• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Kirk Ferentz (four more B1G COY Awards than Tressel and Meyer combined)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Dryden;1824419; said:
Do you see a Jim Tressel coached team starting the season in the top 10 and ending up 8-4? :paranoid:
Click to expand...

:lol: I knew someone would bring that up, I couldn't remember where we started that season to be honest.

BUT...there is one HUGE difference...that team DID NOT QUIT or REGRESS. They started 3-3 and then got a lot better as the season progressed, including beating dUMb and winning the bowl game and spring-boarding us to the big run we've had since. At no time did I think that team quit, or anything close to it, and we were better at the end of the season than at the beginning (WAY better)...can 2010 Iowa say that?
 
Upvote 0
cincibuck;1824360; said:
Johnson - Koulianis, Shon Green, ... I don't care how he gets them, he gets results. Finally, are you suggesting that Tressel got the better deal when DJK ended up in Iowa City and Ray Small in Columbus?
Click to expand...
McNutt is decent. DJK is their headliner, and Minnesota has a better #1 than him.

Indiana has a better WR corps than Iowa. MSU is deeper as well. Those schools also get mediocre incoming talent like Iowa. Purdue often has receiving corps on similar footing to Iowa this year.


Iowa develops TE & linemen without much incoming talent.

Using a very brief & small set of RBs & WRs to suggest he is developing those positions well is rather overstated.
 
Upvote 0
Bucklion;1824445; said:
:lol: I knew someone would bring that up, I couldn't remember where we started that season to be honest.

BUT...there is one HUGE difference...that team DID NOT QUIT or REGRESS. They started 3-3 and then got a lot better as the season progressed, including beating dUMb and winning the bowl game and spring-boarding us to the big run we've had since. At no time did I think that team quit, or anything close to it, and we were better at the end of the season than at the beginning (WAY better)...can 2010 Iowa say that?
Click to expand...

I know what you meant in the context of Iowa quitting this year, I was just busting your balls because that was the first thing that came into my head. :lol:
 
Upvote 0
In the Illinoishttp://Illinois thread I ran some numbers comparing various coaches at B1G schools with their school's performance prior to their arrival and after their removal.

Essentially I did it to prove the Mallory/Mason Maxim which says that once a school that is not a traditional power in the Big Ten gets a coach who enjoys some success the school begins to have unrealistic expectations; ultimately resulting in their 'good' coach being fired and the team returning to their previous lower levels of performance.

Indiana - Bill Mallory
Illinois - Ron Zook
Minnesota - Glen Mason
Purdue - Joe Tiller

Pre: 77-134-3 36.68%
Mallory: 69-77-3 47.32%
Post: 54-108 33.33%

Pre: 103-123 45.67%
Zook: 28-45 38.36%
Post: ?

Pre: 86-134-3 36.24%
Mason: 64-57 52.89%
Post: 17-33 34%

Pre: 92-126-6 42.41%
Tiller: 87-62 58.39%
Post: 15-21 41.67%

Indiana & Minnesota both did in fact prove the maxim. Purdue also proved the basic premise (that success may be tied to a single coach & will not be sustained or improved upon) although Joe Tiller was not fired, rather he left of his own volition.

Conversely Ron Zook is not an example of the Mallory/Mason Maxim as his teams actually performed worse than the ones under previous Illinois administrations.

So how does multiple Big Ten Coach of the Year awardee Kirk Ferentz fare in regards to the Mallory/Mason Maxim?

Pre: 143-89-6 61.35%
Ferentz: 96-65 59.62%
Post: ?

Interestingly the pre-Ferentz 20 year window consists entirely of the tenure of beloved coach Hayden Fry.

Pre: 67-129-5 34.58%
Fry: 143-89-6 61.35%
Post: 96-65 59.62%

So Fry definitely falls into the uncharacteristically successful coach category for Iowa. While the post Fry era has been a slight regression it hasn't (yet) fallen back to the historical levels of performance.

Fry of course differs from Mallory & Mason in that he was not fired prematurely.


Edit:
And sticking this in here just because I got to thinking and looked it up.
The other recent coach who drastically improved his school's football performance and was allowed to finish his tenure on his own terms...Barry Alvarez.

Pre: 92-125-6 42.60%
Alvarez 118-73-4 61.54%
Post: 49-16 75.39%

Hmmm.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
After Iowa lost to Central Michigan 32-31 on Saturday, some Hawkeyes fans began calling for Kirk Ferentz to be fired. The natives were restless before that. Iowa is 10-11 in its past 21 games, and the loss to the Chippewas marked the 10th time since 2006 that the Hawkeyes lost a game despite being favored by double digits.

But the Iowa City Press-Citizen?s Pat Harty pointed out that firing Ferentz after the season would likely cost the Iowa athletic department $35 million, a figure he got by combining the money that would be owed to Ferentz (about $25 million) and the money it would take to hire a new coach with any credibility.

In other words, Iowa might as well get used to Ferentz, for better or worse. His latest contract extension, announced in September 2010, guarantees him nearly $4 million annually through 2020.
Click to expand...
Rumblings
 
Upvote 0
The Iowas of the world need to ask themselves one simple question before firing their coach: who in the hell are we going to hire that is any better than this?

Firing Ferentz, no matter how bad he is in three out of five years, and expecting to do better under the next coach is idiotic.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye86;2223020; said:
The Iowas of the world need to ask themselves one simple question before firing their coach: who in the hell are we going to hire that is any better than this?

Firing Ferentz, no matter how bad he is in three out of five years, and expecting to do better under the next coach is idiotic.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying but I think I disagree. In the end it comes down to their commitment to football. spending on coaches, facilities ect. if Boise, WVU, OKla St., and ourkansas can be strong programs I dont see why Iowa cant.

Ferentz has been living off his reputation for too long now. 10 yr contract extensions for coaches are ridiculous and their current problem shows why.
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeSoldier;2223027; said:
I get what you are saying but I think I disagree. In the end it comes down to their commitment to football. spending on coaches, facilities ect. if Boise, WVU, OKla St., and ourkansas can be strong programs I dont see why Iowa cant.

Ferentz has been living off his reputation for too long now. 10 yr contract extensions for coaches are ridiculous and their current problem shows why.
Click to expand...

How'd that work out for Minnesota? Purdue? Illinois?

Arkansas and Oklahoma state are very poor comparisons . They have droves of local talent to pull from and Berger financial backing, in terms of money earmarked for football extravagance, especially okie state.

WVU has much more local talent too.

Boise plays one or two games a year.

I agree the big ten needs a better commitment financially but Iowa is the wrong school to target. They paid.

Ferentz is wildly overpaid, but it is far cheaper than the results and revenue without him.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
jwinslow;2223028; said:
How'd that work out for Minnesota? Purdue? Illinois?

Arkansas and Oklahoma state are very poor comparisons . They have droves of local talent to pull from and Berger financial backing, in terms of money earmarked for football extravagance, especially okie state.

WVU has much more local talent too.

Boise plays one or two games a year.

I agree the big ten needs a better commitment financially but Iowa is the wrong school to target.
Click to expand...

This is the Big Ten hierarchy in my opinion based on potential (based on current strength Illinois would switch with Wisconsin and Minnesota would get bumped down).

1st Tier
Ohio State
Michigan

2nd Tier
Great history and/or local talent means these teams should be competing for conference titles a majority of the time.

Nebraska
Michigan State
Penn State (maybe eventually can get here again)
Illinois (if they can ever get their act together)

Third Tier
Can be good every once and awhile but lack the resources for sustained success.

Wisconsin (I think their recent success is more of a flash in the pan rather than anything sustainable)
Iowa
Minnesota

Fourth Tier
Anything better than consistently sucking is a pleasant surprise.

Purdue
Northwestern
Indiana

The financial commitment and consistent success needs to come from the second tier. Anything beyond that is just icing on the cake.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top