This 'style' is the same or similar style that led to two 11 win seasons, three straight top 8 seasons and four end of year top 10 rankings during the KF era, more than any coach in Iowa history.
I think Kirk is in a bit of trouble and there are some things that have made me weary, but I'm staying away from the crazy juice.
The only thing not popular with the fan base is not winning 10 games.
No denying the lunatic fringe
might point to this but, for the most part, I think this statement is just as short-sighted, inaccurate and unrealistic as expecting it.
-- BEAT who you should beat (ISU, 2 weak non-con, NwU, Purdue, Indiana, Illannoy, Minny?);
-- At least split with your peers (Wisky, MSU, Penn St?, Nebby? Maryland and Rutgers);
-- Challenge Michigan and OSU and beat them every 3rd / 4th season (that's merely a recruiting class's development cycle).
-- ABOVE ALL -- always be competitive, prepared, strategically fluid and schematically adaptable, while utilizing your
best, most effective players in situations that maximize their strengths / exploit the opponents' weaknesses and give you the best opportunities to win the game.
Depending who's on the schedule among those 3 tiers, I consider Iowa to be at a level of program where it should
always win at least 7 or 8 games and
occasionally win 10 or 11 games.
My "contempt" is based on the last point. Kirt's personnel mismanagement and situational schematic / strategical failures were suspect about the time you mentioned, 2007, became apparent during the Pitt game, in 2008, and have now become an expectation that he will snatch at least 1 or 2 inexplicable (i.m.o., unacceptable) losses from the jaws of victory. For a coach that used to be lauded as doing more with less, he's just become a coach that does less.