**temperflare** · 12-29-2010, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by CyinCo

Are we talking about the 4th down catch near the end of the game? The call on the field was a catch. So apparently there was conclusive evidence to overturn the call.

Don't worry, the refs made up for it by NOT calling the blatant holding as their DB rounded the corner on the INT return for a TD.

**Al_4_State** · 12-29-2010, 08:47 AM

That was a hose job call, but Mizzou kind of brought it on themselves. That pick 6 was the most bone-headed play I've seen in awhile. Apparently no one informed Gabbert that he can throw it out of bounds.