Iowa the last 5 years

Craig60 said:
bcl20 said:
More or less because I want to see where Iowa stands on the field and my personal opinion is that salary isn't relevant to that (not that I don't understand why some people view to be relevant) and because coaches salaries don't interest me much.
Click to expand...
I assure you Iowa University isn't paying him 3 and 1/2 million year to finish in the middle of the pack. It doesn't bother me whatsoever to have an off year but this coaching staff costs us on average two losses a year not the players. Last year was the fake punt with Wisconsin that lost us that game. Everybody in the stands was aware of the situation. Two years in row surprised by a on side kick by Minnesota. The deep frustration that is building is our offense performance deteriates the tougher the competition. We have the most predictable offense there is and quite frankly it makes you miserable to watch it. Come on Nebraska gives up 28 points a game and we score one touchdown in the waning moments, it was not the players it was the game plan. Since we wern't making progress with our normal offense would have it hurt to go to a spread offense with no huddle. Shake it up a little.
Click to expand...

good lord dude. how is this even relevant to the thread?? go whine and complain somewhere else.
 
Would like to know why Cincy and Mizzou are IYO ahead of UI? Also, PSU I think has prob been level or UI maybe a tad better. Just my thoughts...
 
In the KF era, Iowa has gone in 3 year cycles of 7 wins or below, or 8 wins and above. They are just coming off an up cycle, which means you are using 3 up cycle years and 2 down cycle years. That is very creative math.

Until KF breaks this cycle, Iowa needs to be judged in 6 year increments to get an accurate picture of who they are as a team.

For instance, what if we used 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, & 2008?
 
CAARHawk said:
In the KF era, Iowa has gone in 3 year cycles of 7 wins or below, or 8 wins and above. They are just coming off an up cycle, which means you are using 3 up cycle years and 2 down cycle years. That is very creative math.

Until KF breaks this cycle, Iowa needs to be judged in 6 year increments to get an accurate picture of who they are as a team.

For instance, what if we used 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, & 2008?
Click to expand...

I had no spin intended and I agree, 5 years is arbitrary. I just picked it because I like the neatness of working in multiples of 5.
 
Yeah, in most situations that would probably be a good number. It is just that KF's HC record at Iowa just breaks down so cleanly in these three year chunks.
 
Sirhouseman said:
good lord dude. how is this even relevant to the thread?? go whine and complain somewhere else.
Click to expand...
Good Lord yourself.KF is the 7th highest paid coach in the country and the highest paid in the big ten expectations should be high. Until this years win Northwestern had KF number and Fitzgerald makes 1/4 KF's salary. I am sorry but you can not seperate money and performance in evaluating or comparing programs.
 
So we are a top 25 program that typically wins 7 games a year and goes to a podunk bowl...Iowa is still very ultra conservative, plays not to lose, takes no chances, is pure vanilla and is about .500 in the B1G.

Wonder where Iowa would fall in that list if Ferentz and staff could beat the teams they are supposed to beat (the worst teams in the B1G)...think they would be a "little" higher on that list?

So you can make the list, like statistics, mean whatever you want but the bottom line is that Iowa is basically a .500 team in the B1G except for the occasional fluke year.
 
NewMexHawk said:
So we are a top 25 program that typically wins 7 games a year and goes to a podunk bowl...Iowa is still very ultra conservative, plays not to lose, takes no chances, is pure vanilla and is about .500 in the B1G.

Wonder where Iowa would fall in that list if Ferentz and staff could beat the teams they are supposed to beat (the worst teams in the B1G)...think they would be a "little" higher on that list?

So you can make the list, like statistics, mean whatever you want but the bottom line is that Iowa is basically a .500 team in the B1G except for the occasional fluke year.
Click to expand...

The goal with rankings or statistics should be to make things as objective as you want them. As stated before I have no intended spin, Caarhawk thought I should use a different amount of years to formulate rankings and you think I should include conference standings I see. Is there anything else you feel I should include?
 
Ohio State-39
Wisconsin-33
Penn State-32
Michigan State-28
Iowa-25
Michigan-25
Northwestern-21
Purdue-18
Illinois-18
Minnesota-14
Indiana-9

That's how many Big 10 wins (sans Nebraska) every one has over the last 6 years.
 
bcl20 said:
Ohio State-39
Wisconsin-33
Penn State-32
Michigan State-28
Iowa-25
Michigan-25
Northwestern-21
Purdue-18
Illinois-18
Minnesota-14
Indiana-9

That's how many Big 10 wins (sans Nebraska) every one has over the last 6 years.
Click to expand...
So 2 extra wins over Minnesota doesn't change anything. :)
 
Iowa finished 9-14 vs teams that finished top 25 of BCS standings since 2006 (a little flawed because beating Iowa helped put them there to an extent)

32-14 against teams who didn't (once again, a little flawed because it's possible that Iowa beating them kept them out)

5-0 FCS (irrelevant except I wanted to separate record against FCS teams from the win/loss record against non-BCS teams)

The finished in the BCS top 25 once in that time periods.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top