Stop trying to float an opinion as fact. You don't know one way or the other if it would have or not. We were the only team in the West to have a winning record against the East. Since the removal of divisions, we are a combined 12-6, which is pretty much the same average record (6-3) as we had when we were in the West. So I'd say the odds are that we would have essentially had the same record regardless.
Ferentz not retiring.
- Thread starter Hawk_4shur
- Start date
Not really when you see how at least 50% or more of hires end up flops. Has Nebraska been successful? Has Wisconsin been successful? Mich State been successful? Purdue? Michigan? But but Indiana!
So you seriously believe there's no coach out there who: A) would have any interest in taking the Iowa HC job; and B) could do as good a job or even a better job as Kirk Ferentz.
Wow. So when KF leaves, that's just it for Iowa football. We're forever going to be relegated to bottomfeeder status with no hope of ever having any sustained success as a program.
Lol.
Money rules college football and Iowa doesn't have enough to get the players needed to meet these high expectations. There are plenty of more well-funded programs that don't average 10 wins and make the CFP.
Take a look at the recruiting classes around the big 10. Look at SEC teams that haven't sniffed a conference championship for a while.
South Carolina's athletic department has more money than Iowa's. What have they done in the last 25 years?
Take a look at the recruiting classes around the big 10. Look at SEC teams that haven't sniffed a conference championship for a while.
South Carolina's athletic department has more money than Iowa's. What have they done in the last 25 years?
Conflicted. I think Iowa COULD be a better program under another coach. But man is it risky.
But KF, for all his flaws - doesn't lose to Nebraska. So I was excited to see him go.
But KF, for all his flaws - doesn't lose to Nebraska. So I was excited to see him go.
And Beth wants a smooth retirement and transition if possible as I just read in an Athletic email and penn sts' 2026 recruiting has crashed down to 150th.
Some teams, most notably Texas about 10 years ago or so hired or promoted someone to Head Coach in waiting. It didnt go as plan as the real Head coach stayed on long enough that the hot shot head coach in waiting took another head coaching job.
I hope Beth has heard from Kirk how long he wants to be coach so she can plan. or maybe Kirk is just going to do a year to year thing.
Not if it is not a firing. If KF lets Beth know ahead of time even early in a season that he is going to retire she can start putting out feelers to other coaches' agents.
If you get a very good hire announced fairly quickly after Kirk announces his retirement then recruiting doesnt have to take a hit.
Thats not how real life works.
A) its easy to have less motivationn when you know you're leaving a job. Almost everybody does
B) the recuit you do get might not want to play for the new coach or the new coach might not think they are a fit. Very hard for recruiting not to take some sort of hit no matter what you do.
Not really when you see how at least 50% or more of hires end up flops. Has Nebraska been successful? Has Wisconsin been successful? Mich State been successful? Purdue? Michigan? But but Indiana!
I don’t know which take is worse:
1) KF needs to be fired immediately
Or
2) There is not a coach in existence who can take KF’s place, so he needs to coach as long as he is physically capable, because the program is going to inevitably fall apart as soon as he leaves.
1) KF needs to be fired immediately
Or
2) There is not a coach in existence who can take KF’s place, so he needs to coach as long as he is physically capable, because the program is going to inevitably fall apart as soon as he leaves.
How about it is f-ing dumb when you were easily a couple plays from 10-2 and a handful more away from 12 - 0. That is f-ing dumb to suggest the coach needs to go
A) I'm certain there are a lot of coaches that would love the job.
B) I'm not so sure there are.
I get just as frustrated with Ferentz's coaching style as anyone (and during the Brian Ferentz years I would have probably agreed with you). But without Ferentz we don't have Phil Parker (or Norm Parker, for that matter), and possibly the best defense in the country over the last 2 decades+ as a whole. Iowa will never be a hotbed for recruiting. It gets cold, it's a small, white town, and we don't have as deep of pockets as larger schools. To compete, we have to find lower star players and develop them, and that's not going to change unless we double or triple our NIL money, and I don't see that happening.
I think we're good off as we are, and I believe Ferentz gets us to the CFP before he retires. You don't, and that's fine. The good thing is we'll both be there next fall (probably making the same arguments).
Drives me crazy when they try to rush to the line to get the next play off, wasting 20-25 precious seconds.
It’s really not that hard. If you’re under a minute with multiple timeouts left, almost any play that a player gets tackled short of the first down, should get a timeout used.
You will have plays resulting in a first down, where you can rush to the line. You will have incompletions, where you don’t even have to rush.
Last edited:
True but how far off were we this year? Not much. A competent passer that can run would have made us a contender this year imo. Maybe we'll get lucky on the next one.
Yeah we should probably just close up shop once KF retires. What's the point. Iowa football is destined for bottom feeder status forever after he's gone.
I imagine threads like this were abundant on the Nebraska board prior to the Pelini firing. 8 to 10 wins a year wasn't good enough
He is going to retire in the near future whether people like it or not, so........
I am fine with Kirk Ferentz retiring on his own terms, he's earned it.
and after Neb fired a coach who won 9-10 games a year, they struggled to find a coach they wanted and had to settle with Mike Riley.; Penn St is facing the same issue now.
Fire successful coaches and other coaches may not line up to take the job.
One of Iowa’s biggest selling points in a coaching search is how loyal we are to head coaches. We’ve shown we’ll move on quick with poor results (Lick), but we’ll stick by you through some lean years if you show consistent winning seasons.
Its really easy to sit here and say that now. I can absolutely guarantee you if Iowa went 10-2 and then 6-6 and then 4-8 many here would want heads to roll. Saying otherwise is disingenous or plain BS...
Yep. Close the football program down. No coach would come here and anyone who did would tank it. Kirk is the only coach who can succeed at Iowa.
I think this kind of statement is bending (considerably) how MOST here feal. 1) most don't want Kirk fired. 2) most think we may very well struggle at least for awhile, with a regime change. Personally I think we can make a really good hire. Whether that leads to 9-10+ wins per year (what it would take to improve where we are now) is a crap shoot at best.Yep. Close the football program down. No coach would come here and anyone who did would tank it. Kirk is the only coach who can succeed at Iowa.
I think it’s easy to assume whatever is happening currrently is the norm, or the “floor” so to speak. I think that’s exactly why Nebraska fired Pelini and Wisconsin fired Chryst. They assumed 8 win seasons were the norm and a better coach could put them over the top. When Ferentz retires, I certainly hope the new coach has us in the playoff every year. But that’s easier said than done. It’s a balance between hoping for the best and also appreciating what you have, because you don’t know how good it is until it’s gone
Likewise, you never know how good it could be, but it does not matter Ferentz will be retiring soon.
Sorry, but I believe that in the current state of college football we’ll have 10 maybe 15 major players and then the rest including Iowa following well behind. This is all determined by cash available to pay for better players. I just don’t see Iowa having the pockets to compete with OSU, USC, Michigan and Oregon. This will make 8-4 seasons commonplace. When KF retires, we should be happy to get a new coach who can develop men as he can. The NCAA has no control and I wouldn’t be surprised if gambling interests have not already influenced games. I certainly hope I’m mistaken.
I think we’re in complete agreement. Iowa has many disadvantages compared to the blue bloods, and those continue no matter who the coach is
I don’t recall anyone claiming we would be bottom feeders forever once KF retires.
I’ve heard many say they are concerned that the new coach will be as successful as KF. For the last ten years, that would mean averaging a little over 9 wins a year.
Those that think just any ole coach will come into Iowa and win at that rate are delusional. If Beth offered prospective coaches a deal where if they exceed KF’s 9.x wins a year, she would pay them double. But, if they don’t, she pays them half.
How many coaches out there do you think take that deal? 50% of them? 75%? 25%?
I bet maybe 10% at the most. Because there wouldn’t be too many coaches confident they would come out on the right end of that deal.
Well you see, 6 wins is very much different than 9 wins if you put any effort into understanding why and how............
Case in point, your mood would be even worse right now if Iowa was sitting at 6-6 after losses to Michigan State and Nebraska, and then a bowl loss to put them at 6-7 to end the year.
You want to lump everything under an umbrella because it would make it easier when your argument is "I want more".
That's not how this actually works though, irregardless of opinions and feelings. I hope this helps.......
Well, are all bowl games that aren't in the CFP "low-level bowl games"?..........
Btw, the bowls they use in the playoffs are just glorified names/locations for the Qtrs and Semies rounds, at this point.
Also, minor nitpick, but when you and everyone else say "compete for the playoffs", you mean to say compete IN the playoffs.
Iowa competed FOR a spot in the playoffs this year. They lost the games thay could've gotten them in.
That's why the ENTIRE regular season should matter.
If Iowa was 8-2 going into their final two games ranked let's say 13th, and their last two games were against 2-8 Purdue and then a 5-6 Nebraska, those woud still technically be games Iowa was "competing in FOR a spot in the playoffs". They'd need to win those games to have a chance to get in, again irregardless of any crying about those hypothetical 2 other losses we'd have.
By that same token, Iowa is essentially competing FOR a spot in the playoffs each and every week until they lose enough games where it's clear and evident they won't get in.
But I think what you mean is that you want Iowa IN the playoffs playing in those games and competing for a championship.
Unfortunately, it's just not realistic to expect Iowa to be one of the only 3-4 teams that could sneak in to a 12 team playoff, with the way it's structured right now..........EVERY single year, let alone even 3 years, 4 years, 5 years, etc.
That can change though, as Iowa continues rebuild their offense, and if the next head coach can keep that upward trajectory and find a way to at least somewhat maintain the consistency of the defensive play that Phil has established, then they could at least be a team that is competitive year in and year out against their ranked opponents.
But that wording is different than competing for or IN the CFP.
Iowa showed they could compete with the ranked teams they played this year and therefore had their shot to make the playoff.....they didn't get it done. The progress is there, though. Because even just last year if we played these same teams we would've gotten f***ing destroyed, instead of being a handful of unlucky plays and calls from honestly being undefeated.
So to wrap up my tl;dr what you're saying is you want Iowa IN the CFP. You just need to be more realistic about how often they're actually gonna DO that, even if the next coach is a "home run hire".
There's way too many people and forces beyond our control outside this state that do not want to see Iowa succeed.
You say "what about Indiana". There's money there though. Look at basketball, and how badly the media wants Indiana to become a relevant power again, even though the state of Indiana is, in my opinion, nothing special. People that don't live in Iowa, and are in positions of power, unfortunately, would disagree with my
Believe me when I say that won't be the case if Iowa ever shows signs of becoming a CFP mainstay like Indiana is showing right now. So you got that bullsh**, and yes it is very real bullsh**, working against you as well, when you sit there and say you want this program to complete IN the CFP more often....................
Just sayin.
Funnily enough, that's pretty much the exact same timeline as Hayden. The '90s as a whole weren't actually all that great. There were a lot of Hayden teams that either fell short of expectations or simply had no hope while certain programs turned into powerhouses.
Here's Iowas win totals in the '90s....only one of those was Kirk's:
8
10
5
6
5
8
9
7
3
1
Again, refer back to above post about competing IN the playoffs vs competing FOR a spot in the playoffs.
No, Iowa is in tier 3 on the proposed UC Investment contract proposal for media payout in the B10.
I happened to re-watch the Iowa/South Carolina bowl highlights today, and there was a fairly heavy emphasis on Kirk possibly leaving for an NFL job from the commentators. Kirk said he was pretty happy with where he was at. Crazy to think about the rumor mill going on during that time.
Cuban did an interview with SI and said he decided to start pumping money into Hoosier football after having a one on one with Cignetti. Their QB is making over $2.5M.
Hayden averaged 7.15 wins per season at Iowa or a .611 winning percentage over his time from 1979-1998. Prior to that, Iowa had 17 straight losing seasons. Well documented, it was the fan support through those 17 years that impressed him most before he took the job.
At the time Hayden retired he ended with a 3-8 season after finishing 7-5 the year before. Administration at Iowa set the mark of realistic expectations at Iowa at 7-5/8-4. That was the low end for what Iowa set as a standard after Fry.
It is not a loser mentality to want to stay in that 7-5/8-4 range. 43 years of that as an average is damn good football in the conference and out. The coaching staff and players start 0-0 every year wanting to win every game. Kirk will retire and a new coach should be held to a minimum standard of 7-5/8-4 over his first short contract period. DO FANS WANT undefeated seasons? Yes. Do the players? Yes.
A new head coach will only be successful if they can maintain recruiting areas Iowa has always relied upon. Lose those and they will slide. The core of good midwestern football teams are built in the midwest. Iowa will never be able to replace kids who grow up Iowa fans. There are three levels of recruits. Pros in college who know they will play in the NFL, kids who want to work hard and may have a shot at the NFL, and the guys that love football for the game that will end for them when they graduate. Most teams are built with the latter two and Iowa has done very well getting guys to the league. Hire a coach who loses that edge and they will never have success at Iowa.
As others have stated, Kirk will retire. Fry took the Iowa job because of fan support during 17 losing seasons. Fan support is still high and that alone should be attractive to a new coach. It helped hire the former and current coaches... No one is a loser for being happy about 8-4. It is perfectly fine for others to want more. Fan support is still high.
At the time Hayden retired he ended with a 3-8 season after finishing 7-5 the year before. Administration at Iowa set the mark of realistic expectations at Iowa at 7-5/8-4. That was the low end for what Iowa set as a standard after Fry.
It is not a loser mentality to want to stay in that 7-5/8-4 range. 43 years of that as an average is damn good football in the conference and out. The coaching staff and players start 0-0 every year wanting to win every game. Kirk will retire and a new coach should be held to a minimum standard of 7-5/8-4 over his first short contract period. DO FANS WANT undefeated seasons? Yes. Do the players? Yes.
A new head coach will only be successful if they can maintain recruiting areas Iowa has always relied upon. Lose those and they will slide. The core of good midwestern football teams are built in the midwest. Iowa will never be able to replace kids who grow up Iowa fans. There are three levels of recruits. Pros in college who know they will play in the NFL, kids who want to work hard and may have a shot at the NFL, and the guys that love football for the game that will end for them when they graduate. Most teams are built with the latter two and Iowa has done very well getting guys to the league. Hire a coach who loses that edge and they will never have success at Iowa.
As others have stated, Kirk will retire. Fry took the Iowa job because of fan support during 17 losing seasons. Fan support is still high and that alone should be attractive to a new coach. It helped hire the former and current coaches... No one is a loser for being happy about 8-4. It is perfectly fine for others to want more. Fan support is still high.
I remember when our kids was playing city baseball with James Ferentz. Kirk and Mary rarely missed a game...
I read most of your response but you inject your opinion as well, and I am not forcing my opinion on anyone. Never meant/said constantly compete for playoffs/BIG. You like Ferentz I have not liked his strategy for several years, which is okay. You want to prove me wrong-headed good for you I guess, but it is JMO.Well you see, 6 wins is very much different than 9 wins if you put any effort into understanding why and how............
Case in point, your mood would be even worse right now if Iowa was sitting at 6-6 after losses to Michigan State and Nebraska, and then a bowl loss to put them at 6-7 to end the year.
You want to lump everything under an umbrella because it would make it easier when your argument is "I want more".
That's not how this actually works though, irregardless of opinions and feelings. I hope this helps.......
Well, are all bowl games that aren't in the CFP "low-level bowl games"?..........
Btw, the bowls they use in the playoffs are just glorified names/locations for the Qtrs and Semies rounds, at this point.
Also, minor nitpick, but when you and everyone else say "compete for the playoffs", you mean to say compete IN the playoffs.
Iowa competed FOR a spot in the playoffs this year. They lost the games thay could've gotten them in.
That's why the ENTIRE regular season should matter.
If Iowa was 8-2 going into their final two games ranked let's say 13th, and their last two games were against 2-8 Purdue and then a 5-6 Nebraska, those woud still technically be games Iowa was "competing in FOR a spot in the playoffs". They'd need to win those games to have a chance to get in, again irregardless of any crying about those hypothetical 2 other losses we'd have.
By that same token, Iowa is essentially competing FOR a spot in the playoffs each and every week until they lose enough games where it's clear and evident they won't get in.
But I think what you mean is that you want Iowa IN the playoffs playing in those games and competing for a championship.
Unfortunately, it's just not realistic to expect Iowa to be one of the only 3-4 teams that could sneak in to a 12 team playoff, with the way it's structured right now..........EVERY single year, let alone even 3 years, 4 years, 5 years, etc.
That can change though, as Iowa continues rebuild their offense, and if the next head coach can keep that upward trajectory and find a way to at least somewhat maintain the consistency of the defensive play that Phil has established, then they could at least be a team that is competitive year in and year out against their ranked opponents.
But that wording is different than competing for or IN the CFP.
Iowa showed they could compete with the ranked teams they played this year and therefore had their shot to make the playoff.....they didn't get it done. The progress is there, though. Because even just last year if we played these same teams we would've gotten f***ing destroyed, instead of being a handful of unlucky plays and calls from honestly being undefeated.
So to wrap up my tl;dr what you're saying is you want Iowa IN the CFP. You just need to be more realistic about how often they're actually gonna DO that, even if the next coach is a "home run hire".
There's way too many people and forces beyond our control outside this state that do not want to see Iowa succeed.
You say "what about Indiana". There's money there though. Look at basketball, and how badly the media wants Indiana to become a relevant power again, even though the state of Indiana is, in my opinion, nothing special. People that don't live in Iowa, and are in positions of power, unfortunately, would disagree with myopinionfacts. That's why people aren't in that big a hurry to tear down this Cinderella run by Cignetti.
Believe me when I say that won't be the case if Iowa ever shows signs of becoming a CFP mainstay like Indiana is showing right now. So you got that bullsh**, and yes it is very real bullsh**, working against you as well, when you sit there and say you want this program to complete IN the CFP more often....................
Just sayin.
Funnily enough, that's pretty much the exact same timeline as Hayden. The '90s as a whole weren't actually all that great. There were a lot of Hayden teams that either fell short of expectations or simply had no hope while certain programs turned into powerhouses.
Here's Iowas win totals in the '90s....only one of those was Kirk's:
8
10
5
6
5
8
9
7
3
1
Again, refer back to above post about competing IN the playoffs vs competing FOR a spot in the playoffs.
Say what you what you want about HF, but he brought excitement to Iowa football until his illness, and I was then ready to move on to the next head coach of Iowa football.
I have had zero confidence in a Ferentz coached team competing for the playoffs or winning the BIG for several years. Yes, there are a great number of reasons why Iowa will not win BIG, and he is one of them given his expectations and labeling the program "poor little Iowa". In my experience in job/life/sports low expectations breed lackluster results in most any situation. There is absolutely no competitive excitement in the program (except for tailgating/party and a nice day trip in the Fall) and there has not been for quite some time for a lot of fans IMO. Ferentz tries to sit on leads and of course about half the time it does not work, and you just can see it coming.
Bowl games are nice for players and fans that want to attend (winter get away) but IMO really do not mean much else any longer.
I am just waiting for his retirement at this point so at least Iowa will be hopefully trying a different offensive/game management strategy with a different head coach.
I am done so carry on as you wish. No disrespect meant in any of my comments, and I will continue to watch and root for the Hawkeyes regardless of my personal opinion about Ferentz as the head coach.
Do not necessarily disagree. So, what is the point of Iowa or majority of teams in D1 football?