quote:
I think what most people mean is there is an obvious athleticism gap between the two teams. LSU has the superior athletes, however, if they don't play to their best capabilities Iowa will win. No disrespect to Iowa or their program, but I think it's pretty obvious that LSU has the far superior athletes.

That doesn't mean that LSU is better than Iowa. If both teams played their best, I think LSU win's every time. BUT playing your best never happens in football. You can't sustain perfection.

Tiger fans are confident, but I think they should be. Look at recruiting. Look at the athletes LSU has accumulated. It's an impressive bunch. Doesn't mean they will win. Ugly dudes get hot chicks. Upsets happen. That's why they play the game.

The thing that people don't seem to get is that there's much more than being a good athlete to being a good football player.

I agree that Iowa may not be on par athletically with LSU (although that gap is probably a lot less than most on here seem to think). But when it comes to football player quality, the Hawks take a back seat to nobody (when able to avoid injuries due to a lack of depth due to being a developmental program).

I would say if you want to look for a shortcoming in Iowa's program it would be the lack of quality depth that we've had over the years (although I would argue that's improving). Typically our first stringers have been able to play with anyone, but as injuries often do happen during the course of a season, the Hawks' 2nd and 3rd stringers aren't nearly (yet) as gifted as teams that recruit higher profile players. The blueblood teams just sub in another high school all-american and keep on trucking.

Iowa has been very fortunate this year in regards to injuries (knock on wood), and therefore in a good position at this point of the season to compete with pretty much anybody, even a "powerhouse" SEC program.