I didn't watch any of the Iowa game with ISU...
Glad I didn't either. Sounds like Iowa State came ready to play and was the more physical team.

Iowa was plenty physical. Through the 3rd quarter (before the game was out of reach) ISU was averaging 2.4 yards per carry and Albert Young was averaging just about 8 yards per carry.

The problem was that Iowa's coaching staff simply would not run the ball when they need to run the ball. They ignored the wind completely and it came back to haunt them.

Iowa started only one drive outside of the ISU 30 all day.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...58&postcount=2

I'll even take it one further by saying the loss of Tate made no difference. State had rendered him ineffective BEFORE the injury.

Frankie was talking to me. He obviously was looking for any reason to call Hawk fans arrogant.

The Clones did a good job of flat-out neutralizing the passing game, Tate or no Tate.

What I don't understand is why Iowa didn't exploit further the obvious mismatches they had in the running game.

And where was the jailbreak screen? The offense looked very vanilla on Saturday.

I didn't know Phobia was a Hawks fan. I missed his post. But he is an exception. Iowa State fans always regard the fans of two schools as historically arrogant and condescending: Iowa and Nebraska. That's why beating those two schools are always sweetest to us.

Well, all things considered, Nebraska earned their right to be arrogant.

And when you lose 15 in a row to a school, like ISU did to Iowa, there's some legitimacy in that as well.

That being said, ISU has won 6 of 8 from the Hawkeyes. It's about ****ing time Hawkeye fans wake up and realize ISU isn't a 2nd-rate program anymore...

BTW, Frankie, if you listen to alot of sports radio, I can see where you're getting your disdain for Hawkeye fans...

Deace calls it the Jihadic wing of the Hawkeye nation and they are big-time homers.

I take quite a bit of heat on another message board I'm on because I said all summer this was an 8-3 team that didn't deserve to be ranked top-10. I'm not a "real fan"...

htismaqe, phobia - rep. Obviously knowledge, grounded football fans.

But Vailpass, c'mon, you're proving my point about the arrogance. Although I will agree that Iowa probably has an overall more talented team and the reason ISU won was intensity and execution, but you're still saying Iowa's players are 40 points better?
That's like saying Ball St (56 pts, not 40, I know) could have beat Iowa if they had ISU's intensity. Intensity does not make up for 40 points.

Time to accept the fact that ISU has some football players.

Absolutely ISU has some football players. Anybody that thinks that they're THAT far behind Iowa is on something.

If I had to put my own ranks on them, I'd say Iowa talent-wise is a top-13 to top-20 team. ISU is top-20 to top-25.

I said on paper, player by player, position by position, the Hawks look to be superior to the tune of 40 points. I stand by that.
I offered a no-strings-attached congratulations on the victory, which ISU earned.
You have bragging rights for a year due to a very solid performance in the in-state rivalry game.
If you want to be considered an equal ISU will have to earn it by putting together 3-4 years of solid seasons against top-echelon opponents ending in big time bowl games with year-end rankings in the top ten. Until then they are just the same old Clones who have their superbowl against the Hawks then fold the rest of the way.

I'll be the first to admit that, despite a win saturday, ISU is not overall on Iowa's level of a football program. What Iowa's done over the last 3 years is incredible and I would never suggest that one win puts the Cyclones on that level.

I'm just hoping that this win can be the start moving closer to that kind of consistency.

But I'll go with htismaqe's quote "Absolutely ISU has some football players. Anybody that thinks that they're THAT far behind Iowa is on something" to address your statement of "on paper, player by player, position by position, the Hawks look to be superior to the tune of 40 points. I stand by that"

And I agree completely that Iowa is a top 10-20 team, and ISU is 20-25.

But ISU has a fairly advantageous schedule from now on, so I'm praying they use the talent they've got this year to actually make an impact.

O alright fine, I'll admit I may have been overstating the talent gap just a teeny tiny little bit. Truth be told I root for the Clones when they are playing Big 12 opponents, and they definetely have talent. In fact, they are a very well coached team who should make a splash this year.
Now I'm going to go wash mymouth out with black-n-golds (Jager+Goldschlagger)!

Drinking, there's a topic I'm sure I can agree with you about.