In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 230
Online now 239 Record: 4649 (2/27/2012)
The place for inside information on the Iowa Hawkeyes
The place to discuss general topics outside of Iowa
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Great discussion. Here's my two cents. If there was a lesson learned from Dr. Tom's experience at Iowa, it was that no coach should stay here for too long. I recall him being considered for Kentucky, and mentioned for a few other high profile jobs, and in each case, he graciously and quickly removed his name from the list of potential candidates. I think Fran is an ambitious man. My sense is that he won't stay long enough to become one of those 5 - 7 range guys you mentioned, and he would take the opportunity to leave quickly.
Gene Keady at Purdue was always a curious case for me, and I used to compare his record and accomplishments to that of Dr. Tom. In 25 years Gene took his team to 2 sweet 16's and two elite 8's. In 13 years Dr. Tom took Iowa to one elite 8 and two sweet 16's. I think given more time Dr. Tom would have ended up with a much better record than Gene Keady who is still idolized at Purdue (Granted Gene won 6 Big 10 championships and Dr. Tom won none and that's a big distinction and not a small one.). Anyway, all this to say that given Iowa's history and Fran's ambitions, I doubt he would allow himself to become another Dr. Tom at Iowa.
I know it might just be coach speak, but Fran said that Iowa was about the only job he would've left Siena for. He has young kids and seems very family oriented and might not want to move them around much. I could see him retiring at Iowa, but who knows with coaches. The Notre Dame gig could always open up and have interest in him.
You've definitely proven his opinion. And you completely missed the point.
So, if a former player tells FACTS to family members, that is considered hearsay?
I believe that is called a primary source.
But, I'm not going on and on telling information on facts that have been told, nor will I.
Truth, I'm sure you watch football games just like the rest of us. I'm sure you see Kirk Ferentz wearing that headset. He's not on the sidelines listening to 100.7 The Fox Eastern Iowa's Classic Rock during games.
When Ken O'Keefe (called) or Greg Davis call plays, Kirk Ferentz is giving his "yes" and "no" to the plays. He also gives his "yes" and "no" to the types of plays that he thinks should go into the playbook as a whole.
Exactly. U2 has accurate information.
And he scripts the first 20 plays. They are ran no matter what the defense is doing.
And no, Truth, I did not miss the point. The point is some people do know. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it isn't true.
Some people do know, but are they verifiable to the rest of us, that's the point! Just because you may agree with U2's opinion doesn't change that fact there is no way for the rest of us to verify his family members are secondary sources to a primary source (Drew Tate). It's by definition hearsay.
Shouldn't take a court objection --in a thread about Iowa's bball coach--to figure that out.
I apparently didn't make myself clear. I know that U2's information is accurate because it is the same information given to me by others who know. I am not disclosing who told me either. So if you think it is an opinion and hearsay, that is your right. However, if you observe the body of work from the JC debacle until today, an unbiased observation would indicate the information is spot on.
Guys, feel free to discuss your thoughts about Ferentz and the football coaching staff, but this isn't the thread to do it. Let's keep this thread focused on Fran. Otherwise, I'll have to lock it.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports