T1B

Posted: **Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:08 pm**

My point really doesn't have much to do with past success. It's more to do with where the programs are headed. No one is arguing what great tradition Bama has. But I really think they're a program headed nowhere. Their days of being an elite program are over. Iowa is not the only program that has come out of nowhere over the last 25 years or so that I think are passing programs like Alabama by. I'd throw Wisconsin in there and even schools like Louisville are getting to that level.

Alabama has to recruit against a lot tougher competition than Iowa. Times have changed, and it's not as easy for programs like Bama to get the best players anymore. In-state I'd say Auburn right now has a better program, although you'd never wanna admit that (for obvious reasons). Go out of state......LSU, Tennessee, Georgia, and now Florida and Florida State are top notch programs unlike when Bear Bryant was there. Unless you land someone like Tressel (which obviously you won't), how are you going to steer recruits away from those schools?

I don't think that anyone within 5-6 years of my age thinks Bama is a great program anymore. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the only opinions people within that age rage of about 20-30 or so think of Alabama in negative light as opposed to the success they had years ago due to them not being a dominant program recently and because of the cheating scandals.

I'm not a Bama hater, by any means. They're no rival of Iowa's. I'm just saying that to me, I do not see Alabama as a top program. In fact, I think they've become just an average program with little chance for getting much better.

Posted: **Thu Dec 21, 2006 2:04 am**

TheJON wrote:My point really doesn't have much to do with past success. It's more to do with where the programs are headed.

JON, Iowa is heading for a losing season after Texas gets done with ya, followed by a new QB next season and still no defensive backfield.

No one is arguing what great tradition Bama has. But I really think they're a program headed nowhere. Their days of being an elite program are over.

Alabama WILL be back. That's a football program that will reach high acclaim again. Bank on it.

Alabama has to recruit against a lot tougher competition than Iowa. Times have changed, and it's not as easy for programs like Bama to get the best players anymore.

And you honestly think a cold weather midwestern school is gonna compete with southern teams in recruiting hotbeds on a consistent bases for better talent?...dude you ain't Nebraska.

I don't think that anyone within 5-6 years of my age thinks Bama is a great program anymore.

That would be because my 14 year old neighbors kid doesn't know shit about football either.

I'm not a Bama hater, by any means. They're no rival of Iowa's.

No that'd be Iowa St. how's that been working out?

Posted: **Thu Dec 21, 2006 3:23 pm**

You've had the same, stale, tired argument about Iowa for the past 5 years. When are they going to take that "next step"? You talk about Iowa like people who try to tell us that soccer is catching on in America and is the next big thing. Don't believe me? Just watch what Pele does with the Cosmos.

And your argument about 'Bama, you said the same about ND. Look where they are, and they don't have the recruiting base that 'Bama has.

Posted: **Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:49 pm**

Killian,

I don't know when Iowa takes the next step. Maybe next year, maybe 5 years from now. It's this little thing called "bumps in the road." You don't go from being a solid Big-10 program to a national power overnight. It just doesn't work that way. I do not expect Ferentz to win 10 games every year because I understand how difficult it is. This year was a bump in the road. We'll get to that next level.......with or without Ferentz at coach. It just takes time.

And Cornhusker....

What was that "how's that workin' out for ya?" supposed to mean??? Wake up man, we've won 3 of 4 against Iowa State and we're now 18-6 against them since 1982. So, I'd say it's working out pretty well.

Posted: **Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:00 pm**

TheJON wrote:I have no substance for my takes. Whatever I say cannot be based upon facts. I am here to tell you the future. I can't tell you when it will happen in the future, but it will happen. Iowa will win a national championship...in the future. I may be dead and gone, but it will happen. Mark my words.

Posted: **Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:04 pm**

Yes, and I can tell you that Dennis Franchione is a horrible coach and a giant asshole. This year = BSFN.

Posted: **Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:09 pm**

You don't see me littering this board with homeristic tripe on how A&M is the next coming of Nebraska circa 1995 either now do you, Messiah?

Posted: **Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:12 pm**

That's a good point. Got me there. Cock.

Posted: **Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:20 am**

TheJON wrote:And Cornhusker....

What was that "how's that workin' out for ya?" supposed to mean??? Wake up man, we've won 3 of 4 against Iowa State and we're now 18-6 against them since 1982. So, I'd say it's working out pretty well.

September 11, 2006
THE SERIES
Saturday's game against the Cyclones marks the 54th time the two in-state rivals have met. Iowa holds a 35-18 advantage in the series that began with a 16-8 ISU win in 1894. The Hawkeyes have won 17 of the last 23 meetings, but the Cyclones have won six of the last eight in the series.

So now it's ISU 6 of the last 9.
That's 66% ISU, in almost a decade.
You can pick-up your No-Doz at Walgren's
All the while under Ferentz's watch.
If your so inclined to state Alabama has been insignificant the last 20 years, I'd offer in half that time, a school called Iowa freekin' St., who has done nothing else other than beat Iowa 66% of the time, brand your school, a middle of the road program.

Posted: **Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:19 pm**

Isn't it funny how you can use your own time frame to help your argument? Why 9 years? Hmmm......because that's the only time span in which ISU has had success against Iowa. Funny how you forget the 15 straight victories by Iowa before that or the fact that Iowa has won 3 of the last 4. ISU's run of beating the Hawks is over. I give them credit, they had a nice run. Mac really got his team fired up to play against us every year. But, he's a former Hawkeye coach and player plus he's from the state of Iowa so naturally, his teams will have the emotions on their side. Heck, ISU had a run of 2 out of 3 against Nebraska. Really, they should have beaten the Huskers 3 straight years had they not choked it away in OT last year. After next year's 50 pt beatdown of the Clones, it will be 19 of 25 against them. Then 20 of 26 after 2008. Clone fans even know it's gonna be a long time before they win one against us.

Posted: **Mon Dec 25, 2006 5:10 am**

When did Iowa get a football team? Drink a couple beers and you end up in a wrestling forum....sheeit.

Posted: **Mon Dec 25, 2006 5:44 pm**

TheJON wrote:Isn't it funny how you can use your own time frame to help your argument? Why 9 years?

TheJON wrote:My point really doesn't have anything to do with past success. It's more to do with where the programs are headed.

That's a more rescent trend than the 15 straight which ended 10 years ago. I'm trying to base the Iowa/Alabama degree of success upon something. Obviously it must be on past performances, I went back a decade...you felt compelled to pick your time line with Alabama at 25 years ago...why?

JON honestly Alabama is a monster in sleeping...the fan base, no less than that of Iowa's passion or dedication, the money(scandals aside)... for facilities, the SEC, the southern belles, the freekin' weather, the talent within the area, all put 'bama at a more attractive choice for most high schoolers considering either school. Can you give me an example where Iowa beat Alabama for a recruit? I'd venture to say if they went head to head for a guy, Alabama would hold an edge.

That school is headed up when Saban takes the job, (my guess).. Iowa has plateaued much like your cousins in Ames did.
Ferentz is good enough to be competive when he gets senior laden classes ever 3 years, outside of that Ohio St. and /or Michigan are always going to hold serve. With Wisconsin and Biliema, I believe, already passing you by.

Alabama has a more realistic chance, in the future, to win the SEC than I think Iowa has winning the Big 10. Of course, in the SEC you play for a champion unlike the Big 10 or 11 of what ever you call that conference that doesn't always match the best teams even in the freekin' regular season. That can't help the cause for Iowa from a national point of view.

Oh yeah, you secretly are glad McCarney is gone I'd bet, be careful what waits for ya in Chizek. Lets hope he promotes the Iowa game like McCarney did. I bet the alumns will let it be known which team they'd like to beat the most.

Posted: **Mon Dec 25, 2006 7:50 pm**

TheJon is probaby under the illusion that Iowa is the third most prestigious program in the Big 10.

Posted: **Tue Dec 26, 2006 5:21 pm**

Cornhusker,

I am 26 years old....that's why I use the 25 years or so time frame. Am I supposed to give a crap about what happened before my lifetime? All I know is in my lifetime, the only success I remember Alabama having is due in large part to coaches that were cheating. To people my age, we don't see Bama as an elite program. If you think I'm the only one within my age range that agrees with that you're mistaken.

Mace,

Holy crap, I don't think I could find one thing to disagree with you on there. I would actually put Penn State ahead of Iowa and Wisconsin. But the Big-10 has a rich tradition, so saying that we're right behind OSU, Michigan, and PSU is nothing to be ashamed of. In a few more years, perhaps Iowa jumps over Penn State, but we shall see. You're right about the injuries....to an extent. Injuries or not, there was NO excuse to lose to Minnesota, Northwestern, and Indiana. But yes, injuries did play a part in our struggles. People outside of Iowa do not understand the amount of injuries this team sustained throughout the year. Lack of effort the last month of the season was the main reason for our demise though. It is possible that this team contends for the Big-10 title next year although I know the others on here would laugh at that (which is fine considering they don't really know this team like we do). Michigan and OSU are off the schedule. The only game we won't be AT LEAST a touchdown favorite will be the Wisconsin game (the first Big-10 game of the year). If we beat Wisconsin, there is no doubt in my mind that this team can go 12-0. Will they? Who knows? But it is not out of the question one bit.

And anyone that thinks a lack of skill position players was the problem this year is dead wrong. Our 2002, 2003, and 2004 teams never had great skill position players and we went 31-7 in that span. If we had Drew Tate and Albert Young in 2002 and 2003, we may have won a national title those years. Our problem was injuries and lack of depth on the O and D lines. Ken Iwebema missed half the year with injury and EVERYONE had him projected as an All-American DE. Throw in injuries to other key D-line players and the fact that AT LEAST 2 players started at EVERY O-line position this year due to injuries and you've got problems. Then, throw in the fact that this team had high expecations and it went south midway through, and then they just quit playing hard. It happens. This team was 6-6 but I feel that it was 3 plays away from 9-3. And then throw in the fact that we had opportunties against Michigan and maybe we could have been 10-2. Woulda coulda shoulda does not matter though....I know that.

Posted: **Tue Dec 26, 2006 6:36 pm**

You did have Tate in 2003.

Posted: **Tue Dec 26, 2006 7:51 pm**

noj,

And A&M is 3 plays away from being undefeated and playing OSU in the NC game. Instead we are 9-3. Every team every year has "swing" games. Hell, we are like 3 plays away from being 6-6 as well. That's why winning a NC is so hard. It has to be "one of those years" where EVERY ball bounces your way.

Only a small handful of teams have had seasons where they dominated every game start to finish. Iowa was 6-6 because Iowa was a "6-6 team" this year. No other reason. It happens.

Posted: **Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:14 pm**

Jon, you sound like a moron when you speak "for a generation"....what are you Pepsi?

i wasn't alive when Bud Wilkinson coached at OU, or when Bob Devaney was at NU (just barely) or Darryl Royal at UT.....or most of Woody Hayes' career.....but i never used that inverted "my generation" theory....to be uneducated about the history of football. by your same argument you weren't alive or under the age of 8 for about half/or most of Hayden Fry's time at Iowa....so? you don't count that?

who cares what a bunch of 26 year olds think about Bama football.....that doesn't make it true. it makes it a very limited, restricted information popular opinion.

bottom line is that Bama has the resources to climb easily back into the top 10. USC, OU, UT, NU, ND and PSU were down as hard as Bama and have been back pretty strong.

that's what history proves out.

Posted: **Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:10 am**

King Crimson wrote:Jon, you sound like a moron when you speak "for a generation"....what are you Pepsi?

i wasn't alive when Bud Wilkinson coached at OU, or when Bob Devaney was at NU (just barely) or Darryl Royal at UT.....or most of Woody Hayes' career.....but i never used that inverted "my generation" theory....to be uneducated about the history of football. by your same argument you weren't alive or under the age of 8 for about half/or most of Hayden Fry's time at Iowa....so? you don't count that?

who cares what a bunch of 26 year olds think about Bama football.....that doesn't make it true. it makes it a very limited, restricted information popular opinion.

bottom line is that Bama has the resources to climb easily back into the top 10. USC, OU, UT, NU, ND and PSU were down as hard as Bama and have been back pretty strong.

that's what history proves out.

...in terms of another sport...that ball is gone.

Ya know what's great, I see a post like this and I have the priviledge of remembering all the above coaches on the sideline, Wilkinson being the less memorable...I mostly remember him doing commentary on ABC (he was an OU homer boys).
I saw the Woodman take the shot at the Clemson player, don't mean to let that be what I remember most of him, he was a great coach and his teams played damn hard. He reminded me of Lombardi.
Of course the Bob Father was my guy and Darrel Royal was the first guy I related to those Longhorn helmets.

I respect you guys, that even though most of you didn't see the above list of coaches, (Sudden Sam, Mace (great post above!) Luther, and Mikey and ???...excluded..all duffers) you learned of them and appreciate them, no matter who they coached for, or if they broke your heart... if only through what your daddy's told you.

That's our forum...JON, when you said "I don't give a crap about what happened before I was born," well, that defines some of what is wrong with our society...ya see, that makes you appear to be the Terrell Owens of this forum.
He doesn't have an audience without the old timers...you ain't got a football program to cheer for, without the past.

Posted: **Wed Dec 27, 2006 4:19 am**

i'm not going to use ebay to hunt down the 1932 umich season on dvd, but i definitely recognize that michigan's history is what affords its (relative) success today.

Posted: **Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:59 pm**

I thought Ed Martin was what afforded Michigan it's current success??? Just kidding!

Posted: **Wed Dec 27, 2006 9:04 pm**

actually, 'tis funny i mentioned the 32 season just before gerald ford up and died. i probably could score it on ebay, eh.

umich doesn't really have much of a storied history in basketball other than the few bright spots that are bound to occur when you've fielded teams for 231 different seasons.

Posted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:56 am**

I'd say Ed Martin had more to do with Michigan's basketball success than the law of averages.

Posted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:33 pm**

Mace wrote:Alvarez built a very good program at Wisconsin and, while Bielema will continue the tradition, their accomplishments are comparable to what Hayden Fry and Ferentz have done with the Iowa program. Iowa had a bad year but that does not equate to a bad program, or even a lesser program than Wisconsin's (Iowa has way too many wins over the Badgers for anyone to make that statement with a straight face).

I believe the series currently stands at 41-40-2, in favor of Wisconsin.

Posted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:59 pm**

Iowa doesn't lead the all-time series against Wisky? I thought last years win gave us a 3-4 game advantage? Either way, Wisconsin is 5-20 against us in the last 25.

Posted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:03 pm**

I believe the series currently stands at 41-40-2, in favor of Wisconsin.

^^ But Iowa had a lot of injuries leading up to a lot of those games. Oh yeah, and Wisconsin cheated in at least ten of those years.

J=B wrote:Either way, Wisconsin is 5-20 against us in the last 25.

I thought you were 26, Jon.

Posted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:04 pm**

TheJON wrote:Iowa doesn't lead the all-time series against Wisky? I thought last years win gave us a 3-4 game advantage? Either way, Wisconsin is 5-20 against us in the last 25.

40-40-2

http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/series/iw/wi.txt

The site only goes up to 2005, so I factored in this year's Wisconsin win.

Pretty impressive series you two have going on there.

Posted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:39 pm**

L45B wrote:
J=B wrote:Either way, Wisconsin is 5-20 against us in the last 25.
I thought you were 26, Jon.

From Mgo's link, Iowa is 18-6-1 vs. Wisconsin in JON's lifetime. They apparently didn't meet in the '93 and '94 seasons.

Posted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:07 pm**

That's right, 20 out of 26. I forgot to add this year. We lost to them from 1997-2001. Before this year we had a 4 game win streak over them. It's pretty much been a series of streaks. Hopefully, that trend ends in 2007.

L45B,

We haven't faced them but 24-25 times in my life. Axs.

T1B

For TheJON - Iowa/Alabama Comparison