Big Game Kirk? What do the Stats Say?

PJHawk said:
That ^ post should make all Hawkeye fans puke all over their shoes.
Click to expand...

People shouldn't be surprised by this. Imo, yes worst case we should have split with them and had no business losing either. But when the opposing teams fans can bring more attendance than your local fans and when you have to use psyops tactics by blasting things over the speakers to prod them out of your stadium after they've tore down your goal posts and defiled your bathrooms with sexcapades then at some point you're not going to take it lying down any more and you're going to punch back.
 
I hope KF's averages go up after next season, that would really be like pulling a rabbit out of his hat.
 
Last edited:
JonDMiller said:
I ran onto an interesting website Thursday called coachesbythenumbers.com. It's a stat slicer and dicer, so I liked it straight away. Once I got in and looked at the data they had compiled, I spent an hour going over it. What follows are some of the angles I found interesting.

FERENTZ IN BIG GAMES: I think playing against a ranked opponent qualifies as a 'Big Game' Below is how Ferentz's Iowa teams have fared in different splits, plus a few familiar conference names and some from around the country. NOTE: The data sample used by this website goes back to the 2001 season through 2011. That was not my choice of sample, rather what they made available.

Kirk Ferentz
Against Top 5 (Time of Game): (3-3) (50.0%)


Who are the three top 5 teams Iowa has beaten? I assume one is PSU from '08...who are the the other 2?
Click to expand...
 
iowaboy85 said:
Yea, but he also has the worst winning % against teams with sub .500 records(end of season). Basically he can get his team up to play top opponets, but struggles to motivate his team against inferior teams.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Lost opportunities.

If Ferentz's style is all about being consistent, showing up to work, taking care of business... how do you explain performing so poorly in games against weaker teams, where a "basic solid performance" should get the job done.

But I see it differently than you. Ferentz never gets his teams "up" for games...not even the big ones. He's Mr Bland. The players, however, naturally get pumped up for big games. They don't need anyone to tell them it's a big game.

So it's those sub .500 games where it's critical that the coaches keep their guys focused and ready. Those games are also when our opponent is more likely "UP" for us... as they want to pull the upset. (see ISU...see Minnesota... etc). And KFz's weakness there...is on clear display in those stats.
 
Last edited:
hawkdrummer1 said:
Bingo. Lost opportunities.

If Ferentz's style is all about being consistent, showing up to work, taking care of business... how do you explain performing so poorly in games against weaker teams, where a "basic solid performance" should get the job done.

<b>But I see it differently than you. Ferentz never gets his teams "up" for games...not even the big ones. He's Mr Bland.</b> The players, however, naturally get pumped up for big games. They don't need anyone to tell them it's a big game.

So it's those sub .500 games where it's critical that the coaches keep their guys focused and ready. Those games are also when our opponent is more likely "UP" for us... as they want to pull the upset. (see ISU...see Minnesota... etc). And KFz's weakness there...is on clear display in those stats.
Click to expand...


What bites us in the *** against inferior teams is (deliberate) PREDICTABILITY. There is a positive and a negative side to this. The positive is that these live games serve as opportunities to continually fine tune execution allowing Iowa to peak late. The negative is that teams like isu, minny, and nwu thrive entirely on our predictability -- they take big risks betting that Iowa will continually try to impose their will (particularly on offense). This same predictability pays off against powerhouses that think they are talented enough to play us straight up.

I honestly think it is well worth sticking to this overall philosophy because if we manage to squeak past the inferior teams in this manner, it usually leads to a spectacular season. The only tweaking if it were possible would be to somehow elevate our Special Teams play to at least the extent that they are not a liability. Missed sub 35 yard FGs, and poor kick-off coverage are the two areas that would turn those heart-breaking losses to third-world teams into wins.
 
Has anyone double checked the numbers, there are 3 games I can't seem to find. I came up with 45-10 since 2001 against oppenents under .500. For those wondering, 3-5 in KF first 2 years. (99-01) we were 7-6, (02-05) we were 18-0, (06-08) we were 10-6, (09-12) we were 13-3.

Since 01
Conf.- 26-7 (surprising MN is 3 of the 7 and NW is only 1)
ISU- 4-2
BCS (nonISU)- 4-0
Other- 11-1

8 of the 10 loses were on the road the 2 at home were NW (06) and W.Michigan(07).


College Football Reference
 
pmchawk said:
Has anyone double checked the numbers, there are 3 games I can't seem to find. I came up with 45-10 since 2001 against oppenents under .500. For those wondering, 3-5 in KF first 2 years. (99-01) we were 7-6, (02-05) we were 18-0, (06-08) we were 10-6, (09-12) we were 13-3.
Click to expand...
If you were talking about my numbers, there isn't much scientific going on there. According to that site KF's record overall is 92-47, of which he was 46-35 against teams that finished over .500. By default then, the remainder of the games had to be against teams under .500....the only caveat is that I'm not sure how they treated teams who finished dead on .500.
 
I believe there are about 120 BCS division teams.

KF is about #18 in BCS bowl appearances (2) and somewhere about in the 20's in terms of BCS wins (1).
 
I think something like this has already been alluded to, but KF also has the worst record in the conference since 2006 when 10+ point favorites, and Iowa really is in last place BY FAR in that stat amongst Big Ten teams.

So according to the numbers, the problem doesn't seem to be our performance against the better teams in the league, but rather against the bottom feeders. Iowa seems to play to the level of its competition.
 
JonDMiller said:
Yes, that is an interesting number.
Click to expand...

pmchawk said:
Has anyone double checked the numbers, there are 3 games I can't seem to find. I came up with 45-10 since 2001 against oppenents under .500. For those wondering, 3-5 in KF first 2 years. (99-01) we were 7-6, (02-05) we were 18-0, (06-08) we were 10-6, (09-12) we were 13-3.

Since 01
Conf.- 26-7 (surprising MN is 3 of the 7 and NW is only 1)
ISU- 4-2
BCS (nonISU)- 4-0
Other- 11-1

8 of the 10 loses were on the road the 2 at home were NW (06) and W.Michigan(07).


College Football Reference
Click to expand...


Seems to be a number of things playing into the losses against subpar teams.
#1. Many of those games were lost during down years, especially 06, 07, 11 and pre-2001.
#2. Playing on the road (esp combined with #1)
#3. High number of injuries, second half of 2006 & 2010.
#4. Leaving the other team in striking range. Inferior teams see this as an opertunity
#5. Defending slim second half leads rather than expanding a lead. This approach requires fewer mistakes.
#6. Playing poorly in lesser rivalry games vs. ISU, Minnesota, and Northwestern.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
I think something like this has already been alluded to, but KF also has the worst record in the conference since 2006 when 10+ point favorites, and Iowa really is in last place BY FAR in that stat amongst Big Ten teams.

So according to the numbers, the problem doesn't seem to be our performance against the better teams in the league, but rather against the bottom feeders. Iowa seems to play to the level of its competition.
Click to expand...

That statistic came out last fall was really ugly for Ferentz. IIRC since 2006 Ferentz has lost 9 games while favoried by 10 points or more. By comparison Wisconsin hasn't lost any and rest of the Big Ten had a combed 13 losses.
 
Some of those stats got me thinking (since I'm sort of a stat geek) and rather than looking at records vs. teams over/under .500 I thought I'd try and see what it looks like on a tiered basis.

So I looked at records against teams who finished the year with 0-3 wins, 4-7 wins, and 8+ wins. I then compared those to our "peers" in the conference.....Michigan, Michigan St, Wisconsin, Penn State and Nebraska (Ohio State has been a league of their own since 2001). The results were somewhat interesting.

With the exception of Michigan State, overall wins are nearly dead-even (none of these stats include games against teams outside of the FBS):

Iowa - 86
Wisconsin - 92
Michigan - 88
Michigan St - 74
Penn St - 84
Nebraska - 87

However, how teams got those wins suprised me. The following are the total games played and number of wins against teams that finished the year with 0-3 wins:

Iowa - 18, 15
Wisconsin - 25, 23
Michigan 13, 11
Michigan St - 24, 23
Penn State - 18, 18
Nebraska - 16, 16

Two of those are not like the other. Wisconsin and Michigan State have played, far and away, more teams that finished the year with 3 wins or less than any other team in this group. In fact, when you look at it as a % of their total wins, it's not even close. Since 2001, Wisconsin has gotten exactly 25% of their wins against teams with 3 or fewer wins. Michigan St is even worse. They have gotten over 31% (nearly 1/3) of their wins over the last 11 years against teams with 3 or fewer wins. Contrast that with Iowa and Michigan who have gotten 17% and 13%, respectively, against teams with 3 or fewer wins.

When you look at winning % against teams with 8 or more wins, the following are the results:

Iowa - .449
Wisconsin - .407
Michigan - .433
Michigan St - .309
Penn State - .296
Nebraska - .375

As you can see, Iowa has the best winning % against teams that finished with 8 or more wins, with Michigan a close 2nd. Wisconsin and Nebby are fairly respectable, but Penn State and Michigan St are downright terrible.

However, as most have probably guessed, where Iowa falls short is against teams that finished the year with 4-7 wins. This is an issue because the majority of games are played against teams that finish with this win total. The following is the winning % against teams that finished the year with 4-7 wins:

Iowa - .742
Wisconsin - .825
Michigan - .823
Michigan State - .607
Penn State - .820
Nebraska - .769

As you can see, other than Michigan State who is pathetically low, Iowa has the worst winning % against teams in the 4-7 win range.....not even winning 75% of those games over an 11 year time span. If you break down by year and look at our best years (2002-2004 and 2008, 2009), we were a combined 24-2 against teams that finished between 4 and 7 wins....better than a .920 winning %. In the other 6 years, our winning % against teams with 4-7 wins was 25-15 or a .625 winning %.

So how do we squeeze 1-2 more wins each year? There's really only 2 choices if you're Iowa. Either schedule more patsies like Wisconsin and Michigan State or find a way to win more games against teams in the 4-7 win range. It's pretty unrealistic in my book to expect more wins against teams in the 8+ win category because we are already winning those at an almost 50% clip and that's probably about as good as can be expected.
 
iowaboy85 said:
Yea, but he also has the worst winning % against teams with sub .500 records(end of season). Basically he can get his team up to play top opponets, but struggles to motivate his team against inferior teams.
Click to expand...

Minnesota the last 2 years, for example. It's what people remember.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top