Long tenure coach

[BILLBUCKNER]

Does this mean anything to recruits anymore. The one thing that a new coaching regime does is jump start the antication of the fan base and recruits that good times are ahead and can be used as momentum to help recruiting. You have a new staff fired up and motivated to make things happen. The one thing tht crappy teams can sell sell sell is opportuing for early playing time. So this may entice a very good recruit to go to that school. Why else would a player choose Illinois or Indiana if they have an offer from say....Iowa.? Iowa has brand spanking new indoor facilities to sell now which only helps to keep up with the Jones..NW plans one and other teams thru out the BIG I am sure will be updating theirs to keep up.

 

[BirdsOfPrey]

I think having a long tenured coach is one of the few recruiting advantages that Iowa has had. Every year, we witness de-commits & transfers in mass due to coaches leaving. Recruits and their families still value stability and want to know that the coaches they have established relationships with will be there while they attend that school. Weather, distance from home, academic offerings and admission requirements are important too. Facilities likely have the biggest influence on today's recruits. In recruiting, it's about identifying potential recruits early & building relationships with them as well as high school coaches. Iowa hired all new assistant coaches to infuse the program with a younger, enthusiastic, energetic staff with NFL ties. It was a given that recruiting would suffer for a couple years while the new staff started building relationships. Iowa put themselves at a huge recruiting disadvantage by falling behind the national trend when it comes to facilities. Nearly all the Big10 schools and most of the better programs nationally opened swanky deluxe football centers in the last ten years. Iowa likely lost more than a few recruits these last few years to Indiana, Illinois, Wisconson, Missouri etc. as all those schools opened deluxe football centers several years ago. The recent opening of Iowa's complex along with assistant coaches having a couple years to get established definitely should produce an upgrade in recruiting results next season.

Links to Big10 schools facilities:

http://www.iuhoosiers.com/facilities/ind-facilities-memorial.html

http://www.fightingillini.com/facilities/irwinindoor.html

http://www.uwbadgers.com/facilities/mcclain-facility.html

http://www.purduesports.com/facilities/mollenkopf-athletic-center.html

http://www.msuspartans.com/facilities/daugherty-skandalaris.html

http://www.thisisnebraska.com/fb_facilities.php?sport=fb

 

[hockalot]

Does this mean anything to recruits anymore. The one thing that a new coaching regime does is jump start the antication of the fan base and recruits that good times are ahead and can be used as momentum to help recruiting. You have a new staff fired up and motivated to make things happen. The one thing tht crappy teams can sell sell sell is opportuing for early playing time. So this may entice a very good recruit to go to that school. Why else would a player choose Illinois or Indiana if they have an offer from say....Iowa.? Iowa has brand spanking new indoor facilities to sell now which only helps to keep up with the Jones..NW plans one and other teams thru out the BIG I am sure will be updating theirs to keep up.

In our case. It means the recruits can look forward to 4 or 5 years of mediocrity.

 

[PhoenixHawk]

Jamie Pollard is a big believer in changing coaches to fire up the fanbase to buy more tickets and collectible coins.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

Starting with the 2010 season, the Pit Panthers have had 4 head coaches (Wannstedt, Hayward, Graham & Chryst.) In that time, Pit's record is 33-31. During that same time period, Iowa has had 1 coach. Iowa's record during that time is 34-29, with two of those wins coming against Pit. Had Iowa lost both games (both games required second half comebacks after being down double digits at halftime) Pit would be 35 -29 and Iowa would be 32-31.

Not sure stability is always what it is cracked up to be. Pit has been able to get the same results with virtually a revolving door.

 

[Thawki]

Starting with the 2010 season, the Pit Panthers have had 4 head coaches (Wannstedt, Hayward, Graham & Chryst.) In that time, Pit's record is 33-31. During that same time period, Iowa has had 1 coach. Iowa's record during that time is 34-29, with two of those wins coming against Pit. Had Iowa lost both games (both games required second half comebacks after being down double digits at halftime) Pit would be 35 -29 and Iowa would be 32-31.

Not sure stability is always what it is cracked up to be. Pit has been able to get the same results with virtually a revolving door.

If their records are what they are during that time, why do you feel the need to point out that Iowa had to come back in the second half of each game from being down double digits in order to win each game? How is that relevant to anything. Are you trying to say the wins are somehow worth less than some other kind of win?

You point out what the two teams records would be if the two wins for Iowa were losses to Pitt, and what Pitt's record would have then been instead. But these were Iowa's wins. You don't make a point to examine close losses Iowa had and then say how much better their record would have been if they had won those close games. So why do it in two close games we won? It is like you are saying we were really a lot worse and they were really a lot better, but somehow we managed to squirm out of it and we appeared better than we really were. I guess you do that to support your narrative.

One might make the point that perhaps we were able to come back and win those games because players knew what to expect from their coaches and what was expected of them. The coaching continuity could have contributed to that. Meanwhile, having new coaches on the other side at Pitt might have made it harder for them to win those games. Maybe when there was chaos of a comeback the lack of experience with the new coaching staffs at Pitt contributed to losing those games.

Of course, that doesn't support your narrative, so I guess you wouldn't want to point that out

 

[ArvadaHawk]

If their records are what they are during that time, why do you feel the need to point out that Iowa had to come back in the second half of each game from being down double digits in order to win each game? How is that relevant to anything. Are you trying to say the wins are somehow worth less than some other kind of win?

You point out what the two teams records would be if the two wins for Iowa were losses to Pitt, and what Pitt's record would have then been instead. But these were Iowa's wins. You don't make a point to examine close losses Iowa had and then say how much better their record would have been if they had won those close games. So why do it in two close games we won? It is like you are saying we were really a lot worse and they were really a lot better, but somehow we managed to squirm out of it and we appeared better than we really were. I guess you do that to support your narrative.

One might make the point that perhaps we were able to come back and win those games because players knew what to expect from their coaches and what was expected of them. The coaching continuity could have contributed to that. Meanwhile, having new coaches on the other side at Pitt might have made it harder for them to win those games. Maybe when there was chaos of a comeback the lack of experience with the new coaching staffs at Pitt contributed to losing those games.

Of course, that doesn't support your narrative, so I guess you wouldn't want to point that out

My goodness, those are a lot of words. I'll be succinct for you:

* kfootball defenders point to head coaching stability as a major plus to having kfootball around.
* Pit has had a revolving door of head coaches (4) since 2010.
* Iowa has had the same coach since 2010.
* Pit's record is virtually the same as Iowa's since 2010 (33-31/Pit vs. 34-29/IA.) That debunks the head coaching stability card as being a driving factor in having a lot more success winning games then a school with a revolving door.
* Iowa's coach needed to come behind, down double digits at halftime, to win 2 head to head matchups. Otherwise Pit, with their revolving door of head coaches, would actually have a better record than Iowa since 2010. Further debunking the stability card.

Make sense now, Thawki? I really just want to make certain that you do understand my point. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance to you.

 

[9209doug]

9209doug

Does this mean anything to recruits anymore. The one thing that a new coaching regime does is jump start the antication of the fan base and recruits that good times are ahead and can be used as momentum to help recruiting. You have a new staff fired up and motivated to make things happen. The one thing tht crappy teams can sell sell sell is opportuing for early playing time. So this may entice a very good recruit to go to that school. Why else would a player choose Illinois or Indiana if they have an offer from say....Iowa.? Iowa has brand spanking new indoor facilities to sell now which only helps to keep up with the Jones..NW plans one and other teams thru out the BIG I am sure will be updating theirs to keep up.

 

[9209doug]

Re: 9209doug

Does anybody remember when we were 1-10 every year and bowl games were games that other schools went to!