Predict 5-6 players who won't be on the team in August 2013

[AZmess]

lol your call.

All I'm saying is that him sucking/coaches are dumbfucks don't have to be the ONLY REASONS why he didn't play last year.

[Debit One]

It strikes me as moderately to extremely absurd to speculate about defections while knowing nothing about the kids' personal situations, what the coaches are telling them, what they see with their own eyes in practice, etc., etc.

[Hawk4Life94]

Originally Posted by AZmess

lol your call.

All I'm saying is that him sucking/coaches are dumbfucks don't have to be the ONLY REASONS why he didn't play last year.

I know what you're saying.

[L. Wade Childress]

doug, who in the fuck could have possibly supplanted miller last year? i dont even see any options on the roster.

[nolookpass]

Originally Posted by Kerky

What was Poggi's medical issue(s)? Is he healthy now or not?

Rhabdo, amongst others.

His Dad was one of the peeps rushing to Doyle's defense.

[L. Wade Childress]

i just looked at the roster because i figured i had to be missing someone, but nope... the options beyond miller at safety were lowdermilk, sleeper, and slippy, slappy, swimmy, swanson???

[douglasbader]

Originally Posted by Debit One

It strikes me as moderately to extremely absurd to speculate about defections while knowing nothing about the kids' personal situations, what the coaches are telling them, what they see with their own eyes in practice, etc., etc.

Are you new to the internet?

[douglasbader]

Originally Posted by L. Wade Childress

i just looked at the roster because i figured i had to be missing someone, but nope... the options beyond miller at safety were lowdermilk, sleeper, and slippy, slappy, swimmy, swanson???

A cum filled gym sock should have replaced him.

[Shawneemicks]

Originally Posted by nolookpass

Rhabdo, amongst others.

His Dad was one of the peeps rushing to Doyle's defense.

Wasn't ole Biff just recently critical of Iowa for something?

[DGHawk]

Originally Posted by Gushawk

All that tells me is that Kirk must have thought Rudock was substantially worse than sophomore Stanzi, as he was starting by the time Big Ten play rolled around and JVB was as abysmal as JC. Well, that and that KF is a huge DF.

My guess - Rudock won't start or if he does it means we're up shit creek and he'll be the best of some brutal options.

What about the year before?

[Lime]

Originally Posted by DGHawk

What about the year before?

I think you can rationalize sticking with Christensen throughout 2007 much more easily than you can sticking with Vandenberg throughout 2012. Christensen was at least a sophomore and in theory could have improved. Vandenberg was a senior--- more snaps weren't going to make him a better player.

(I suppose you could argue that Ferentz was hoping that Vandenberg eventually recaptured his abilities from 2009 Ohio State/2011 but I think that's a less rational hope.)

[DGHawk]

Originally Posted by Lime

I think you can rationalize sticking with Christensen throughout 2007 much more easily than you can sticking with Vandenberg throughout 2012. Christensen was at least a sophomore and in theory could have improved. Vandenberg was a senior--- more snaps weren't going to make him a better player.

(I suppose you could argue that Ferentz was hoping that Vandenberg eventually recaptured his abilities from 2009 Ohio State/2011 but I think that's a less rational hope.)

I don't disagree in part. However, JC never improved during the year and may have been worse the next year. Yet it took a complete debacle in the Pitt game and the knowledge that KF's life may have been in danger before Stanzi was named QB.

[ChipHilton]

Originally Posted by nolookpass

Rhabdo, amongst others.

His Dad was one of the peeps rushing to Doyle's defense.

Effed up shoulders, too.

[douglasbader]

This might mean Brad Rogers is done.

Marvin McNutt ‏@McNutt7wr
If you want another great hawk to follow go follow my bruh @Rogers_38

[AZmess]

Why?

[AZmess]

Oh because current players can't tweet. Nvm.

[douglasbader]

Silly AZ, dicks are for chicks.

[AZmess]

Originally Posted by douglasbader

Silly AZ, dicks are for chicks.

D+

[RiotFan]

Morehouse made a couple of comments in the podcast about Lile having "wandering eyes" or something to that effect. Already burned a RS and should compete right away for PT. would surprise me but Morehouse sounded like he had been hearing rumors.

[Gushawk]

Originally Posted by RiotFan

Morehouse made a couple of comments in the podcast about Lile having "wandering eyes" or something to that effect. Already burned a RS and should compete right away for PT. would surprise me but Morehouse sounded like he had been hearing rumors.

What does this, specifically "wandering eyes", mean? Does Tanner Miller not have them? Are they good or bad?

[valp0guy]

Brad Rodgers is the football jess settles

[douglasbader]

Originally Posted by RiotFan

Morehouse made a couple of comments in the podcast about Lile having "wandering eyes" or something to that effect. Already burned a RS and should compete right away for PT. would surprise me but Morehouse sounded like he had been hearing rumors.

He also blew his ACL out last year.

[douglasbader]

Kakert says this is a good sign Rogers is done and Gamblindan confirms he is done and that Weisman is back to Fullback.

[Gushawk]

Still don't think Weisman plays many if any snaps with his hand on the ground.

[douglasbader]

Originally Posted by Gushawk

Still don't think Weisman plays many if any snaps with his hand on the ground.

He will play 80% of his snaps with his hand on the ground and he should.

[RiotFan]

Originally Posted by Gushawk

What does this, specifically "wandering eyes", mean? Does Tanner Miller not have them? Are they good or bad?

Meaning he might be looking at other schools.

Unfortunately Miller does not have these same "wandering eyes."

[Gushawk]

Originally Posted by RiotFan

Meaning he might be looking at other schools.

Unfortunately Miller does not have these same "wandering eyes."

I read it as more akin to "head on a swivel"/"ballhawk", but it was a bizarre phrase to use, IMO.

[Gushawk]

Originally Posted by douglasbader

He will play 80% of his snaps with his hand on the ground and he should.

Disagree on both counts. We'll see.

[douglasbader]

Originally Posted by Gushawk

Disagree on both counts. We'll see.

You may be right, but why do you disagree? There are multiple people well connected to the program that are saying over and over for months now that Weisman has been moved back there. Rogers isn't coming back, so Weisman is the only other viable FB option. Iowa (at least at this moment) has a healthy stable of running backs including Bullock, Canzeri, Hill, Malloy, Daniels, etc....

Seems you are reacting more off gut instinct of a few early season games and forgetting that Bullock was the starter and finished the year strong.

I think you will see Weisman as the FB and likely short yardage runner next year and that will be the perfect place for him. It is where Iowa needs him the most and they simply don't need him at RB.

[Gushawk]

1. I believe Moorehouse reported Kirk himself saying Weisman was still at RB.

2. I don't think we'll see Iowa lined up much in a traditional I. Less than 20% of the time, maybe quite a bit less, IMO.

3. I think under most circumstances and against most opponents, Weisman is our most effective ball carrier over the course of 15+ carries, and that won't be lost on the staff.

[DoeyHawk]

Bullock and Weisman should split carries. We all know this won't happen as Kirk is fond of finding one guy, running his ass into the ground until he is inevitably injured and/or concussed.

Finding a serviceable blocking fullback shouldn't be that difficult. In addition to being a nice change of pace guy, Weisman can catch out of the backfield. If Iowa has absolutely nobody to play fullback other than Weisman, than I guess you have to play him there out of necessity.

[Gushawk]

...or just don't/very rarely play a traditional fullback. And as much as I hate Greg Davis, I think that particular change is one that's somewhat more likely under his stewardship.

[RiotFan]

Morehouse also said on the podcast that Canzeri was reported at 4.35 recently and is somewhere around 195 lbs. Don't expect any of the freshmen RB's to play next year unless AIRBHG makes his presence known (likely I suppose).

[AZmess]

Fuck Barta.

[DoeyHawk]

Originally Posted by RiotFan

Morehouse also said on the podcast that Canzeri was reported at 4.35 recently and is somewhere around 195 lbs. Don't expect any of the freshmen RB's to play next year unless AIRBHG makes his presence known (likely I suppose).

Any word if he has learned how to break an index finger tackle?

[RiotFan]

Originally Posted by DoeyHawk

Any word if he has learned how to break an index finger tackle?

Negative.

[Whatever]

Originally Posted by douglasbader

You may be right, but why do you disagree? There are multiple people well connected to the program that are saying over and over for months now that Weisman has been moved back there. Rogers isn't coming back, so Weisman is the only other viable FB option. Iowa (at least at this moment) has a healthy stable of running backs including Bullock, Canzeri, Hill, Malloy, Daniels, etc....

Seems you are reacting more off gut instinct of a few early season games and forgetting that Bullock was the starter and finished the year strong.

I think you will see Weisman as the FB and likely short yardage runner next year and that will be the perfect place for him. It is where Iowa needs him the most and they simply don't need him at RB.

Actually, Weisman was the starter in the last 2 games last year and Bullock didn't finish the year strong at all. He fucking sucked against Purdue and Indiana which were his last 2 games. Weisman had more success against Nebraska and Michigan at the end of the year than Bullock did against those 2 shitty defenses.

If Weisman is moving back to fullback it better mean that Canzeri or one of the other running backs is better than him. If it is Bullock, I am going to be pissed, because Weisman is clearly better than him. Bullock has a chance to be a decent third down back, but he is not an every down type of guy.

[L. Wade Childress]

after rogers got hurt we ran one-back sets almost all of the time.

[ChipHilton]

Bullock came back from injury to get 22 carries for 107 vs NW, along with 5 catches for 41. He had 25 carries for 83 at IU, a solid half of which were "smear the queer" carries into the middle of the DL, causing Eddie P to disgustedly and repeatedly moan that those plays had no chance. (Like Canzeri vs OU, Doey.) He may well have sucked against Purdue.

[Gushawk]

I don't think Weisman is superior to Bullock in all respects, but I do think he is superior on the whole.

And if Weisman is taking 80% of his snaps with his hand on the ground, I don't think he will be taking many snaps period.

[douglasbader]

Originally Posted by L. Wade Childress

after rogers got hurt we ran one-back sets almost all of the time.

This is because Weisman was also hurt and we had like 1 healthy RB left.

[douglasbader]

I like Weisman, he is good, but Iowa has proven that behind a healthy Offensive line they can plug in a retarded one legged monkey and it will gain 100 yards per game.

Use him where he is most needed.

[L. Wade Childress]

Originally Posted by douglasbader

This is because Weisman was also hurt and we had like 1 healthy RB left.

no, weisman was that one back much of the time. i brought this up in previous threads, but i was shocked that i never saw a change in blocking philosophy even though we lost what I figured was a key component of the running game (the lead blocker)

[Gushawk]

in theory, that doesn't necessarily not make sense, as I don't think on a typical zone blocking play the fullback is assigned to block a particular man but rather to clean up if a lineman is unable to get to the next level. A TE could theoretically be assigned a similar role, or to block the DE freeing the tackle to get upfield.

[ChipHilton]

I'm trying to decide, if I were a Big 10 DC, whether I'd be more concerned about a combination of Weisman and Matthew Meyers/Adam Cox or a combination of Weisman and Canzeri/Bullock.

[L. Wade Childress]

Originally Posted by Gushawk

in theory, that doesn't necessarily not make sense, as I don't think on a typical zone blocking play the fullback is assigned to block a particular man but rather to clean up if a lineman is unable to get to the next level. A TE could theoretically be assigned a similar role, or to block the DE freeing the tackle to get upfield.

I agree but common sense against a stacked box does not compute

[Monster]

How many stars does the retarded one legged monkey have?

[Gushawk]

Originally Posted by L. Wade Childress

I agree but common sense against a stacked box does not compute

Lotta stacked boxes on the hawkeye horizon.

[Uff Da]

Originally Posted by douglasbader

I like Weisman, he is good, but Iowa has proven that behind a healthy Offensive line they can plug in a retarded one legged monkey and it will gain 100 yards per game.

Use him where he is most needed.

This was true prior to the disaster known as greg davis's offense. I am not so sure now. Teams had plenty of defenders in the box knowing that iowa would not stretch the field.

[douglasbader]

MacMillan done? Did I miss this?