T1B

Internet Marketing at its finest right there folks...........

I got you to click, didn't I?

Now that I have your attention, I would like to see what everyone thinks about the big game in Ann Arbor this weekend. Iowa v Denard Robinson errrrr Michigan.

Does DickRod's merry band of future Burger King assistant managers have ANY shot against their big brother, Iowa, on Saturday?

The short answer is no. The long answer is...........fuck no, are you kidding?

Iowa is too physical, too TALENTED (yes, they have much more talent than Michigan and it's not even close), and too fundamentally sound. Michigan will need an Arizona-game-like collapse in order to hang with their big brother. The match-up heavily favors Iowa for the following reasons:

1.While I do expect Robinson to get his yards, Iowa's defense does not blitz or give up many big passing plays downfield. That should limit Robinsons big plays and I'm not convinced he's disciplined enough to be content to consistently take the 4-5 yard runs and underneath routes that will be there. I could see him getting frustrated with that after a while and try and force a big play. Iowa's defense eats QB's like that alive. It's a very opportunistic defense.

2.Michigan can't stop Iowa's attack. Iowa has 2 big play WR's and a QB that can throw the deep ball very well. On top of that, the O-line is pretty solid and Adam Robinson should be able to consistently get 5-6 yards a rush. That will keep the Michigan offense off the field. Watch for Michigan to get eaten alive with play action on Saturday.

D-Rob will get some yards. Michigan will probably even put up a decent amount of points. Their offense is just too good for even Iowa's defense to completely shut down. But the Hawkeye defense will contain their offense enough and limit the amount of long drives, force a couple of turnovers, and move the ball at will against Michigan's defense pretty much all day. Hawkeyes 38 Wolverines 20.

I'm not gonna make any sig bets, but I will make a real bet with M Club, RetardSteve, and/or BlindRef. If Michigan wins.......awww, it doesn't matter, they won't. But if (err when) Iowa buttfucks Michigan in the mouth, all the Michigan fans must perform an "Eiffel Tower" on Mace and I. Deal?

Seeing who authored this thread, I didn't think you needed an enlargement considering you are the biggest dick on this board. That being said, I hope Iowa loses so you will climb back into your hole and go away for the rest of the season.

Fuck Iowa

I'm headed for Ann Arbor early tomorrow morning and expecting to have a good time tomorrow night and lookin forward to my first trip to the Big House. A Hawkeye win will make the trip home more enjoyable but a loss would mean more beer stops and piss breaks. It's a win-win situation.

Mace wrote:I'm headed for Ann Arbor early tomorrow morning and expecting to have a good time tomorrow night and lookin forward to my first trip to the Big House. A Hawkeye win will make the trip home more enjoyable but a loss would mean more beer stops and piss breaks. It's a win-win situation.

Nice. Take pictures of the mass exodus of Wolverine fans in the middle of the 4th quarter for me.

Harvdog wrote:Seeing who authored this thread, I didn't think you needed an enlargement considering you have the biggest dick on this board.

Thanks Harv. I don't like to brag, but I do appreciate compliments- even if they come from the mentally challenged folk, such as yourself.

TheJON wrote:Does DickRod's merry band of future Burger King assistant managers have ANY shot against their big brother, Iowa, on Saturday?

11-40-4 all-time sayswhat?

Dinsdale wrote:

TheJON wrote:Does DickRod's merry band of future Burger King assistant managers have ANY shot against their big brother, Iowa, on Saturday?

11-40-4 all-time sayswhat?

Who gives a fuck about all-time? This is why college football fans annoy me. Always bragging about shit that happened dozens of years ago.

College football: where NOW doesn't matter! That should be the slogan.

I was joking when I called them "little brother", by the way. It was an obvious baiting tactic.

TheJON wrote: I was joking when I called them "little brother", by the way. It was an obvious baiting tactic.

great, because seven posts in and the only reason any of us is responding is to point out this:

...all the Michigan fans must perform an "Eiffel Tower" on Mace and I.

er, are you sure you don't want to rephrase that?

also, this bit of jonsense:

Who gives a fuck about all-time? This is why college football fans annoy me. Always bragging about shit that happened dozens of years ago.

from a guy who spent 2004-2008 bragging ad nauseum about 2002.

M Club wrote:also, this bit of jonsense:

Who gives a fuck about all-time? This is why college football fans annoy me. Always bragging about shit that happened dozens of years ago.

from a guy who spent 2004-2008 bragging ad nauseum about 2002.

I like to discuss recent history and success. I don't give a shit about success a program has had over time because I wasn't even alive before 1980 and I barely remember much college football before 1990.

Do you go to Michigan games now and while your team is getting rolled you stand up and applaud the awesomeness that your program once was?

"well guys, we're getting anally raped by Purdue right now but that's okay because we used to be good. Hail to the Victors. Once good, always good".

For a good decade now, Iowa has been on par or better than Michigan. But silly me for bringing that up. I forgot, programs were made 50 years ago and if you weren't good prior to that time period, you will always suck. Even if you win 87 national titles in a row, it doesn't matter.

Gotta love CFB fans. Hilarious. We've beaten Penn State 8 of 9 times and have only lost to them TWICE since 1995 + had better overall success and still their fans claim Iowa is their "little brother", they have more talent than Iowa (we have more players in the NFL), and when we beat them over and over and over again all we hear is "you're still just lowly Iowa".

I know you're not a Penn State fan, but how many fucking times does Iowa have to outperform them on the season and beat them before we are considered the better program? The media and college football fans have the most retarded basis for determining a programs stature. It's all based on old shit that nobody even remembers or was alive for. If we beat Penn State 20 more straight times, do you think State Penn fans will at least acknowledge we're on par with them? If Iowa wins on Saturday, they will have a .500 record and just as much success over the last decade as Michigan. How much longer until we've got an even program with you guys? Is a decade not long enough? 10 fucking years is not a short period of time. We're not talking about some fluke year in 2002 and then Iowa fading back to oblivion like everyone predicted (though I'm not quite sure why they expected that considering Iowa had been a pretty solid program for the previous 20 years).

It's all total bullshit and makes it really hard to respect college football. Take a look at our preseason ranking. Forget the loss to Arizona, that's irrelevant considering it hadn't happened before the year started. Iowa returned 17 starters from a team that WON a BCS bowl. Our preseason ranking was 10th (or 9th in 1 poll), which is 2-3 spots lower than where we finished. Fucking Oklahoma is ranked ahead of us after not even finishing in the Top 20 last year and with fewer returning starters. If Michigan had the exact same players and coaches as Iowa has this year with the same results as Iowa last year, they would have a preseason ranking of no lower than 2. Why does this piss me off? Because if you're not ranked in the Top 4 or 5 preseason and you lose a game, you've got no shot at getting into the national title game- even if you lose early (like Iowa did).

What exactly does Iowa need to do in order to earn some respect? Or is it impossible because they weren't great in the 60's and 70's?? Yep, hard to imagine why everyone outside of CFB fans laugh at the sport!

ah, so you're going to reference some arbitrary statute of limitations here. pretty convenient. 2002 is nearly as irrelevant to the 2010 season as the 70s are. i suppose you can say 02 built momentum for ferentz to put together the team he has now, but i can also say the 70s and 80s helped build michigan into the brand it is today, where they still pull decent recruits despite being a shite team. so saying the here and now should be the only criteria for discussing cfb - unless your team was good eight editions ago - is pretty gay. history actually makes cfb a better sport than whatever it is your hypothetical point-and-laugh meatheads watch.

as far as iowa starting a <gasp> entire three spots behind where they finished: maybe no one was as impressed as you are with a team that barely beat three shit teams at home. a few bounces here and there would have left them at 7-5 or something. ja, could have would have, but then again, great teams don't put themselves in a position where those sorts of things are actually discussed.

We won a BCS bowl in semi-dominating fashion. We basically dominated Iowa State and Arizona at home (2 bowl teams) and Wisconsin and Penn State on the road (2 Top 15 teams). Plus, we actually had to play Michigan in a prime time game before they just laid down and quit. People forget that Michigan was actually playing decent football at that point. Then they lost to Iowa and went into the tank. Oh, and we went into the Shoe and took the Rose Bowl champs to OT with our backup QB and some other injuries.

Great teams DO have bad games. Winning when you don't play your best is what separates the good teams from the bad. Ohio State won a god damn national title by playing woth fire every week. And Iowa really wasn't as close to losing many games as you mught think. Yes, MSU and UNI games we were fortunate enough to win. But none of the other games came down to the last few minutes, they were over middle of the 4th quarter. Michigan did get the ball back with a shot to win it but they were down 2 scores with 3 minutes to go and there was no way DRobinson was driving them 60 yards just to get in field goal range.

Most people look at the scores and go "iowa was lucky". Well, the truth is Iowa was the most unlucky team in the country last year. Have you any idea how many starters were out with injuries last year? This team may have gone unbeaten had Stanzi not gone down late in the 1st half against Northwestern. We played like shit against UNI because it was the 1st game and because we had about 10 starters out with injury or suspension. When you have basically your 2nd string playing a team that's beyond fired up and you're not taking them very seriously, what do you think is going to happen?

2 years ago Iowa went 9-4 and were 4 plays away from being unbeaten. So, if you're going to say they were a few bounces away from 7-5 in 2009, I would say they were 4 plays away from being the best team in the country in 2008.

The last game Iowa lost by more than a touchdown was 2007. I bet there aren't more than 1-2 other teams in the country that can say that. Iowa is literally 7 plays away from having a 31 game win streak. Always two sides to everything.

As for program respect....it's not that I don't respect the histories and long standing traditions of a Michigan or a Notre Dame. It's just that none of that matters to me when I look at the current state of a program. Is Iowa basketball still a middle of the pack program? Fuck no. We're on the most pathetic programs in the country. You don't hear Iowa fan trying to argue we're still an above average program and we've only sucked for the past few years. Notre Dame has been average for the past 15 years and everyone around college football still looks at them as an elite program. That is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard.

I still do consider Michigan an elite program. They've only been down for a couple of years, so it's not like I'm saying that program strength should be judged based on a year or 2. But when you consider the fact that not only is Iowa better than Michigan right now but we've been on par with them for the past decade....how can you not say Iowa has an equal program to them right now?

Is Penn State a better program than Iowa? How many more times do we have to beat them before we pass them in terms of ranking the programs? 8000? Recent trends should mean a shit load more than what the fuck someone did 20+ years ago. Who really gives a fuck about what your team did back when you either weren't alive or can barely remember anything? Heck, how many games from the 1990's can you really remember specifics of? There's bits and pieces of games I remember like it was yesterday but I couldn't tell you what half of the key plays in any game from the 1990's were. And neither could most other people. And this comes from someone that missed exactly 1 Iowa home game during that entire decade.

I'm 30 years old and we have had exactly 2 coaches in my lifetime and the current coach is signed through 2020 and he will never be leaving because no one is going to want to pay for his insane buyout even if they really wanted him as coach. Both those coaches have had numerous offers from the NFL and other schools yet they stayed. If Iowa is such a shitty program, why the fuck are great coaches staying here? Ferentz now makes 3.75 million. We can financially compete with anyone WITHOUT using ANY taxpayer dollars. Yeah, what a lousy program....

This has got be the winning drive for the Board Bitch Title...

Not that long ago, JON wrote:Let's see here.....

2 straight years I tell you what a fraud Wisconsin is. 2 years in a row you tell me how awesome they are. 2 years in a row you run your mouth. Yet I'm the moron?

Iowa > Wisconsin

Always has been, always will be.

21-7 record vs Wisconsin in last 28 games. I believe that's ownage!

Then we get this:

JON wrote:This is why college football fans annoy me. Always bragging about shit that happened dozens of years ago.

JON wrote:I like to discuss recent history and success. I don't give a shit about success a program has had over time because I wasn't even alive before 1980 and I barely remember much college football before 1990.

Thanks Jon for proving us all... right.

Are you retarded?

I'm serious. Are you?

Iowa owns Wisconsin now and for damn near 30 years. I'm guessing that's in response to something Goober said about how Wisconsin owns Iowa or is better than Iowa. I provided stats that would indicate they aren't better now OR over a long period of time.

But seriously.............are you retarded? I need to know so that I can determine whether or not I should feel bad for laughing at you.

JON, you're arguing program vs. teams. Yes, ND has had shitty teams on and off for 15 years. The teams have suffered because of shitty coaching, but it's taken 15 years for it to start to effect the actual program. During those 15 years, they hired the following:

Bob Davie (thought of as one of the top DC's in college football at the time)
George O'Leary (a very good college head coach at the time)
Tyrone Willingham (thought of highly by some, for unknown reasons)
Charlie Weis (the top OC in the NFL at the time)
Brian Kelly (2 time NCAA coach of the year)

If Iowa had the same overall record in the 15 year span that ND did (108-74), could they hire the same type of coaches? When Michigan changed coaches, they made (at the time) arguably the biggest hire in the last 40 years. They got an established coach, at a top 5 team, to leave his alma matter and come and coach them. When Alabama was coming off a decade of mediocrity, they went out and hired Nick fucking Saban. Iowa couldn't pull off either of those types of hires.

Not talking shit, and I'm not saying there is anything wrong with it, but it's different levels. Those jobs are destination jobs, not stop overs. While Iowa isn't a stop over as evicence by Fry and Ferentz long tenure's, it's also not a destination job.

TheJON wrote: Iowa owns Wisconsin now and for damn near 30 years.

TheJON wrote: Who gives a fuck about all-time? This is why college football fans annoy me. Always bragging about shit that happened dozens of years ago.
College football: where NOW doesn't matter! That should be the slogan.
.

TheJON wrote:But seriously.............are you retarded? I need to know so that I can determine whether or not I should feel bad for laughing at you.

I don't think anybody here feels the least bit bad for laughing at you

Depends what your definition of destination job is. I guess I can't speak for Kirk Ferentz or Hayden Fry as to what their intentions were when they took the Iowa job. Did they plan to come to Iowa for x-amount of time and springboard it into a "better" job? I don't know them, so I couldn't say.

I think Iowa is a destination job for someone that played at Iowa or has major ties to the program. I guarantee you this WOULD have been a destination job for Bob Stoops- he even said so when he was at Florida. I'm also confident the same could be said for guys like Bielema and Mike Stoops.

Ferentz did coach at Iowa in the 1980's for 8 years so it's not unlikely to think he didn't see this as a destination job when he took it. Personally, I think he was hoping to build the program and then get an NFL job. Like I said, I don't know for sure, but it's my best guess. But if it's true, I think it would have been the same intentions if he had gotten the Michigan job or any other big-time college job. But I think he started taking a look at some NFL gigs (and possibly college ones- we'll never know the truth about Michigan a few years ago unless Ferentz says something after he retires) and realized he is happy at Iowa.

Given the fact that he just basically signed a lifetime contract with Iowa at $3.75 million per year, it's quite obvious he has no intentions of ever leaving. He knows nobody is going to pay for that kind of buyout, even if he was Vince Lombardi. So, would you say Iowa is a "destination job" for Ferentz now?

But let's say Ferentz decides after this year he's quitting coaching. Do you really think Iowa couldn't go out and get pretty close to their pick of coaches given the money we are willing to spend and the success we've been having? 15 years ago we paid coaches about average and we were just a slightly above average program. But given the success we've had over the past decade and our money, I just don't see how this wouldn't be an attractive "destination job" for a top level coach.

Cuda wrote:

TheJON wrote: Iowa owns Wisconsin now and for damn near 30 years.

TheJON wrote: Who gives a fuck about all-time? This is why college football fans annoy me. Always bragging about shit that happened dozens of years ago.
College football: where NOW doesn't matter! That should be the slogan.
.

TheJON wrote:But seriously.............are you retarded? I need to know so that I can determine whether or not I should feel bad for laughing at you.

I don't think anybody here feels the least bit bad for laughing at you

http://www.theoneboard.com/board/viewforum.php?f=2

Run along little boy, run along.

TheJON wrote:Do you really think Iowa couldn't go out and get pretty close to their pick of coaches given the money we are willing to spend and the success we've been having? 15 years ago we paid coaches about average and we were just a slightly above average program. But given the success we've had over the past decade and our money, I just don't see how this wouldn't be an attractive "destination job" for a top level coach.

No, I don't. I think there would be a handful of coaches that would fit specific criteria for to go to Iowa, but they couldn't have their pick of the litter when it came to coaches. Mike Stoops would be interested. Bielema would probably be interested. But they both have ties to Iowa. Look at Ferentz, he was a career assistant before he took that job and turned into a great coach. Iowa didn't go out and hire a coach from a top 5 school.

Who could Iowa get now from a top 5 school? Chris Petersen? Maybe. He's used to coaching in an environment similar to Iowa, and would probably view Iowa as a destination job. But Iowa will always be viewed as at absolute best, the third best job in their own conference. Like I said, Michigan pulled a guy from his alma matter and before his team went to a BCS Bowl. ND pulled a guy that was undfeated and a second from the NC game. I don't see the same thing with Iowa.

Iowa, rightly or wrongly, is still viewed by many as being in that limbo area like Kansas State. Yeah, KSU was great but as soon as Snyder left they fell to shit. They're viewed as being one bad hire from being at the bottom of the Big Ten. That's enormus pressure for a coach and something that can ruin a career.

TheJON wrote:We won a BCS bowl in semi-dominating fashion.

Remember that? Remember? That was awesome.

You don't think Iowa could pull a Brian Kelly-type given our money? I disagree.

You're right, Ferentz wasn't a big name but a couple things you must understand......first off, Iowa wasn't as good of a program as they are right now back then. But the thing is, Ferentz was a great fit at Iowa. We could have had bigger names. Stoops was all set to come to Iowa before Bob Bowlsby decided to dick around and lost him to OU. Stoops was the biggest name on the market that year. Just because you hire a coach that's not necessarily considered the "hot" name doesn't mean that school couldn't have landed a bigger name. Do you really think Florida couldn't have done better than replacing Spurrier with Ron Zook? I never recall Ty Willingham being some sort of "big name" when Notre Dame hired him. USC hired Paul Hackett and then Pete Carroll. Those guys were NFL washouts. Could USC not land bigger names than that?

Sometimes a school hires a coach because they think they'd be a perfect fit and that one of the big names wouldn't. The biggest reason Iowa hired Ferentz was because that was Hayden Fry's choice. Hayden was the one that recommended him. Our AD actually wanted Terry Allen because he's a moron (though I will say he did a nice job of hiring Jim Harbaugh). If you're on the board of committees at Iowa and Hayden Fry comes up to you and says "that Kirk Ferentz is gonna be an excellent coach and you should interview him", are you going to say "no"? Look at Hayden's history of producing coaches. The guy knows a football coach when he sees one. He felt it would have been the best choice, and he was right. So I think you're overrating how big of a name Ferentz was at the time because I don't think that's a true indication of what we really COULD have gotten.

TheJON wrote:You don't think Iowa could pull a Brian Kelly-type given our money? I disagree.

Brian Kelly was 24-1 over two years and had his team ranked 3rd in the country when ND hired him. Again, who fits that criteria? A lot of teams have money and can pay just as well as Iowa.

You're right, Ferentz wasn't a big name but a couple things you must understand......first off, Iowa wasn't as good of a program as they are right now back then. But the thing is, Ferentz was a great fit at Iowa. We could have had bigger names. Stoops was all set to come to Iowa before Bob Bowlsby decided to dick around and lost him to OU. Stoops was the biggest name on the market that year. Just because you hire a coach that's not necessarily considered the "hot" name doesn't mean that school couldn't have landed a bigger name. Do you really think Florida couldn't have done better than replacing Spurrier with Ron Zook? I never recall Ty Willingham being some sort of "big name" when Notre Dame hired him. USC hired Paul Hackett and then Pete Carroll. Those guys were NFL washouts. Could USC not land bigger names than that?

But Stoops was also an assistant. He was essentially, Bob Davie. Obviously with the benefit of hindsight, that comparison seems silly. But both were viewed (when they were hired) as the hot young assistant in college football. Florida was left in a tough situation because of when Spurrier left and they wrongly thought that the program could run it self and they just needed elite players. Willingham was viewed as a good, not great coach when he was hired. ND could have done much better, but they stepped all over their dicks. USC couldn't have done better than Carroll. He was about their 5th choice and he had to beg for an interview.

Sometimes a school hires a coach because they think they'd be a perfect fit and that one of the big names wouldn't. The biggest reason Iowa hired Ferentz was because that was Hayden Fry's choice. Hayden was the one that recommended him. Our AD actually wanted Terry Allen because he's a moron (though I will say he did a nice job of hiring Jim Harbaugh). If you're on the board of committees at Iowa and Hayden Fry comes up to you and says "that Kirk Ferentz is gonna be an excellent coach and you should interview him", are you going to say "no"? Look at Hayden's history of producing coaches. The guy knows a football coach when he sees one. He felt it would have been the best choice, and he was right. So I think you're overrating how big of a name Ferentz was at the time because I don't think that's a true indication of what we really COULD have gotten.

I'm not overreacting to anything. That was exactly my point, schools should consider who "fits" well at their school before they make their hire. Iowa can have all the money they want, but if they hire Urban Meyer, that would be insane. But I don't think they could hire Urban Meyer. That's the difference.

No Bret Favre pics?

Damnit!

Jsc810 wrote:

Mace wrote:I'm headed for Ann Arbor early tomorrow morning and expecting to have a good time tomorrow night and lookin forward to my first trip to the Big House. A Hawkeye win will make the trip home more enjoyable but a loss would mean more beer stops and piss breaks. It's a win-win situation.

Rack. That's how you do it.

Unlike this crap:

TheJON wrote:Internet Marketing at its finest right there folks...........

...

I'm not gonna make any sig bets, but I will make a real bet with M Club, RetardSteve, and/or BlindRef. If Michigan wins.......awww, it doesn't matter, they won't. But if (err when) Iowa buttfucks Michigan in the mouth, all the Michigan fans must perform an "Eiffel Tower" on Mace and I. Deal?

Because of Mace, I'd like to see Iowa win. But because of JonBitch, I hope Iowa gets punked by 40 points.

Says the guy that roots for like 18 teams and is the most annoying Troll to ever hit message boards. Your opinion holds no weight, Jsc.

you're projecting again