Stopping the run key to Huskers' title run

[bigg10]

You really don't understand the difference between a program with long-term success compared to a program who, once in a while, has a good recruiting class or two and turns out a couple of good teams? You're basically talking about one recruiting cycle. Let's see what happens now that you've lost a three-year starter at QB.

 

Further, you're breaking this down to the last three seasons to prove a point - a more arbitrary number couldn't be imaginable. Why not take the last 12 seasons? Or the last 7? Or the last 16? Why not just talk about last season alone, where Iowa was the last of all three schools?

 

And while we're imagining what would have happened if just one more pass was caught for Iowa in 2009, imagine also if one more were dropped against Michigan State, Arkansas State, Michigan and Northern Iowa - all Hawkeye wins by three points or less. Suddenly you're staring down the barrel of a six-loss season and your whole argument falls apart.

I did clear back to the 70's Knap to show that from 1970 Iowa went from barely making a top 50 program to now being in the top 15. I agree Iowa very well could have dropped those games. Point about the field goals is, you all remember the "1 second" now you know that game could have gone either way, then imagine if TX had been found breaking the rules during that time, yet some TX fan wants to talk smack to you.

Face it OH St was not all that and a bag of chips anyway. Yes they have won more in the past, but their future does not look bright. Any more recruits bail today?? The numbers show Nebraksa has slide, yet I have faith they wont need to cheat to get back to their former selfs. Bo has it going on, he just needs a few more recruiting classes to get some O in there.

 

Edit. Another number to futher show my point is from 1894 to 1969 Wiskey was 30-17-1 over Iowa From 1970 to today they are 12-26-1.

I cant pull up the numbers right now, but Oh St holds a sizeable all time against Wiskey, yet over the last ten years Oh St has stuggled with Wiskey.

[knapplc]

I did clear back to the 70's Knap to show that from 1970 Iowa went from barely making a top 50 program to now being in the top 15. I agree Iowa very well could have dropped those games. Point about the field goals is, you all remember the "1 second" now you know that game could have gone either way, then imagine if TX had been found breaking the rules during that time, yet some TX fan wants to talk smack to you.

Face it OH St was not all that and a bag of chips anyway. Yes they have won more in the past, but their future does not look bright. Any more recruits bail today?? The numbers show Nebraksa has slide, yet I have faith they wont need to cheat to get back to their former selfs. Bo has it going on, he just needs a few more recruiting classes to get some O in there.

 

But you're not a top 15 program for the 00s, you're #22. Your rank at #15 is that arbitrary three-year range that means nothing.

 

That's the problem with Iowa Football - up, down, up, down, up, down, up, down - it's like a roller coaster.

 

70s - 48th

80s - 26th

90s - 37th

00s - 22nd

10s - ??

 

I can say with reasonable confidence that, even with Ohio State's impending troubles, that they will almost certainly rank higher for this decade than Iowa. Why? Because they have the funds, the boosters, the fan support and the history that will keep recruits coming back. That's a huge advantage that a program like Ohio State has that an Iowa doesn't.

 

Same reason Nebraska won so many recruiting battles against Missouri, even when the kids were from Missouri. Sure, Missouri would produce a decent team here and there, but when you go on a recruiting trip to Missouri you're not going to be shown the National Championship Trophy Room, or the Heisman Room, or anything like it. There's a certain cachet that some programs have and some don't. OSU has it. Nebraska has it. Michigan, downtrodden though they are at the moment, has it.

 

If you're a betting man and someone offers you a bet on who will win the National Championship first, Iowa or Michigan, take Michigan. Take Ohio State. Take Nebraska. You're being a blind homer if you take the Hawkeyes.

[NUance]

Or the difference between a realist and someone with blinders on. Sure the all time series says alot. But I got one for you to look at, Most winning percent. We all KNOW OH and Nebraska should be right up there right? I mean they are old school power houses and won many games in the day.

1970-2010

#1 Nebraska

#2 OH St

#48 Iowa

 

1980-2010

#1 Nebraska

#4 OH St

#26 Iowa

 

1990-2010

#2 OH St

#4 Nebraska

#37 Iowa

 

2000 -2010

#4 OH St

#18 Nebraska

Tied at #22 Iowa

 

2005-2010

Tied at 2nd OH st

25th Nebraska

tied at 30th Iowa

 

2008-2010

Tied at 4th OH St

Tied at 14th Iowa

19th Nebraska

 

Now imagine if Iowa had beaten OH St in 09 and 10 OR imagine if the B10 takes those wins away for getting caught running a shady program. That would mean in 09 OH ST should have never been B10 champs but rather Iowa and Iowa goes to the Rose. As a OH St fan that "expects" to beat Iowa, you must be proud, you had to run a shady program to beat us by a field goal (one in OT), two years straight? I mean a field goal each time, it shouldnt be hard to imagine the W turning into a L. Basically 1 ball that got dropped turned into a catch.

So basically all three are top 20 teams. Infact since 08 Iowa and OH St are top 15. When you get down to the top 20 teams you know as well as I do anything can happen. Who has home field, heck even wind in a stadium can influence a game. So as an Iowa fan, I will say I dont think Nebraksa or OH St have much room for chest beating. And if you think you do, ya better start making room for more chest beaters.

Now onto non chest beating football talk. With TP gone, do you expect OH St to run the ball more? I think you have some talent at RB, no more TP and a less experienced qb now. Mabey back to a more "pro set"?

Iowa has done quite well this past decade. But that’s about it. In the previous 100 years Iowa only had one other decade with two 10 win seasons. By contrast NU has consistently had seasons of 10 or more wins about half the time for the past 50 years. Let's take another look at the data:

 

Iowa W-L data

2000s (four 10 win seasons)

1990s (one 10 win season)

1980s (two 10 win seasons)

1889-1980 (zero 10 win seasons)

 

Nebraska W-L data

2000s (four 10 win seasons)

1990s (six 10 win seasons, plus three 9-win seasons)

1980s (eight 10 win seasons, plus two 9-win seasons)

1970s (four 10 win seasons, plus six 9-win seasons);

1960s (two 10 win seasons)

 

 

This is the difference between a solid football program who had a decent decade (Iowa), and a GREAT program who is a consistent, dominating winner, NEBRASKA.

[bigg10]

I did clear back to the 70's Knap to show that from 1970 Iowa went from barely making a top 50 program to now being in the top 15. I agree Iowa very well could have dropped those games. Point about the field goals is, you all remember the "1 second" now you know that game could have gone either way, then imagine if TX had been found breaking the rules during that time, yet some TX fan wants to talk smack to you.

Face it OH St was not all that and a bag of chips anyway. Yes they have won more in the past, but their future does not look bright. Any more recruits bail today?? The numbers show Nebraksa has slide, yet I have faith they wont need to cheat to get back to their former selfs. Bo has it going on, he just needs a few more recruiting classes to get some O in there.

 

But you're not a top 15 program for the 00s, you're #22. Your rank at #15 is that arbitrary three-year range that means nothing.

 

That's the problem with Iowa Football - up, down, up, down, up, down, up, down - it's like a roller coaster.

 

70s - 48th

80s - 26th

90s - 37th

00s - 22nd

10s - ??

 

I can say with reasonable confidence that, even with Ohio State's impending troubles, that they will almost certainly rank higher for this decade than Iowa. Why? Because they have the funds, the boosters, the fan support and the history that will keep recruits coming back. That's a huge advantage that a program like Ohio State has that an Iowa doesn't.

 

Same reason Nebraska won so many recruiting battles against Missouri, even when the kids were from Missouri. Sure, Missouri would produce a decent team here and there, but when you go on a recruiting trip to Missouri you're not going to be shown the National Championship Trophy Room, or the Heisman Room, or anything like it. There's a certain cachet that some programs have and some don't. OSU has it. Nebraska has it. Michigan, downtrodden though they are at the moment, has it.

 

If you're a betting man and someone offers you a bet on who will win the National Championship first, Iowa or Michigan, take Michigan. Take Ohio State. Take Nebraska. You're being a blind homer if you take the Hawkeyes.

I agree that those things do have their advantages. As far as money, Ia is right up there. As far as sending them to the pros, Ia is right up there, as far as education Ia is right up there. In the end that matters more than weather a school won every game from 1940 to 1970, these kids were not even born yet, but as the numbers show during their life times Iowa's name has been out there. Maybe not a house hold name like Nebraska or OH St, but out there quite a bit.

IF I was a betting man, I would take Iowa with a NC before OH St or Mich. Mich has several years to go before they will be back. OH St is going to get the ban hammer and face it kids dont want to go if they cant play in the BT ccg or post season. As for Nebraska I said it along time ago in another post, Iowa and Nebraska are in a race to the top. Which one gets there first is anyones guess.

[bigg10]

[This is the difference between a solid football program who had a decent decade (Iowa), and a GREAT program who is a consistent, dominating winner, NEBRASKA.

 

Before I even pull up any numbers, I will say you do know that back in the day, B10 teams were only allowed to play in the Rose bowl, right? One big 10 team played post season for a very long time (9 game seasons, 10 with the Rose)). I think in the 60's they might have added a game to make it a 10 game season.

[okaive]

I have to disagree with you on one of your points. Education is not the top tier in most football athlete's consideration. It is the wins and how far is that program going to take them to the NFL. There are a select few that go to college for the education, but not that many.

[knapplc]

Anyone ever notice that it's the schools with no history of success that constantly claim that a history of proven success makes no difference, either "today" or in recruiting?

 

It must be a complete accident that Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Alabama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, and all the other "history of winning" programs continue to be atop the ranks of sending kids to the pros, profitability, and the like. It must be an accident that these schools seem to win far more consistently than, say, Iowa.

 

That's it. An accident.

[Fuzzy]

Stopping the run last year would have helped out a lot last year. Hopefully this year, we can live up to stopping the run in a run heavy conference.

[n.e.husker]

Stopping the run last year would have helped out a lot last year. Hopefully this year, we can live up to stopping the run in a run heavy conference.

Agreed, the second half of the A&M game we let too many yards go. And the entire bowl game.

[CO_hawk]

Anyone ever notice that it's the schools with no history of success that constantly claim that a history of proven success makes no difference, either "today" or in recruiting?

 

It must be a complete accident that Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Alabama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, and all the other "history of winning" programs continue to be atop the ranks of sending kids to the pros, profitability, and the like. It must be an accident that these schools seem to win far more consistently than, say, Iowa.

 

That's it. An accident.

 

Ya kinda like Oregon, Boise St, TCU, VaTech, Texas Tech, Okla St., Wisc, BYU, Utah, GT, WV. Teams rise and fall all the time, that doesn't mean that any other school besides the all time greats can't make it to the top and stay there.

 

 

With all the disadvantages that Iowa has going for them I think they do quite well for themselves. We know we are not an elite program, but we still send kids to the NFL (more than half of the teams you mentioned), compete with the best of our league, and make a lot of money doing it. We might never make it to elite status, but considering where the program has been in the past our fans have a right to be optimistic about our future.

[Fuzzy]

Stopping the run last year would have helped out a lot last year. Hopefully this year, we can live up to stopping the run in a run heavy conference.

Agreed, the second half of the A&M game we let too many yards go. And the entire bowl game.

 

Not to mention Texas when we let Garrett Gilbert, a C class QB if you ask me, run over us like T-Mart.

[knapplc]

Anyone ever notice that it's the schools with no history of success that constantly claim that a history of proven success makes no difference, either "today" or in recruiting?

 

It must be a complete accident that Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Alabama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, and all the other "history of winning" programs continue to be atop the ranks of sending kids to the pros, profitability, and the like. It must be an accident that these schools seem to win far more consistently than, say, Iowa.

 

That's it. An accident.

 

Ya kinda like Oregon, Boise St, TCU, VaTech, Texas Tech, Okla St., Wisc, BYU, Utah, GT, WV. Teams rise and fall all the time, that doesn't mean that any other school besides the all time greats can't make it to the top and stay there.

 

 

With all the disadvantages that Iowa has going for them I think they do quite well for themselves. We know we are not an elite program, but we still send kids to the NFL (more than half of the teams you mentioned), compete with the best of our league, and make a lot of money doing it. We might never make it to elite status, but considering where the program has been in the past our fans have a right to be optimistic about our future.

 

Your examples don't disprove my point. Boise St. has been a blip team. A few years of success surrounded by decades of nothing. Oregon has been as good as any other middle-tier team in a major conference over the past 50 years. VA Tech is a storied program and sits at #17 on the all-time wins list. Texas Tech was good when Leach was there, otherwise see Oregon.

 

Every program starts somewhere, but because a team has had a few seasons of success doesn't mean they will continue to be successful. We're in a conversation discussing whether Iowa belongs among the all-time greats. Why are we comparing Iowa to Nebraska and Michigan and Ohio State? Because Nebraska, Michigan and Ohio State have all proven, over several decades, that they belong atop college football. They are part of the Ten Pillars of the sport. Iowa does not compare.

[CO_hawk]

Anyone ever notice that it's the schools with no history of success that constantly claim that a history of proven success makes no difference, either "today" or in recruiting?

 

It must be a complete accident that Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Alabama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Miami, and all the other "history of winning" programs continue to be atop the ranks of sending kids to the pros, profitability, and the like. It must be an accident that these schools seem to win far more consistently than, say, Iowa.

 

That's it. An accident.

 

Ya kinda like Oregon, Boise St, TCU, VaTech, Texas Tech, Okla St., Wisc, BYU, Utah, GT, WV. Teams rise and fall all the time, that doesn't mean that any other school besides the all time greats can't make it to the top and stay there.

 

 

With all the disadvantages that Iowa has going for them I think they do quite well for themselves. We know we are not an elite program, but we still send kids to the NFL (more than half of the teams you mentioned), compete with the best of our league, and make a lot of money doing it. We might never make it to elite status, but considering where the program has been in the past our fans have a right to be optimistic about our future.

 

Your examples don't disprove my point. Boise St. has been a blip team. A few years of success surrounded by decades of nothing. Oregon has been as good as any other middle-tier team in a major conference over the past 50 years. VA Tech is a storied program and sits at #17 on the all-time wins list. Texas Tech was good when Leach was there, otherwise see Oregon.

 

Every program starts somewhere, but because a team has had a few seasons of success doesn't mean they will continue to be successful. We're in a conversation discussing whether Iowa belongs among the all-time greats. Why are we comparing Iowa to Nebraska and Michigan and Ohio State? Because Nebraska, Michigan and Ohio State have all proven, over several decades, that they belong atop college football. They are part of the Ten Pillars of the sport. Iowa does not compare.

 

I know they don't compare to Ohio st. or any of those others. Honestly I don't think any Iowa fan on here is saying Iowa deserves to be among the all time greats, not me at least. I do like to see where Iowa sits compared to the elite teams, while under Kirk Ferentz. I do see Iowa in the top third of the big ten, which to most people is pretty good.

 

Ohio st

Nebraska

Penn st

Mich

Iowa

Wisc

 

Are the top teams in the Big Ten, besides Ohio st.'s dominance the other school are interchangeable regarding recent success. Ohio st has had our number, Nebraska may as well in the future, but that doesn't mean we are not a top 25 program, because in recent years we are. Nebraska and Iowa are alot alike except for tradition, that is why we compare our program with Nebraska.

[knapplc]

I know they don't compare to Ohio st. or any of those others. Honestly I don't think any Iowa fan on here is saying Iowa deserves to be among the all time greats, not me at least. I do like to see where Iowa sits compared to the elite teams, while under Kirk Ferentz. I do see Iowa in the top third of the big ten, which to most people is pretty good.

 

Ohio st

Nebraska

Penn st

Mich

Iowa

Wisc

 

Are the top teams in the Big Ten, besides Ohio st.'s dominance the other school are interchangeable regarding recent success. Ohio st has had our number, Nebraska may as well in the future, but that doesn't mean we are not a top 25 program, because in recent years we are. Nebraska and Iowa are alot alike except for tradition, that is why we compare our program with Nebraska.

 

I get the impression bigg10 is saying Iowa belongs among the all-time greats. Today, yes. All-time, no.

 

I certainly agree with you that Ferentz has your Hawkeyes looking like a worthy opponent on a yearly basis. Hopefully he's beginning to build something lasting in Iowa City. You cannot have too many good teams in your conference.

 

I won't walk into that Black Friday game without concern. Iowa is a team that can beat anyone on its schedule. But I still expect to win that game. And I think you guys should expect that, too.

[CO_hawk]

I know they don't compare to Ohio st. or any of those others. Honestly I don't think any Iowa fan on here is saying Iowa deserves to be among the all time greats, not me at least. I do like to see where Iowa sits compared to the elite teams, while under Kirk Ferentz. I do see Iowa in the top third of the big ten, which to most people is pretty good.

 

Ohio st

Nebraska

Penn st

Mich

Iowa

Wisc

 

Are the top teams in the Big Ten, besides Ohio st.'s dominance the other school are interchangeable regarding recent success. Ohio st has had our number, Nebraska may as well in the future, but that doesn't mean we are not a top 25 program, because in recent years we are. Nebraska and Iowa are alot alike except for tradition, that is why we compare our program with Nebraska.

 

I get the impression bigg10 is saying Iowa belongs among the all-time greats. Today, yes. All-time, no.

 

I certainly agree with you that Ferentz has your Hawkeyes looking like a worthy opponent on a yearly basis. Hopefully he's beginning to build something lasting in Iowa City. You cannot have too many good teams in your conference.

 

I won't walk into that Black Friday game without concern. Iowa is a team that can beat anyone on its schedule. But I still expect to win that game. And I think you guys should expect that, too.

 

My biggest worry is what's going to happen when Kirk leaves. Knapplc I enjoy your inputs on this board and wish others were as reasonable as you are.