Unbelievable statistic regarding our performance as double digit favorites

[SpiderRico]

I was looking up statistics regarding how we have performed under KF when we were double digit favorites. The numbers just blow my mind....

From 1999-2005 (first 7 years), we played a total of 20 games in which we were a double digit favorite. They are as follows

1999: Northern Illinois
2000: No games as double digit favorites
2001: Kent State, Miami OH, Minnesota, Penn State
2002: @Indiana, @Minnesota, Akron, Northwestern, Utah State
2003: Buffalo, Illinois, Penn State
2004: @Illinois, Iowa State, Kent State
2005: Ball State, Illinois, Indiana, Northern Iowa (there was no line here, but we would conceivable be double digit favorites)

So in those first 7 years, we played 20 games in which we were favored by double digits. In those 20 games, we were a perfect 20-0 straight up. In fact, we covered the double digit spreads in every single game except for 3....Penn State in 2001 (line was 10.5 and we won by 6), @Illinois in 2003 (line was 13 and we won by 10), and Iowa State at home in 2004 (line was 25 and we won by 7). 17-3 against double digit spreads is great.

However, from 2006-2012 (the 2nd 7 years), the story is VASTLY different. We played a total of 34 games in which we were double digit favorites. They are as follows:

2006: @Syracuse, @Illinois, @Indiana, Iowa State, Montana, Northern Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue
2007: Nothern Illinois (neutral), @Iowa State, Indiana, Minnesota, Syracuse, Western Michigan
2008: Florida Int'l, Iowa State, Maine, Purdue
2009: Arkansas State, Indiana, Minnesota, Northern Iowa, Northwestern
2010: @Indiana, @Northwestern, @Minnesota, Ball State, Eastern Illinois, Iowa State
2011: @Minnesota, Indiana, Tennessee Tech, Louisiana Monroe
2012: Central Michigan

So the second 7 years saw us as double digit favorites 34 times. In those 34 games, we were a combined 24-10. That's horrendous. Ten losses against teams you were favored by more than 10 points against is unfathomable and SHOULD be a fireable offense. But it gets even worse. We were unable to cover the spread in an additional 12 games. So overall, we are 12-22 against the spread as double digit favorites in the last 7 years. We went from covering the spread as double digit favorites at an 85% clip to covering at a 35% clip, which also includes 10 losses straight up. And I don't want to hear the talent excuse because we had enough talent to be ranked in the Top 10 to start the 2006 season, to be ranked in the top 20 to end the 2008 season, to be ranked in the top 10 to end the 2009 season and to be ranked in the Top 10 to start the 2010 season.

In the last 7 years, our "peers" in the conference (at least they used to be) which include Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Nebraska and Penn State don't have 10 losses COMBINED as double digit favorites.

Had we won those games over the years, our regular season records would have been as follows:

2006 - 8-4
2007 - 9-3
2008 - 8-4
2009 - 11-1
2010 - 10-2
2011 - 8-4
2012 - 5-7

And 2012 probably wouldn't have happened that way because a run like the above from 2006 thru 2011 would have most likely netted us better recruits so that a losing record doesn't happen.

This isn't asking Kirk to perform miracles and upset teams on a regular basis that he has no business upsetting. It's about simply winning the games that everyone expect us to win by at least 10 points.

Wait, let me guess......that's football?

 

[Makavelihawk]

I saw that stat a few weeks ago, but not broken down like this. Absolutely insane. Good post.

 

[PJHawk]

Nice work Rico - unfortunately it reveals such pathetic sh8t your pants results on behalf of this program.

 

[herkytime]

Simple, ebb and flow.

 

[DuffMan]

LOL fire KF because he ain't covering enough spreads.... whats next? Fire coaches because they lie about player abilities in spring practice?

 

[theboat]

LOL fire KF because he ain't covering enough spreads.... whats next? Fire coaches because they lie about player abilities in spring practice?

So you think regularly losing to the likes of directional Michigan, Indiana, and Minnesota when favored by more than 10 is no big deal?

 

[Makavelihawk]

LOL fire KF because he ain't covering enough spreads.... whats next? Fire coaches because they lie about player abilities in spring practice?

Your reading comprehension is as poor as your posts. He's 24-10 outright regardless of spread genius. What that means, so that you can understand it is that he's lost 10 games in the last 7 years against horrible teams in which we were favored by over 10 pts. I hope this helps, but I doubt it.

 

[HawkeyeMHA]

Never good for the hawks to be favored. Clear recipe for a loss

 

[DwayneTwill]

Burp...football. Credit goes to them.

 

[homes]

I'm surprised his record was that good in the first 7 years. What are the reasons for the past 7 years being so much different? The 10 losses are a particular cause for concern, and suggests Iowa's talent has not kept up - they're simply not as good as they once were. Is this a reflection on high school kids not wanting to play this type of football anymore? The facilities appear to be top notch. The support has been consistent. Something is keeping the better players away.

 

[pmchawk]

I think I'm the only one, but I don't hold 06 against the staff. Tate injury to his hand killed him. He didn't look 100% until the bowl game.

 

[timberhawk]

SpiderRico, you lead a pathetic life. Seriously, you spend this much time analyzing every single angle of KF to support your disdain for him. We get it, you want him gone. You think he is overpaid. You think the game has passed him by. He is the worst coach in the country. Blah, blah, blah.

Can you please go use your time to do something else for at least a few minutes today other than post on a message board?

 

[pmchawk]

I'm surprised his record was that good in the first 7 years. What are the reasons for the past 7 years being so much different? The 10 losses are a particular cause for concern, and suggests Iowa's talent has not kept up - they're simply not as good as they once were. Is this a reflection on high school kids not wanting to play this type of football anymore? The facilities appear to be top notch. The support has been consistent. Something is keeping the better players away.

Kirk became ultra conservative after the 1st 7 years

 

[theboat]

Kirk became ultra conservative after the 1st 7 years

He is more conservative now than he was then.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

"2006 - 8-4
2007 - 9-3
2008 - 8-4
2009 - 11-1
2010 - 10-2
2011 - 8-4
2012 - 5-7"

Now that I would have been far happier about, and I would have a totally different opinion of the KF era at this point. It's not about having "unrealistic" expectations and wanting to beat OSU, Michigan, PSU, etc. every time. It's about simply taking care of business against the teams you are SUPPOSED to beat. I've always maintained that it's these types of games that have typically made the difference between Iowa being 9-3 and 7-5, and the "would have been" records above more or less reflect that. It's a night and day difference. The staff isn't getting it done against the teams they are supposed to handle, plain and simple.

I remember KF making a comment maybe a decade ago something to the effect of "If anybody on this team overlooks Indiana (or whichever opponent it was), then they aren't smart enough to play for me." Well, SOMEBODY in this program sure seems to be overlooking the cupcakes on the schedule, because the results since 2005 haven't been good at all.

How Iowa can beat a Top 10 MSU team 37-6 in 2010, then turn around and lose to a 2-win Minnesota team, is beyond me.

And if I remember correctly, Iowa has more losses against 10+ point underdogs than the rest of the conference COMBINED. Not just the smaller group of teams that Scorp mentioned. That is pathetic!

 

[homes]

SpiderRico, you lead a pathetic life. Seriously, you spend this much time analyzing every single angle of KF to support your disdain for him. We get it, you want him gone. You think he is overpaid. You think the game has passed him by. He is the worst coach in the country. Blah, blah, blah.

Can you please go use your time to do something else for at least a few minutes today other than post on a message board?

I think his post provides very provocative information about the program.

 

[Makavelihawk]

He is more conservative now than he was then.

Without question.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

I think his post provides very provocative information about the program.

Some people don't want to hear it, though.

 

[hawkfan2679]

SpiderRico, you lead a pathetic life. Seriously, you spend this much time analyzing every single angle of KF to support your disdain for him. We get it, you want him gone. You think he is overpaid. You think the game has passed him by. He is the worst coach in the country. Blah, blah, blah.

Can you please go use your time to do something else for at least a few minutes today other than post on a message board?

This record has been brought up more than once on this message board in the past. The Gazette did a story on it prior to this year...regardless of what you think of the OP, don't you think this is something noteworthy?

I didn't go through as much trouble as Rico, but doing some analysis from the Gazette article prior to this year:

Iowa's losses as double digit favorites since 2006: 9
The entirety of the Big 10 losses as double digit favorites since 2006: 15

 

[homes]

He is more conservative now than he was then.

If that's all there is to it, that is easily fixed, with a willingness on his part to change back to what they were. Maybe they're on to a new 7 year cycle.