Iowa Hawkeye Football Xs and Os: Rating Kirk Ferentz as an in-Game Coach

Lately, most Hawkeye fans are not happy with the job their head coach has done.

This is in marked contrast to the early part of Kirk Ferentz's tenure, during which the Iowa fanbase couldn't have been happier with their head man.

One then questions how Kirk Ferentz has done, year-by-year, given the situation he has had to work with. A top-notch in-game coach should overachieve, or at least meet expectations, with some consistency.

Contrarily, lesser in-game coaches underachieve or meet expectations only when they have top-notch personnel.

Firstly, I will note that this article does not take into consideration recruiting or player development. In my opinion, Iowa has been, without a doubt, the strongest program in the country at developing players.

Moreover, recruiting is inherent within how the team does. How many stars a player has next to his name before he gets on campus is irrelevant, and as regards recruiting, Iowa, in my opinion, has a ceiling.

Given the limitations of that ceiling, Ferentz and staff have done a good job in identifying players that fit what the program is trying to accomplish and getting them on campus.

Obviously, player development and recruiting are part of collegiate coaching, but in this case, I am only concerned with the level of talent any particular Hawkeye team had in any given year vs. the team's record.

Secondly, my feelings on the Hawks are subjective. Just because I feel that the 2005 team could have won more games than it did, does not mean that I am correct, though I will justify my opinion.

Thirdly, when I write of "expectations," I am not referring to what was expected of the team coming into the season. Rather, I am looking at the team through a historical lens.

Who was on the team, how experienced were they, who was injured, what did the schedule look like, how many games were winnable and with that in mind, how did the team do?

Finally, I didn't bother looking into 1999 and 2000, because, though Ferentz has to be held accountable for those years—years in which Iowa went a combined 4-19—those seasons can fairly be written off as transitional years.

2001

Final record: 7-5 (4-4 in conference)

In 2001, the Hawks went 1-4 in games decided by a touchdown or less. In other words, Iowa went 1-4 in winnable games.

Nonetheless, I agree with the mentality that this was one more step up the mountain. This team was missing the final piece of the puzzle, and had to learn to win the close ones.

In effect, though I would love that Iowa State loss back, 7-5 is an accurate representation of who this team was.

Final Estimation of Team: Met expectations.

2002

Final record: 11-2 (8-0)

I'm going to do this backwards and write that this team met expectations, to which you're going to reply "Wha...?"

At the time, fans couldn't have expected the breakthrough year that Iowa had, but said fans aren't considering the makeup of the team through a historical lens.

The Hawks had future NFL All Pros at kicker, tight end, strong safety and left guard. They had future NFL career players at left tackle and defensive tackle. They had players that had a nice NFL run at defensive tackle and defensive end.

The top backup defensive end—who led the team with 10 sacks—is an NFL career player. The free safety, right guard and center would have had a shot at NFL careers if not for injuries.

On top of that, they had a Davey O'Brien Award winner at quarterback, two solid receivers and a strong 1-2 punch at running back. None of the offensive skill players had much pro potential, mostly due to their measurables, but they were exceptional collegiate athletes.

The same could be said for the right tackle and middle linebacker, the latter of who was first-team all-conference.

Finally, all of the above were juniors or seniors, most of who had multiple years of starting experience. Also, this is not taking into consideration the future NFLers that weren't in the starting lineup, but played prominent special teams roles.

In short, yes, given the talent on this team, 11-2 was about right. In fact, one might argue that the loss to Iowa State was, once again, unacceptable.

2002 was less a matter of overachieving, and more a matter of a culmination of three years of outstanding player development.

Final Estimation of Team: Met expectations.

2003

Final Record: 10-3 (5-3)

This team had the first great Ferentz-coached defense, and also had exceptional special teams. All of the starting defensive linemen spent multiple years in the NFL, both of the safeties have and are enjoying long NFL careers, the kicker is an All-Pro and the linebackers were pretty good too.

The problem was the offense.

It had a serviceable line that featured an Outland Award-winning left tackle, as well as a good running back that was too short to get much consideration in the NFL.

However, the receivers were decimated by injuries and the quarterback was the epitome of quiet, understated efficiency, but he lacked any ability to take over games.

The 2003 Hawkeyes had the weakest passing offense in the Big Ten and were eighth in total offense.

This team had an extra game, which helped it to get to 10 wins, but man-for-man, this was an eight-win team.

Final Estimation of Team: Overachiever.

2004

Final record: 10-2 (7-1)

One has to start by considering that the Big Ten was down in 2004. However, that doesn't take away from the accomplishments of the Hawkeyes.

Due to injuries, the Hawks were down to a walk-on running back for much of the season. They wound up last in the country in rushing offense. They were 101st in total offense.

Yet, they made things happen.

In retrospect, it seemed that every time the team looked at 3rd-and-7, the receivers managed to get eight yards. Though I'm sure my memory is failing me, I can't remember a single dropped pass on the season.

The defense, while not the most statistically impressive Iowa defense under Ferentz—not even one of the top three—was incredible. The line spent the final six games in the opposing teams' backfields.

This was the last year of across-the-board, great Iowa special teams, and true sophomore quarterback Drew Tate was unbelievable.

Nevertheless, given the offensive woes, I would call this a six-seven win team that won 10.

In the end, this was the season that established Kirk Ferentz's reputation.

Final Estimation of Team: Major overachiever.

2005

Final Record: 7-5 (5-3)

First of all, I discount this team's Outback Bowl loss. It was the only game in over 30 years of watching both pro and college football, in which the refereeing was so bad that it made the matchup uneven. Bad calls happen, but that game was beyond the realm of acceptable.

That said, this team had unfairly high preseason expectations.

Though the 2005 Hawks returned two all-conference linebackers, as well as two four-year starting cornerbacks, they had to replace the entire defensive line, which, as previously noted, was dominant.

Moreover, the new linemen included two undersized redshirt freshmen at defensive tackle and two inexperienced sophomores at the ends.

It was unrealistic to have expected the defense to reload.

On the other hand, the offense had a lot working for it. All-conference quarterback Drew Tate was back, almost all of his receivers returned, he had a healthy group of running backs to work with and he had a good amount of experience on the line.

Statistically, this turned out to be the second-best offense of the Kirk Ferentz era.

In short, this was an offense-dominant team, and Ferentz had trouble adjusting his philosophy to that dynamic. This was complicated by a lot of bad bounces in 2005, which, in a way, made up for a lot of good bounces in 2004.

This group lost two games by a field goal or less. Both games—Michigan at home and Northwestern on the road—were winnable. If Ferentz had been more aggressive with an offense that had the ability to put points on the board, he would have had a good shot at winning at least one if not both of those games.

This was an eight-win team that failed to win eight games, due to a coach that didn't adjust his philosophy to the team dynamic.

Final Estimation of Team: Slight underachiever.

2006

Final Record: 6-7 (2-6)

The year of the fat cats, and arguably, the low point of the Kirk Ferentz era.

Being an outsider, it is hard to say what was wrong with this team's dynamic. All I could see was what was wrong on the field, and in that respect, it seemed like almost everything.

The 2006 Hawks had a senior QB in Drew Tate, a strong group of running backs and an experienced offensive line. The defense returned the entire front four, as well as a linebacker and both safeties.

Iowa had to replace most of its receivers, both cornerbacks and two of the best linebackers in school history.

Drew Tate had health issues throughout the year, and his receivers couldn't catch a cold. Still, there was plenty to work with, and there was no excuse for losing to two teams that weren't bowl eligible—Northwestern and Indiana—as well as 6-7 Minnesota.

Maybe one of them, but not all of them.

In its final game of the season against Minnesota, Iowa might have been worst team in the Big Ten, but on paper, this team was good enough to compete for the conference championship.

In closing, the benchmark for this team was eight-nine wins.

Final Estimation of Team: Major underachiever.

2007

Final record: 6-6 (4-4)

This team wasn't good. The defense was decent, but wasn't able to win games on its own, and the special teams were average. However, the offense was terrible, and complicating the matter, it lost its top two pass catchers in the first conference game.

In effect, the 6-6 record was about what could have been expected of this squad.

What was inexcusable was losing badly to 5-7 Western Michigan. At home. On senior day. At the end of the season. With a bowl game hanging in the balance.

Basically, this was accurately a six-seven win team, and I wouldn't call them "underachievers" if they had lost to Illinois, but beaten Western Michigan. Nonetheless, that was not the case.

Given the situation, they had to beat WMU.

Final Estimation of Team: Slight underachiever. 

2008

Final Record: 9-4 (5-3)

This team could have been in the run for an undefeated season if 2007 starting quarterback Jake Christensen had developed. The 2008 Hawks had a great defense, a dominant running game and average special teams. They needed a quarterback that could lead a balanced offensive attack.

Unfortunately, Christensen didn't progress and the rest is history.

The 2008 Pitt game was the most poorly coached game of Ferentz's career up to that point. Otherwise,  sloppy, inexperienced quarterback play bit them on the rear in losses to Northwestern, Michigan State and Illinois.

On the other hand, this team went on to win some big late-season games once Ricky Stanzi figured things out. By the end of 2008, the Hawks were playing like a top-10 team. It just took them—and their young quarterback—a while to get there.

With a quality, experienced quarterback, this was a 10-win team at worst. Without one, as was the case, it was an eight-nine win team.

Final Estimation of Team: Met expectations.

2009

Final Record: 11-2 (6-2)

The 2009 Hawks had possibly the greatest defense in the Fry/Ferentz era. Either way, it was the best D in the Kirk Ferentz era.

Consider that seven of the nine starters that have already graduated were drafted. One of the two starters that have yet to move on—Shaun Prater—will get drafted and the other—Broderick Binns—had a great senior year and might have done well enough to go late in the draft.

The offense wasn't great—86th-ranked scoring offense in the country—but it scored when needed.

However, make no mistakes—pinball interceptions, blocked punts that bounced right into a Hawkeye's hands, two blocked field goals in a row. I'm not saying this team was lucky, because I believe one makes his own luck.

But this team got a lot of fortuitous bounces.

Unfortunately, the bounces stopped going Iowa's way when quarterback Ricky Stanzi's regular season ended with a snapped leg against Northwestern. If not for that injury, the Hawks may have been able to run the table.

Ultimately, this was a nine-win caliber team that made things a lot harder for itself, but also made the most of its opportunities, and finished the year with a huge Orange Bowl win.

Final Estimation of Team: Overachiever. 

2010

Final Record: 8-5 (4-4)

Senior quarterback. Experienced playmakers in the offensive skill positions. A dominant defensive line. Ball-hawking safeties.

This team had the pieces that could have gone all the way.

Of course, there were some elements missing. The offensive line was inexperienced, the linebackers dropped like flies and when it was all said and done, Iowa lacked running back depth.

Also, the defensive coordinator missed most of the season with diabetes, the Big Ten was strong in 2010 and Iowa played a tough schedule.

Nevertheless, all five of the Hawks' losses were by a touchdown or less. Three were by a field goal or less.

There was far too much talent on this team to have only won seven games in the regular season, and the end-of-the-season loss to hapless Minnesota was a disgrace.

This was a minimum nine-win team that quit at the end of the year. The bowl game win against a ranked, 10-win foe was the year's only saving grace.

Final Estimation of Team: Major underachiever.

2011

Final Record: 7-6 (4-4)

The 2011 Hawks entered the season as the least experienced team in the Big Ten, as well as one of the least experienced teams in the country.

They had to replace three D-linemen, the starting quarterback, top receiver and top rusher; two starting linebackers, both safeties and an all-conference punter. All of the linemen, the quarterback and one of the safeties were chosen in the NFL draft.

In short, this didn't project to be a championship team.

On the other hand, it lost to a three-win Minnesota team, the offense no-showed against a good Nebraska team and a good Penn State defense and it lost in triple overtime to Iowa State. Though the ISU team in question was a decent foe, Kirk Ferentz set new lows for inexplicably poor coaching that gave the game away. 

The defense was lousy by Iowa standards, but it did improve as the season went on. Furthermore, the offense boasted the all-time greatest single-season performance by an Iowa receiver, as well as the fourth-best single-season performance by a running back. The 2011 Hawkeyes had a quarterback that came in third in the conference in passing efficiency.

Finally, the 2011 Hawks had one of the softest schedules in the Big Ten.

This team should have won eight and could have won nine. The losses to both Iowa State and Minnesota—not necessarily the losses themselves, but the way they occurred—were inexcusable.

Final Estimation of Team: Underachievers.

Final Synopsis

There are more elements to college coaching than in-game Xs and Os. As previously mentioned, there is player development, an area in which Kirk Ferentz has been as successful as anybody in the country.

In fact, his in-game coaching wouldn't be questionable if it weren't for his top-notch player development, because he wouldn't have as many top-caliber players on his teams.

As of September 2011, the Hawkeyes had the second-most players in the NFL of all Big Ten teams. They also had the eighth-most of all college football programs.

Moreover, I recently crunched some numbers and found that over the NFL draft period 2001-2010, Iowa had the most offensive linemen drafted in the country.

Hawkeye fans are well aware that Iowa doesn't recruit with the likes of Texas, Ohio State or Florida, but Kirk Ferentz's program does pump out NFL talent near the level of those schools.

With that in mind, the "lil' old Iowa" argument doesn't hold water.

It is true the Hawks don't have the depth or immediate talent advantages of OSU or Florida, and for that reason, they cannot compete with those programs on a yearly basis, nor can they sustain a lot of injuries.

On the other hand, given development time, Hawkeye players can compete with those programs on a semi-regular basis, and that is a testament to the job Kirk Ferentz has done.

The problem is the Xs and Os (and player attrition).

According to my (subjective) assessment, Ferentz's Hawkeyes have met expectations three times. They have overachieved three times, and they have underachieved five times with two of those underachievements being egregious.

Even more damning is that two of Ferentz's three overachieving seasons occurred in the first half of his tenure. Over the last seven seasons, he has only overachieved or met expectations twice. A success rate of just under 26 percent isn't impressive no matter how one paints it.

In closing, for all the positives Kirk Ferentz brings to the Iowa football program—and there are a lot of positives—he has not been a particularly good in-game coach.

One can hope that the recent staff shakeup, and particularly the new offensive coordinator, will help to ameliorate this.