Coaching Effect

C

cincyhawk

Well-Known Member
Kirk's coaching effect this year is a -4.

https://collegefootballmatrix.wordp...-conference/big-ten-coaching-net-game-effect/

That means, without Ferentz, CFB matrix projected Iowa at a 12 win season.

Coaching Effect – Another one of our factor calculations. This is the difference in our predicted baseline result versus the actual results of a team. A team can finish at a higher level than predicted (positive coaching diff.) or under what we predicted (negative coaching diff.). These numbers carry forward and are used to predict the mostly ‘likely’ scenario for season wins/losses and individual games.

Unbelievable.
 
Although we can all see the impact of KF as a coach this year isn't that bad. Though we could easily see what decisions and strategies led to defeats by Wisky (also ball security), PSU (tough game by tough teams), and Purdue on the road, the only one that is squarely on KF is NW.
 
Vegas had Iowa winning by 10 but probably didn't expect the projected #11 overall draft pick would be on the bench most of the game. This has attributed to every loss this year, except maybe Purdue. Fant didn't play any 3rd down in the 4th quarter against Wisconsin and didn't play much until the 4th quarter against PSU.
 
cincyhawk said:
Kirk's coaching effect this year is a -4.

https://collegefootballmatrix.wordp...-conference/big-ten-coaching-net-game-effect/

That means, without Ferentz, CFB matrix projected Iowa at a 12 win season.

Coaching Effect – Another one of our factor calculations. This is the difference in our predicted baseline result versus the actual results of a team. A team can finish at a higher level than predicted (positive coaching diff.) or under what we predicted (negative coaching diff.). These numbers carry forward and are used to predict the mostly ‘likely’ scenario for season wins/losses and individual games.

Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Uh, we haven't won 8 yet.
 
hawkdrummer1 said:
Uh, we haven't won 8 yet.
Click to expand...

The coaching effect is the projected net loss against teams their model says Iowa should beat. We've lost three straight plus Wisconsin. In addition there are 12 games in the regular season. Their model had us 10 - 0. You think it predicted an Illini win or a Nebby win preseason?
 
hawkeyes87 said:
Don't know if something changed after you posted this link, but the article that comes up now is from 2012!

KF at -4 is worse than Bo Pelini's -3, and Danny Hope and Joe Pa's -1. But, way better than the Zooker's -10! I miss that guy!
Click to expand...

Lol. I posted the wrong link. The guy was on the air a few weeks ago at KXNO, and mentioned Kirk's cumulative effect was really poor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top