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.