Hawk Stock: What Should Our Annual Expectations Be?

[Stiles]

I believe with Iowa's resources (fans, revenues, investment in program (coach's pay and facilities), 30 year tradition) Iowa should average expect 8.25 wins over the long run). That is 4-0 in preseason most years (3 out 4 vs ISU on average) and 4-4 in conference play most years. That is not unrealistic. More years at 5-3 or better in conference than 3-5 years in conference, bringing the average slightly above 8 wins.

I agree some years we will experience below average years (or else you wouldn't have an average). That said 7 should be the low water mark with 5 doormats played every year.

With all of that said it just seems this coaching staff is missing something the past few years. We obviously can develop NFL players, which should equal wins on the field, but it isn't. I believe we have some of the best/if not the best developers of talent in college football, but these same coaches are below average on game day.

We had an NFL qb last and and 4 future NFL d linemen and only won 7 games in the regular season last year? That is lack of coaching...period.

 

[JonDMiller]

Jon, I love how you spin things like this. All you did was took an average # of wins over the last 7 years. In 5 out of the last 7 years, Iowa has won 7 or less football games in the regular season. .

Please look at the post I was replying to. The poster said 8 or more wins per year, but also said there would be years where they won less than that.

To me, that sounds a lot like on the average.

 

[JonDMiller]

He was talking regular season Jon. Surprised you missed the all capitals REGULAR in his post.

You are right. I did miss that. And I think that, as a minimum expectation level, is waaaay to optimistic. EVERY year?

 

[Stiles]

Tell me why Nebraska from this day forward has an advantage on Iowa and should expect more wins than Iowa annually (their fans expect 9 wins per year in the regular season).

Is it that their fans expect too much?

Nebraska obviously has a much better tradition than Iowa, but so does Minnesota, the past is the past. We generate just as much revenue as Nebraska; they have the same recruiting issues with in-state talent (1.8m people vs 3m). I know Iowa has two 2 BCS level programs, but most of the time we get all the in-state kids we offer, so that really isn't much of a Nebraska advantage.

Some of you say Iowa should average 8 wins a year, do you believe Nebraska should also average 8 or should the average 9? If you believe 9, why should Nebraska average more?

 

[StatelineHawk]

I would say 8+ REGULAR season wins, plus a bowl game. But calling it an "annual" expectation doesn't mean that a rebuilding season where you go 7-5 every so often is unacceptable - it just shouldn't be the norm like it has been for Iowa football 5 of the past 7 years.

Out of the 8 regular season wins, I'd say it could break down a couple ways:
4-0 non-conference, 4-4 in the Big Ten
3-1 non-conference, 5-3 in the Big Ten

Either scenario gets you to 8-4. Of course, doing better than that sometimes would be nice. Like going 4-0 in the non-conference, and 5-3 or 6-2 in the conference. To get to 9-3 or 10-2.

Also in my expectations are to regularly beat underdog teams like ISU, Indiana and Minnesota. It doesn't mean we should NEVER lose to those teams. Upsets happen. But 19-9 since 2006 as 10+ point favorites is unacceptable, considering all of the other teams in the conference have lost 2-3 games MAX in that scenario in the same time frame. Winning these types of games is a MUST if we want to see 8-9+ win seasons with regularity.

Well put!
Losing 9 times as a 10 point favorite is unacceptable. Losing to a team as bad as Minny 2 years in a row should never happen. Upsets happen, but this is beyond an upset. I lived through Iowas whole consecutive years losing streak, thought I do not remember the first few. Roy Bash is the first Iowa QB i remember. Iowa just seems to suffer more bad losses than other teams.

 

[JonDMiller]

Here are some programs that did not average 8 wins a year 2001-2010, ALL games

Everyone in the Big Ten not named Ohio State, Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska
Everyone in the Big 12 not named Oklahoma and Texas
Over half of the SEC, including Alabama. Tennessee had 8.1
Notre Dame

 

[JonDMiller]

Tell me why Nebraska from this day forward has an advantage on Iowa and should expect more wins than Iowa annually (their fans expect 9 wins per year in the regular season).

Is it that their fans expect too much?

Nebraska obviously has a much better tradition than Iowa, but so does Minnesota, the past is the past. We generate just as much revenue as Nebraska; they have the same recruiting issues with in-state talent (1.8m people vs 3m). I know Iowa has two 2 BCS level programs, but most of the time we get all the in-state kids we offer, so that really isn't much of a Nebraska advantage.

Some of you say Iowa should average 8 wins a year, do you believe Nebraska should also average 8 or should the average 9? If you believe 9, why should Nebraska average more?

All histories are not equal. You don't think Nebraska's three national titles in the 1990's aren't relevant? Their success since the 1960's has meant incredible amount of $$ poured into that program, which has given them amazing resources and they are a national brand.

Minnesota's successes along those lines are only remembered first hand by people who are grandparents today. Huge difference.

 

[nationalchamps]

Tell me why Nebraska from this day forward has an advantage on Iowa and should expect more wins than Iowa annually (their fans expect 9 wins per year in the regular season).

Is it that their fans expect too much?

Nebraska obviously has a much better tradition than Iowa, but so does Minnesota, the past is the past. We generate just as much revenue as Nebraska; they have the same recruiting issues with in-state talent (1.8m people vs 3m). I know Iowa has two 2 BCS level programs, but most of the time we get all the in-state kids we offer, so that really isn't much of a Nebraska advantage.

Some of you say Iowa should average 8 wins a year, do you believe Nebraska should also average 8 or should the average 9? If you believe 9, why should Nebraska average more?

This is a great post and a point I have tried unendlessly to drive home to my fellow hawkeye brethren around the office. Kids nowadays don't give a rip about history/tradition. These kids were infants the last time Nebraska won a national title and weren't even born the last time the Domers won one. Kids could simply care less so let's drop the history/tradition argument when it comes to Iowa recruiting.

 

[SDK46]

My issue is we've had two years since 06 where the team underachieved significantly, with all sorts of talent. (06 and last year), with 2010 being a disaster.

It seems like the coaching staff does a lot well....developing players, representing the university, etc., but in those two instances the team got away from them with a few "fat cats" (as KF stated) infecting the team.

Not sure why we, in the last 5 years, seemingly lack prowess in the area of "taking a really excellent team to a new level."

 

[nationalchamps]

All histories are not equal. You don't think Nebraska's three national titles in the 1990's aren't relevant? Not to kids who were babies at the time and have no recollection of them taking place. Their success since the 1960's has meant incredible amount of $$ poured into that program, We've had success since the early 80s and you know we have the same resources as Nebby which has given them amazing resources and they are a national brand.

Minnesota's successes along those lines are only remembered first hand by people who are grandparents today. Huge difference.

 

[Stiles]

I agree that comparing Nebby and Minnesota is a big reach. My point is Nebraska does not have much better resources than Iowa. Additionally, it is coming upon 15 years since they were at an elite level, kids today don't know that.

The rules of the game are much different than they were when Nebby won those titles too. No Prop 48 or Big 8 conference schedule specifically.

If you think they should win more than Iowa, please say why so.

 

[Stiles]

Jon, what is your thoughts on average wins per year? You didn't state that in your article.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

You are right. I did miss that. And I think that, as a minimum expectation level, is waaaay to optimistic. EVERY year?

You also missed where I said that expecting 8+ wins doesn't mean that it's unacceptable to have a rebuilding year here and there, just so long as those years are the exception, not the rule.

No where did I say 8+ wins was expected EVERY year.

 

[sdschroe]

For those who say the Nebraska program success in the 60's through the 90's is not relevant.

You all realize kids go through a comprehensive recruiting process, right? When recruits go to visits at Nebraska, when they hear about Nebraska from their parents, coaches, etc. they see a program with a much more impressive history of success than Iowa.

That doesn't mean Nebraska is going to win every recruiting battle against Iowa. But the success is relevant.

 

[DDHawkeye]

Seriously guys. We are rebuilding. Yes, last season we underperformed based on the talent we had... get over it. And clearly this season was a rebuilding year (2nd fewest returning starters of all FBS teams!!!) I have faith that we have young players developing, and they will step up and play very well in the coming years when they get their chance. The Ferentz will get the ship righted, and glory will be ours. GO HAWKS!!!

 

[MissouriHerk]

....I would suggest that to some degree any human is more prone to becoming stale in their approach to things when you have been doing much of the same thing for years and years. You also tend to become more set in your ways in many cases.

Some of us remember the days when it was looked upon favorably when you would say you have worked for the same corporation for many years. That has all been changing for a number of years now where corporations recognize that they need to continually be looking for employees / managers who can bring sound new ideas to the table if they want to keep or improve their position in the market. Coach F. sells the low turnover in his staff to recruits which I'm sure can be a positive thing in some recruit's minds but in other respects could be a contributor to a program that has become stale.

There's an old adage out there that seems applicable........if you put a frog into a pan of boiling water he will jump out of the pan immediately. However, if you put a frog into a pan of cool water and turn up the heat to a boiling level very slowly over a longer period of time that frog will stay in the pan to his death.

Sometimes it's difficult to recognize the need for change.[/QUOTE]

You make a great point, and analogy.

 

[Stiles]

For those who say the Nebraska program success in the 60's through the 90's is not relevant.

You all realize kids go through a comprehensive recruiting process, right? When recruits go to visits at Nebraska, when they hear about Nebraska from their parents, coaches, etc. they see a program with a much more impressive history of success than Iowa.

That doesn't mean Nebraska is going to win every recruiting battle against Iowa. But the success is relevant.

Didn't say it wasn't a factor, just not a very big one. NFL draft picks, how I liked coaches, teammates, school, town, etc. would be bigger factors.

I might add all of that history was 15 years ago, with most importantly... different coaches, it was 3 staffs ago in a completely different conference. Kids will factor that in too.

 

[hogeye]

You are right. I did miss that. And I think that, as a minimum expectation level, is waaaay to optimistic. EVERY year?

Way to optimistic? I don't know, Jon. You said the other day on your program that 6 wins was a reasonable bare minimum for where we are at in college football. So, he's talking 2 more wins that what you seemed to agree was bare minimum, unless I misunderstood your position on your show regarding the caller that cause you to pause and think.

Mathematically, that's actually about where Iowa is under Ferentz on average. We're a little better than 4-4 in conference, on average. Kirk's winning percentage is about 60%. 60% of a 12 game schedule is 7.2.

It's not THAT outrageous.

 

[Bigtenchamp]

Fry's last 7 seasons

1992 Iowa 5–7 4–4 5th
1993 Iowa 6–6 3–5 8th L Alamo
1994 Iowa 5–5–1 3–4–1 7th
1995 Iowa 8–4 4–4 6th W Sun 22 25
1996 Iowa 9–3 6–2 T–3rd W Alamo 18 18
1997 Iowa 7–5 4–4 T–6th L Sun
1998 Iowa 3–8 2–6 T–7th

My point? 6-7 wins every year is going to suffice that long to anyone.

Things need to get going again - there has to be some urgency here.

 

[CAARHawk]

You all know I have set the mark at 8 wins.

Of course that is somewhat complicated by change to a 13 game schedule. 8-4 IS pretty different from 8-5.

However, each falls in the 60s with respect to winning percentage, so it isn't that huge a shift.

8-5 either means winning 60% of your games with a decent end of the season bowl victory, or winning 2/3 of your games during the regular season and, for Iowa, losing a New Year's Day Bowl. Either way, the fans would react much differently than 7-6 or less.

This is why the 3 seven or less, 3 eight or more KF pattern is meaningful and why looking at a time frame that doesn't align with this pattern can be deceiving, either on the negative or positive side.