[HomerChampless]

Iowa is not Indiana. Iowa should not be thankful for mediocre seasons.

Barta's job is to hire an Iowa football coach that wins, who's teams appear to progressively be getting better, and who's teams compete for championships.

When a football coach does that, putting fannies in the seats comes naturally.

[9YRPLAN]

no, it isnt

[CRHawk2002]

This seems to be a very random time to post this. A month after the season is over when we are having a very good recruiting class.

[FalseMirage]

I'm also tired of an empty Kinnick on game day.

The Indiana AD must have the easiest job in the world, as long as he hires a coach that loses, everyone is satisfied.

[HandsyHobo]

Originally Posted by HomerChampless

Iowa is not Indiana. Iowa should not be thankful for mediocre seasons.

Barta's job is to hire an Iowa football coach that wins, who's teams appear to progressively be getting better, and who's teams compete for championships.

When a football coach does that, putting fannies in the seats comes naturally.

I don't think anyone is ever truly pleased with a 6-6 or 7-5 season. That said, it's easy to underestimate how many obstacles Iowa has in every aspect of the game (finances, facilities, quality of recruits, etc.). Consequently, it can be easy to expect more than you're getting. Iowa often seems like it is capable of achieving better results, but that is because of the effort everyone in the program is already putting in. It's not because of some sort of inherent program identity that would exist if anyone was the head coach.

I don't really understand the point of starting this thread. What you may fail to realize is that there are two (and only two) reasons that Iowa is not Indiana: Hayden Fry and Kirk Ferentz. Before them, Iowa was, in fact, on Indiana's level.

[KnightHawk9]

Originally Posted by HomerChampless

Iowa is not Indiana. Iowa should not be thankful for mediocre seasons.

Barta's job is to hire an Iowa football coach that wins, who's teams appear to progressively be getting better, and who's teams compete for championships.

When a football coach does that, putting fannies in the seats comes naturally.

I don't understand where the comparison between Indiana and Iowa is coming from. Our season didn't in any way resemble Indiana's. Did you mean Purdue?

[ICbornNraised]

Originally Posted by HandsyHobo

I don't think anyone is ever truly pleased with a 6-6 or 7-5 season. That said, it's easy to underestimate how many obstacles Iowa has in every aspect of the game (finances, facilities, quality of recruits, etc.). Consequently, it can be easy to expect more than you're getting. Iowa often seems like it is capable of achieving better results, but that is because of the effort everyone in the program is already putting in. It's not because of some sort of inherent program identity that would exist if anyone was the head coach.

I don't really understand the point of starting this thread. What you may fail to realize is that there are two (and only two) reasons that Iowa is not Indiana: Hayden Fry and Kirk Ferentz. Before them, Iowa was, in fact, on Indiana's level.

This is correct

[1977Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by HandsyHobo

I don't think anyone is ever truly pleased with a 6-6 or 7-5 season. That said, it's easy to underestimate how many obstacles Iowa has in every aspect of the game (finances, facilities, quality of recruits, etc.). Consequently, it can be easy to expect more than you're getting. Iowa often seems like it is capable of achieving better results, but that is because of the effort everyone in the program is already putting in. It's not because of some sort of inherent program identity that would exist if anyone was the head coach.

I don't really understand the point of starting this thread. What you may fail to realize is that there are two (and only two) reasons that Iowa is not Indiana: Hayden Fry and Kirk Ferentz. Before them, Iowa was, in fact, on Indiana's level.

So are you saying that we shouldn't be happy with 7-5? Or are you saying that it's unrealistic to expect better because we're Iowa?

And regarding our lack of facilities, did we not just build a brand new practice facility? Or is it only the basketball team that gets to use that? And finances, is Iowa not Top-15 nationally in athletic department revenue? Not buying the facilities or finances argument. Recruiting, yes - the state of Iowa is not a talent hot bed.

[theboat]

People want to believe that we are a coach away from being OSU, when we are more likely a coach away from being Minnesota.

sucks that KF is so happy with 7-5 that he has just sat on his arse and has not recruited any players.

[HomerChampless]

Originally Posted by HandsyHobo

I don't think anyone is ever truly pleased with a 6-6 or 7-5 season. That said, it's easy to underestimate how many obstacles Iowa has in every aspect of the game (finances, facilities, quality of recruits, etc.). Consequently, it can be easy to expect more than you're getting. Iowa often seems like it is capable of achieving better results, but that is because of the effort everyone in the program is already putting in. It's not because of some sort of inherent program identity that would exist if anyone was the head coach.

I don't really understand the point of starting this thread. What you may fail to realize is that there are two (and only two) reasons that Iowa is not Indiana: Hayden Fry and Kirk Ferentz. Before them, Iowa was, in fact, on Indiana's level.

For example, the fan base at tOSU is so much more results oriented than you, hobo. One mediocre season of tOSU football and their fans want the heads of football coaches. Do you care that it looks like Iowa is going back to Indiana's level? IMO, I'm not sure of the answer - it doesn't show in your posting to this thread.
I've never disagreed that the efforts of coaches are the main contributor to a football program's success, but you forgot another reason why a football program succeeds or goes stagnant: the fan base.

Not too many football programs survive on tradition these days... unless you're Notre Dame (and they've not been too hot lately).

[vegashawki]

I like losing to NW and MN and accept mediocre seasons, thnx Barta.

[twinhawkfans]

Why does this site have to have stupid people on it??

[JHHawk]

''Not too many programs survive on tradition these days''?

NC game this year: Alabama vs LSU....no tradition there,right?
Last six national champs? Bama,Auburn,Bama,LSU,Fl,Texas...no tradition there at all.

And the last losing season at Iowa? 2007? Losing seasons in the last ten? One.

By definition, Iowa has a coach that wins....9 of last 10 year. Go fish.

[HandsyHobo]

Originally Posted by HomerChampless

For example, the fan base at tOSU is so much more results oriented than you, hobo. One mediocre season of tOSU football and their fans want the heads of football coaches. Do you care that it looks like Iowa is going back to Indiana's level? IMO, I'm not sure of the answer - it doesn't show in your posting to this thread.
I've never disagreed that the efforts of coaches are the main contributor to a football program's success, but you forgot another reason why a football program succeeds or goes stagnant: the fan base.

Not too many football programs survive on tradition these days... unless you're Notre Dame (and they've not been too hot lately).

I literally laughed out loud at the bolded part. Sorry. In your first post, you said that success is the key to bringing fans to the stadium. Now, apparently, fans are the key to bringing success. I think you had it right the first time.

Backsliding? Since when? The 2010 Orange Bowl? I disagree with your assessment that Iowa is backsliding. In my opinion, Iowa is stagnant at worst.

[hogeye]

Barta's job is basically to be Kirk's coffee gopher...as well it should be.