Will Iowa Football Ever Loose It's Mojo?

DuffMan said:
Again my point is not that we are immune to a loosing season or two. My point is I don't think we have to worry about being one bad hire from the 60's and 70's.
Click to expand...


You need only look at Iowa's own history. We competed for national titles in the 50s and sucked it up in the 60s and 70s.

I don't know if our decline in the 60s and 70s was a result of bad coaching or what (since I wasn't alive for most of it), but, obviously, there is at least one factor (or group of factors) that has been proven able to decimate our program. There is no reason to think we are immune to such decimation today, and I believe a bad hire could (note: not would, but could) result in a return to obscurity.

What do you think Barta would tell you if you asked him if a bad coaching hire could decimate the Iowa football program?
 
Wait... nevermind... Duff has changed my mind. Iowa is good now and will always be good regardless of who is coaching us or how many consecutive bad hires are made.

This is almost as good as having Biff Tannen's book of sports scores and travelling back in time. WE WILL ALWAYS BE GOOD!!! YOU CAN BET ON IT!!!
 
I think Iowa has too much money to go into prolonged periods of losing. As long as Iowa is willing to pay up to 3-4 million a year for a football coach, they'll be able to find good coaches. That doesn't make them immune from hiring a coach whose system doesn't work (Callahan, RichRod) but it will allow them to fire said coach with money still left on the contract and replace him with another coach.
 
Clark said:
I think Iowa has too much money to go into prolonged periods of losing. As long as Iowa is willing to pay up to 3-4 million a year for a football coach, they'll be able to find good coaches. That doesn't make them immune from hiring a coach whose system doesn't work (Callahan, RichRod) but it will allow them to fire said coach with money still left on the contract and replace him with another coach.
Click to expand...

I could be mistaken, but doesn't Notre Dame football have a lot of money, too?
 
LG210 said:
I could be mistaken, but doesn't Notre Dame football have a lot of money, too?
Click to expand...

You act like Notre Dame has been Iowa State this past decade. Didn't they make two BCS bowls in the last decade?

If that's the model you want to use for lack of success, I'll gladly take it.
 
LG210 said:
You need only look at Iowa's own history. We competed for national titles in the 50s and sucked it up in the 60s and 70s.

I don't know if our decline in the 60s and 70s was a result of bad coaching or what (since I wasn't alive for most of it), but, obviously, there is at least one factor (or group of factors) that has been proven able to decimate our program. There is no reason to think we are immune to such decimation today, and I believe a bad hire could (note: not would, but could) result in a return to obscurity.

What do you think Barta would tell you if you asked him if a bad coaching hire could decimate the Iowa football program?
Click to expand...

Yes they did have a run in the mid-late 50's under Evy, but they weren't able to sustain that run. That's the difference. Iowa has had a successful 30 year run and have used that run to build a successful football program from every aspect. That's why they would be able to survive a bump in the road if it occured today, and quite possibly why they weren't able to overcome that in the early 60's following Evy's departure.
 
Clark said:
You act like Notre Dame has been Iowa State this past decade. Didn't they make two BCS bowls in the last decade?

If that's the model you want to use for lack of success, I'll gladly take it.
Click to expand...

Ehh... compared to their .733 overall winning percentage, ND has not looked too hot since getting rid of Holtz. Winning percentage of next four coaches (who coached in a regular season game): .583, .583, .564, .615 (one season for Kelly).

By comparison, KF is 89-60 at Iowa. Excluding the first two seasons, he is 85-41.

Choose your models wisely....




1997–01Bob Davie53525–.5832001*George O'Leary000––2002–04Tyrone Willingham32115–.5832004†Kent Baer001–.0002005–09Charlie Weis53527–.5642010–13Brian Kelly185–.615
1997–01​








5​


35​


25​


–​


.583​


2001*​




0​


0​


0​


–​


–​


2002–04​




3​


21​


15​


–​


.583​


2004†​




0​


0​


1​


–​


.000​


2005–09​




5​


35​


27​


–​


.564​


2010–13​




1​


8​


5​


–​


.615​
 
Last edited:
LG210 said:
Ehh... compared to their .733 overall winning percentage, ND has not looked too hot since getting rid of Holtz. Winning percentage of next four coaches (who coached in a regular season game): .583, .583, .564, .615 (one season for Kelly).

By comparison, KF is 89-60 at Iowa. Excluding the first two seasons, he is 85-41.

Choose your models wisely....
Click to expand...

Again, if that's the BASEMENT for a program, I'd take that. It's not out of the realm of possibility that Iowa could go a decade without having a winning season but so many things would have to go wrong that it isn't likely given the financial support that the football prgram has.
 
If something happened tomorrow, and Iowa had to make a coaching change do you think Iowa would follow the model of Michigan hiring Rich Rodriquez or do you think Barta would look for a Ferentz clone? My money is on someone similar in profile to Ferentz. I am sure that Ferentz and Barta have even spoken about something like this. I don't care if they hire a big name coach to replace Ferentz when he leaves (hopefully not for many years) but the athletic department has shown that they understand the importance of football and have the facilities, coaching salaries, et al to back up their claim. Do I have confidence in Barta to make the hire? Not a ton, but I have only paid attention to two of his hires, one was bad and one is looking good. I don't think he would get a chance to make a second football hire if that went awry, however.
I also think Iowa would have a good shot at getting a name or an up and comer. I could also see a promotion from within, and although I wouldn't like it I wouldn't be surprised if O'Keefe was given serious consideration. One thing I am sure won't happen, however is that Iowa would hire a coach without Big Ten roots now. Iowa has to recruit a ton out of state, but still relies on the Big Ten footprint for most its talent.
Hopefully Kirk coaches out his contract and possibly beyond and Iowa averages somewhere around 9 wins a season.
 
I think its more of a fact that Iowa would recognize the coaching mistake early. After watching the basketball program tank under Alford/Lick, if you believe it started under SA, I have a strong feeling Barta would be quick to catch that its not working out for any coach of any sport at Iowa. I would also expect him to stick to the same type of coach/scheme instead of trying to go to a spread/pass heavy offense. So, I think Iowa could fall into a spiral such as the 60s 70s however I feel they are willing to pay for a good coach because the profit off of a good football team is worth more.
 
I think it takes a few factors to ALL roll out at the same time for things to fall off.

From what I seem to remember about Michigan when Carr stepped down, the program had the typical coaching change attrition(especially with a drastic offensive style change), but I also think they had some other guys going pro early. That left a roster dent.
Rich rod got strapped with some roster issues...yet seemingly hampering the defensive side of the ball the most(?). To me that was weird. I seem to remember back in 09, they had 1 or 2 walkons starting on that defense. Probably unheard of at Michigan. What exactly leads to that happening at michigan?

Then for whatever reason...lack of talented bodies or **** poor coaching, his staff couldn't draw up a gameplan to hold anyone under 30 during all 3 years. It all culminated in huge 2 year fall off. Offensively it seemed Michigan had its share of underclassmen(young guys) starting, and lacked a legit WR. How much of that can be laid at Carr's feet?

Solich at NU seemed to drive a Ferrari into a tree, by going from national championships to 8-4/9-3 each year. I don't honestly know how much damage Solich did to the program that lead to Callahan ultimately going off the cliff. Of course Callahan basically took a dump on all that historically made Nebraska what it was. Solich was always rumored to be a trainwreck of a man with drinking issues, along with a few other vices. He may have been THE classic "wrong hire".

Colorado pretty much won the B12 north each year in the early 2000's but hooker/weed gate seemed to turn that program on its ear at the end of 05, and Hawkins never amounted to anything. I think Hawkins came into a worse situation than people realized. Perhaps the party was indeed over by the time he was brought in.

Hawkins had a very young team starting early in his career(07/08) and had his share of all conference players and draft picks, but for whatever reason just seemed to coach the most moronic team ever! Each year they seemed to return a lot of guys. That always gave me the impression he had to start from scratch, but they did give him 5 seasons to put a winner out there. He could barely win 4 4-5 games a year.

I can say with great certainty that coaching was Colorado's undoing. That team was a real head scratcher each year with its ineptitude. Also Hawkins was something like 3-24 on the road with the Buffaloes. Not making that up. They could play decent at home, but how are you that freaking bad during away games????

Overall i think RR and Hawk came into bad situations that nobody realized at the time. I don't know what Michigan has coming back this year besides Robinson, so its hard to tewll what may have happened in year 3.
It seemed like an "all in" 2010 for Hawkins as he had a pretty senior laden team to work with. That was all his (un)doing in year 5. with those players, and a half-way manageable schedule.
 
Last edited:
Fact: Iowa has had 3 decades of 3 year runs of very good football followed by 2 or 3 or 4 years of mediocrity. And the cycle continues.
 
Again you can't compare Iowa bball to Iowa football. Iowa didn't invest in its bball program the way they did with football. They weren't nearly as healthy of a program.
 
DuffMan said:
Again you can't compare Iowa bball to Iowa football. Iowa didn't invest in its bball program the way they did with football. They weren't nearly as healthy of a program.
Click to expand...

From 79-98 Iowa bball was a top 25, top 30 program just like the football program, two hires that did not work out and look where the programs at. The comparisons and/or analogy absolutely works for me.
 
trj said:
From 79-98 Iowa bball was a top 25, top 30 program just like the football program, two hires that did not work out and look where the programs at. The comparisons and/or analogy absolutely works for me.
Click to expand...

Again Iowa basketball was nowhere near as healthy as Iowa football overall. On the court they had a solid winning tradition. Off the court they were somewhat of a mess. They didn't re-invest in basketball in terms of training and practice facilities like they had at football. They didn't have the donor and fan support football has. It's literally apples and oranges.
 
expos1994 said:
Every team is a bad hire away from a big drop off. Look at Notre Dame and Michigan. You have to have good coaching especially at Iowa and we have great coaching. Eventually the Hawks will have to hire a new head coach. Hopefully not for a long time.
Click to expand...


Good point. Look at USC between Robinson & Carroll.

FSU has had a recent dip the end of the Bowden yrs & now they are ramping up slowly again.

Alabama was down prior to Saban.

Again, good point.

What Iowa has going for a coach is the support (almost rock star status) they get from the fans. Very nice facilities & support from the university. Compared to high-end programs such as OSU, USC, Texas, a coach at Iowa doesn't have all the pressure like at these programs. A 3-4 loss year is acceptable during rebuilding yrs & the coach gets paid well during those yrs.

So less pressure, pretty good $$$ & nice facilities. Also, Iowa City is a different city than others in Iowa & does stand out. It's just a different atmosphere.
 
DuffMan said:
Again Iowa basketball was nowhere near as healthy as Iowa football overall. On the court they had a solid winning tradition. Off the court they were somewhat of a mess. They didn't re-invest in basketball in terms of training and practice facilities like they had at football. They didn't have the donor and fan support football has. It's literally apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

Okay, i get it now a brand new fancy practice facility was the reason why SA/TL were not good fits here.:rolleyes:

Until the mid 90's you had 15,500 at Carver on a pretty regular basis.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Good point. Look at USC between Robinson & Carroll.

FSU has had a recent dip the end of the Bowden yrs & now they are ramping up slowly again.

Alabama was down prior to Saban.

Again, good point.

What Iowa has going for a coach is the support (almost rock star status) they get from the fans. Very nice facilities & support from the university. Compared to high-end programs such as OSU, USC, Texas, a coach at Iowa doesn't have all the pressure like at these programs. A 3-4 loss year is acceptable during rebuilding yrs & the coach gets paid well during those yrs.

So less pressure, pretty good $$$ & nice facilities. Also, Iowa City is a different city than others in Iowa & does stand out. It's just a different atmosphere.
Click to expand...

Why is everyone comparing Iowa to schools that have national cache. Most of those other schools mentioned in this thread can afford to hit and miss til they get it right. Iowa can't. 70,585 becomes 60,585 in a blink of an eye, people nowadays don't need much of an excuse not to go to games anymore.

Notre Dame has not been relevant in 20 years and they still get guys like Charlie Wiess or Brian Kelly to come in and think they will be the savior. A 3 year dip by Iowa from a bad hire and it becomes the Fran McCfraffrey hire 'the best of what is available'.

Just look at the '99 hiring process. Exclude Stoops and Elliot, Sonny Lubrick was the highest profiled serious candidate for the job. Ty Willingham turned down an interview would not even listen....Effin Ty Willingham.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top