SDK46
Well-Known Member
I'll let my data do the talking.....
If you go back to '79 when Fry started, we've averaged 7.226 wins a season (224 wins in 31 seasons)
I did a little Excel chart and the trend line is flat.....almost perfectly horizontal. (Wish I could learn how to cut/paste it to here....)
Combing these two data viewpoints my take is as follows:
1.) When Iowa does win more than just 7 games, we're above our last 31-year average.
2.) IMO, the average wins per year needs to be 9 or above to be considered a national power.
3,) We need to rise above just "respect" in order to be considered a national power. And you do that by winning the NC or at least the Big-10 a few years in a row.
4.) We cycle and when we do, we cycle to 6 wins, or less. National powers cycle but they go from say 11 wins to 9 or 8.
We have respect. We aren't taken lightly. We have a product we can be proud of. But we're by no means a national power nor are we really knocking on the door.
If you go back to '79 when Fry started, we've averaged 7.226 wins a season (224 wins in 31 seasons)
I did a little Excel chart and the trend line is flat.....almost perfectly horizontal. (Wish I could learn how to cut/paste it to here....)
Combing these two data viewpoints my take is as follows:
1.) When Iowa does win more than just 7 games, we're above our last 31-year average.
2.) IMO, the average wins per year needs to be 9 or above to be considered a national power.
3,) We need to rise above just "respect" in order to be considered a national power. And you do that by winning the NC or at least the Big-10 a few years in a row.
4.) We cycle and when we do, we cycle to 6 wins, or less. National powers cycle but they go from say 11 wins to 9 or 8.
We have respect. We aren't taken lightly. We have a product we can be proud of. But we're by no means a national power nor are we really knocking on the door.
Last edited: