What did the anti-Ferentz Crowd Think of Saturday?

Congrats to KF on 144 wins! I’m sure if any of the “experts” on this board were handed the Iowa head coaching job, they would have been handed their hats long before KF. Coaching is a tough job. KF has been successful some years, not so much other years. Would love to see a National Championship before I die, but even if we dont, KF has given us some memorable moments throughout the years. Last years win against “The” Ohio St, has to be one of my favorites since we rarely beat them no less put a 50 burger on them! Every Michigan fan was envious of us last year, and that was satisfying in and of itself. We may be “little ol’ Iowa”, but now and then we send shockwaves throughout the college football world. That makes us significant. We could never accomplish this without KF AND HF before him. This is our culture, THIS IS who we are, and I for one, could not be prouder of what this program has become. We have changed the landscape of college football. Would Wisconsin, K-State, or even Oklahoma, for that matter, be who they are without the Iowa legacy? I think not! There are many programs that would trade places with us in a heartbeat just to have our consistancy and culture. I hear a lot of you piss, bitch, and moan about this and about that, but bottom line is, there is something that always keeps you coming back for more. If you look at Iowa in the big picture, you know I’m right. I for one would be proud to see a statue of KF along the likes of Hayden Fry, Nile Kinnick, and Dan Gable someday. He’s earned it, he deserves it! I am so proud to be a Hawkeye homer and a guzzler of Black and Gold kool-aid! Love me, hate me, I dont care! So congrats to KF! Not a better coach or human being out there to represent who we are.
 
NoBeer said:
Its not hard to understand but your view point is not the only valid one. It absolutely IS more than wins and losses. I'm sorry you can't see that.
Click to expand...

If you're referring to how a program is run, etc...of course I appreciate that. If you read my earlier post you'll see that I said we're fortunate to have had two guy like KFz and Hayden. I also pointed out what a great representative of the University KFz is. It was pretty clear. If you choose not to see that, that's your thing.

As for on the field (which is what the numbers are all about), as Herm Edwards said "you play to win the game". That's how your measure on-field success. If you're an "everybody gets a trophy" kinda guy...then we obviously have different ways of looking at it.
 
Jonrn said:
I’m not anti ferentz, but a consistent criticism I have and still have is over the past 10 years is Iowa’s constant inability to recruit and develop a WR. DJK, mcnutt and tevaun Smith all had flashes, but the lack of developing constant reliable downfield threats is baffling.
Click to expand...

This has kind of turned into an odd sort of revisionist history. Hayden was definitely a better offensive coach than Kirk, so somehow people have added the corollary that he had top receivers coming in all the time, which isn't true. Heck, in the famous '85 Michigan, one of our starting receivers, Happel (if i'm spelling that right!) was a walk-on.

Both coaches have done great things for the University and I have tons of great memories of both. While Kirk has made really frustrated at times, I am more than willing to accept his faults and appreciate those great times. Especially in light of what we've seen in the past decade at other conference schools (MSU, PSU and OSU).

Winning is a great thing, but there are other ways to consider success.
 
I would like to add that the Big Ten is a joke right now. Ohio State, Michigan State and Penn State are playing by a different set of rules. What in the heck do you have to do to get the death penalty? Apparently, pedophilia, rape and domestic abuse are minor crimes at these programs, if they are considered wrongdoing at all. All 3 of those schools are outlaw, cheating, immoral programs that should be kicked out of the Big Ten immediately. Of course, we know that won't happen.

The schools who run clean programs (and Iowa is one of them) really are at a disadvantage. I'll take Ferentz any day over cheating criminals like Urban Meyer, Mark d'antonio and Joe (the fraud) Paterno.
 
lightning1 said:
.75 to .80 win % is high.
Click to expand...
tksirius said:
Yeah that was weird. People acting like .55 to .59 is some great achievement, but .75 to .80 is somehow surprisingly low.
Click to expand...
I thought the legends would all be higher because it seemed like they lost no more than one or two games year in year out.

It goes to show that it only takes one or two down years per decade to even out career winning percentages.

I'm not arguing that 75 to 80 is low. You're both right, It isn't. I'm simply pointing out that if that's where most of the legends fall then above 80% is a pretty high bar. And it's a matter of perception that I thought more would be above it. And my research proved most of my perception to be inaccurate. I'm also pointing out that there's no way those coaches were constantly rattling off one or two loss seasons even when it seemed like they were. The down years were more frequent than perceived.
 
AreWeThereYet said:
A winning percentage of 59.85 over 20 years is pretty good. It's around 30th over that span out of 128 teams, give or take a few. Could Iowa have landed a better fit for the program at coach. I would say there are a dozen or so coaches that could have done better over a similar span with what Iowa has to offer in the way of recruiting base and reputation. Few of those would have signed and even fewer would have stuck around. I'm not sure you fully grasp how low the odds are of getting what you want.
Click to expand...
I don't think you fully grasp how your mind is infected with the 'we're just lil ole Iowa' mentality. ;) Iowa is a wonderful place to coach football. We can thank Hayden Fry and the B1G $$ for that.
 
Northside Hawk said:
I thought the legends would all be higher because it seemed like they lost no more than one or two games year in year out.

It goes to show that it only takes one or two down years per decade to even out career winning percentages.

I'm not arguing that 75 to 80 is low. You're both right, It isn't. I'm simply pointing out that if that's where most of the legends fall then above 80% is a pretty high bar. And it's a matter of perception that I thought more would be above it. And my research proved most of my perception to be inaccurate. I'm also pointing out that there's no way those coaches were constantly rattling off one or two loss seasons even when it seemed like they were. The down years were more frequent than perceived.
Click to expand...
I wasn't trying to go after you. :) It just amazes me how some folks on here think a 55% B1G & 59% overall record is "great," but the same folks fail to realize what "great" truly is. It's ok to be glad that Kirk kept us from tanking as a program and average to above average, but it's ridiculous, IMO, to say he's a legend or great.
 
tksirius said:
I wasn't trying to go after you. :) It just amazes me how some folks on here think a 55% B1G & 59% overall record is "great," but the same folks fail to realize what "great" truly is. It's ok to be glad that Kirk kept us from tanking as a program and average to above average, but it's ridiculous, IMO, to say he's a legend or great.
Click to expand...
What started the whole thing was that Daily Iowan writer back in June or July who claimed that Ferentz' career % of 60% or whatever it is was a barely passing grade, not to mention a firable offense, like he was going on a high school history curve or something. I went on to point out that the greatest legends in the sport, based on that criteria as well as my research, were C- to B- and then went on to rip the DI by saying they haven't produced a solid sportswriter since Steve Batterson.
 
Last edited:
Northside Hawk said:
I thought the legends would all be higher because it seemed like they lost no more than one or two games year in year out.

It goes to show that it only takes one or two down years per decade to even out career winning percentages.

I'm not arguing that 75 to 80 is low. You're both right, It isn't. I'm simply pointing out that if that's where most of the legends fall then above 80% is a pretty high bar. And it's a matter of perception that I thought more would be above it. And my research proved most of my perception to be inaccurate. I'm also pointing out that there's no way those coaches were constantly rattling off one or two loss seasons even when it seemed like they were. The down years were more frequent than perceived.
Click to expand...
Not all win % are the same. Some programs have more built in advantages than others. Some programs cheat. Etc. I would consider KF a great coach if he wasn't so conservative. That covers a lot of his faults, IMO. His conservative nature is why we can't recruit good WRs on a consistent basis. It's why we lose to teams we shouldn't lose to.
 
lightning1 said:
Not all win % are the same. Some programs have more built in advantages than others. Some programs cheat. Etc. I would consider KF a great coach if he wasn't so conservative. That covers a lot of his faults, IMO. His conservative nature is why we can't recruit good WRs on a consistent basis. It's why we lose to teams we shouldn't lose to.
Click to expand...
Agreed. He will steal a game once in a while that we have no business winning, but will give back almost as many that we have no business losing. And when he loses a game he had no business losing because he lets a lesser team hang around and find a way, those are the ones that linger the memory. Either way he plays with fire when its not necessary. We were kicking Gerogia Tech's rear ends all over the Orange Bowl but the game was still in doubt until Wegher's late TD run iced it. But before that we were sweating out 17-14 when we shouldn't have had to because Ferentz went conservative in the second half.
 
Last edited:
lightning1 said:
Not all win % are the same. Some programs have more built in advantages than others. Some programs cheat. Etc. I would consider KF a great coach if he wasn't so conservative. That covers a lot of his faults, IMO. His conservative nature is why we can't recruit good WRs on a consistent basis. It's why we lose to teams we shouldn't lose to.
Click to expand...
Kirk struck gold twice with both Norm & Phil. If the offense had been on par with the defense the entire last 2 decades, Kirk might have a natty and an outright B1G championship on his resume.
 
If you aspire to be a bit above average KF is your guy.

If you like punting KF is your guy.

If you like vanilla KF is your guy.

If you like playing it safe KF is your guy.

If you like seeing running plays into a stacked line KF is your guy.

If you like coaching to be a family affair KF is your guy.

It isn't that complicated...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top