Red Flag

[ajk4st8]

Originally Posted by DJK15

Bryan Bulaga, Dan Doering and Rob Bruggeman will prove that wrong.

Haha

Good luck with that.

[MontyBurns]

Originally Posted by ajk4st8

Haha

Good luck with that.

C'mon they've all been all-conference players.

In high school, that is. Hahahahaha.

[arndog77]

personally the o-line worries me. all the sacks they gave up last year, not good. hopefully they get it fixed, but I'm afraid it's not an easy fix. Hopefully, I'm wrong

[SouthernHawk]

Originally Posted by ajk4st8

Haha

Good luck with that.

Returning players that have experience = bad because they were less than stellar in previous years, and it's stupid to expect them to improve.

New players = bad because they're new, and how could we expect anything out of them.


Ah, a life in the shoes of a Cyclone football fan....

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. I'm on fire today.

[ajk4st8]

Originally Posted by SouthernHawk

Returning players that have experience = bad because they were less than stellar in previous years, and it's stupid to expect them to improve.

New players = bad because they're new, and how could we expect anything out of them.


Ah, a life in the shoes of a Cyclone football fan....

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. I'm on fire today.

I just think its funny how fast Iowa fans forget how AWEFUL their team was last year. Not just bad, but aweful. Easily one of the worst Big 10 teams I have EVER watched. Probably the worst offense of a D1 team Ive ever seen (yes, coming from an ISU fan).

Yet, the same players have the potential to 'improve' enough over the offseason to make their team competitive.

Ahhh... they days where Iowa has started thinking how much less pathetic they will be vs. talking how good they will be. Sign of the times.

[SouthernHawk]

Originally Posted by ajk4st8

I just think its funny how fast Iowa fans forget how AWEFUL their team was last year. Not just bad, but aweful. Easily one of the worst Big 10 teams I have EVER watched. Probably the worst offense of a D1 team Ive ever seen (yes, coming from an ISU fan).

Yet, the same players have the potential to 'improve' enough over the offseason to make their team competitive.

Ahhh... they days where Iowa has started thinking how much less pathetic they will be vs. talking how good they will be. Sign of the times.

OK Mr. Apocolypse, I think that's a little overboard. Iowa finished 4-4 in the BT because they were one of the worst BT teams you've ever seen? You must not watch BT football very often - and in that case, you'd hardly have the knowledge to comment on how weak of a conference it is, or how weak Iowa's competition is.

Iowa was competitive in almost every game - including a road night game at UW, at PSU (until the final quarter), and agaist the all mighty Cyclones.

If the worst team you've ever witnessed is one that finishes .500, defeats a BCS bound team and nearly knocks off the #5 team in the nation, you must be used to watching some pretty good football.

I'm not saying Iowa was good, but "the worst you've ever witnessed"?

Huh.

[kingcy]

Originally Posted by SouthernHawk

OK Mr. Apocolypse, I think that's a little overboard. Iowa finished 4-4 in the BT because they were one of the worst BT teams you've ever seen? You must not watch BT football very often - and in that case, you'd hardly have the knowledge to comment on how weak of a conference it is, or how weak Iowa's competition is.

Iowa was competitive in almost every game - including a road night game at UW, at PSU (until the final quarter), and agaist the all mighty Cyclones.

If the worst team you've ever witnessed is one that finishes .500, defeats a BCS bound team and nearly knocks off the #5 team in the nation, you must be used to watching some pretty good football.

I'm not saying Iowa was good, but "the worst you've ever witnessed"?

Huh.

So close games count as something now?
When you have a 3 game losing streak to Northwestern and a 2 game losing streak to Indiana there are issues in the program. Looking at than Iowa maybe the only team ever to have those two streaks at the sametime.

[ajk4st8]

Being competitive in a game means nothing.

I guess I should have said more towards Iowa's offense was the worst I had ever seen. Their D had its moments.

Dont forget Iowa loses its only 2 offensive playmakers from last year.

[SouthernHawk]

Originally Posted by kingcy

So close games count as something now?
When you have a 3 game losing streak to Northwestern and a 2 game losing streak to Indiana there are issues in the program. Looking at than Iowa maybe the only team ever to have those two streaks at the sametime.

Iowa beat NU last year, so it was only a 2 game losing streak. Similar to ISU's against Baylor.

The losing streak against IU is embarrassing, and needs to be fixed.

Originally Posted by ajk4st8

Being competitive in a game means nothing.

I guess I should have said more towards Iowa's offense was the worst I had ever seen. Their D had its moments.

Dont forget Iowa loses its only 2 offensive playmakers from last year.

The offense was bad. No doubt about it.

But just for future reference, Iowa's offensive statistics were better than ISU's in every category. Just thought I'd point out the fact that the "worst offensive team you've ever witnessed" is actually only the "second offensive team you've ever witnessed."

[ajk4st8]

Yeah our offense was aweful last year.... especially against Texas and OU. But that was something we all knew was going to happen with a new coaching scheme.


The bottom line is that Iowa probably won't win a meaningful football game in a long time.

[SouthernHawk]

Originally Posted by ajk4st8

Yeah our offense was aweful last year.... especially against Texas and OU.

*Awful

And against UNI, and against Kent State, and against KU, and against Iowa.

[MontyBurns]

Originally Posted by SouthernHawk

OK Mr. Apocolypse, I think that's a little overboard. Iowa finished 4-4 in the BT because they were one of the worst BT teams you've ever seen?

Iowa finished 4-4 in the BT because they did not play Ohio State or Michigan. If not for a joke of a schedule, Iowa would have been 2-6 in the BT just like they were in 2006.

Originally Posted by SouthernHawk

But just for future reference, Iowa's offensive statistics were better than ISU's in every category. Just thought I'd point out the fact that the "worst offensive team you've ever witnessed" is actually only the "second offensive team you've ever witnessed."

Not even close to accurate. The stats aren't really comparable because ISU played teams like Texas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, while Iowa was playing Northwestern, Indiana, and MAC teams, but ISU's offense put up mostly better numbers than Iowa's anyway:

Pass offense: ISU 2439, Iowa 2281
Rush offense: Iowa 1515, ISU 1484
Total offense ISU 3923, Iowa 3796
First downs: ISU 230, Iowa 203
Sacks allowed: ISU 17, Iowa 47

Based on 12 games for both teams.

Do you care to explain how you determined that "Iowa's offensive statistics were better than ISU's in every category."? Is it another "Southernhawk guarantee"?

Like the man posted: Iowa had the worst offense in major college football.

[SouthernHawk]

Originally Posted by MontyBurns

Iowa finished 4-4 in the BT because they did not play Ohio State or Michigan. If not for a joke of a schedule, Iowa would have been 2-6 in the BT just like they were in 2006.




Not even close to accurate. The stats aren't really comparable because ISU played teams like Texas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, while Iowa was playing Northwestern, Indiana, and MAC teams, but ISU's offense put up mostly better numbers than Iowa's anyway:

Pass offense: ISU 2439, Iowa 2281
Rush offense: Iowa 1515, ISU 1484
Total offense ISU 3923, Iowa 3796
First downs: ISU 230, Iowa 203
Sacks allowed: ISU 17, Iowa 47

Based on 12 games for both teams.

Do you care to explain how you determined that "Iowa's offensive statistics were better than ISU's in every category."? Is it another "Southernhawk guarantee"?

Like the man posted: Iowa had the worst offense in major college football.

ISU had more yards, I'll give you that. However, Iowa's offense was more effective.

YPA - Iowa 6.07, ISU 5.77
TD/INT - Iowa 17/7, ISU 9/14
YPC - Iowa 3.5, ISU 3.1
YPR - Iowa 11.5, ISU 9.6
Iowa averaged 18.5 PPG, ISU averaged 18.1 PPG

Iowa also had far fewer turnovers than ISU.

You can try to make the argument that ISU played against great defensive opponents, but being stagnant against UNI, Kent State, Texas Tech, Missouri, and Iowa. But really, again, that's an idiotic argument. If your only argument is "yeah, well, it's easy, because ISU plays in the much harder Big 12, therefor their stats are more impressive" your only argument, then I don't know what to tell you. You obviously aren't a very knowledgable sports fan if that's your only argument. Because, basically, no matter what the statistics, no matter what the conference does, they'll always be poor in your opinion, and that will forever be your invalid argument.

So really, an argument can be made either way for the worst offensive team, but given the fact that Iowa turned the ball over less than ISU and scored more points per game than ISU, I think it's a valid argument that ISU's offense was no better than Iowa's.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by SouthernHawk

ISU had more yards, I'll give you that. However, Iowa's offense was more effective.

YPA - Iowa 6.07, ISU 5.77
TD/INT - Iowa 17/7, ISU 9/14
YPC - Iowa 3.5, ISU 3.1
YPR - Iowa 11.5, ISU 9.6
Iowa averaged 18.5 PPG, ISU averaged 18.1 PPG

Iowa also had far fewer turnovers than ISU.

You can try to make the argument that ISU played against great defensive opponents, but being stagnant against UNI, Kent State, Texas Tech, Missouri, and Iowa. But really, again, that's an idiotic argument. If your only argument is "yeah, well, it's easy, because ISU plays in the much harder Big 12, therefor their stats are more impressive" your only argument, then I don't know what to tell you. You obviously aren't a very knowledgable sports fan if that's your only argument. Because, basically, no matter what the statistics, no matter what the conference does, they'll always be poor in your opinion, and that will forever be your invalid argument.

So really, an argument can be made either way for the worst offensive team, but given the fact that Iowa turned the ball over less than ISU and scored more points per game than ISU, I think it's a valid argument that ISU's offense was no better than Iowa's.

One look at an objective strength of schedule puts an end to your spin. Sagarin had Iowa's SOS as the 75th ranked in the nation. One would have a hard time finding many if any BCS conference teams with a worse rating. ISU's schedule was ranked #20 in terms of difficulty. Most "knowlegable sports fans" understand the impact of SOS for what it is without trying to make excuses for Iowa's poor offensive performance.

College Football Ratings Page

[SouthernHawk]

Originally Posted by Steve

One look at an objective strength of schedule puts an end to your spin. Sagarin had Iowa's SOS as the 75th ranked in the nation. One would have a hard time finding many if any BCS conference teams with a worse rating. ISU's schedule was ranked #20 in terms of difficulty. Most "knowlegable sports fans" understand the impact of SOS for what it is without trying to make excuses for Iowa's poor offensive performance.

College Football Ratings Page

Still, this is irrelevant. And here is why.

Just because ISU faced a more difficult schedule does not mean they faced better defenses. Missouri, Texas Tech, Northern Iowa, Kent State, Kansas State, and Colorado were not known for their defenses.

Iowa, while playing weaker opponents (I'll grant you that) played better defensive teams. I'd take the Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Penn State, and even Purdue defenses over those listed above.

The difference in the opponents would be offensive production, which can be shown by Iowa's 18.1 PPG allowed in comparison to ISU's 31 PPG.

Basically, you can't go on rankings alone to judge why an offense was so bad. Iowa had a pretty darn good defense last year, but the offense was so putrid that they were an overall mediocre football team.

And finally, this is just depressing me - arguing over who's offense was less awful.