Here are the answers to the magic thinkers who populate the board hateful and usually silly animosity to KF and the state of the program, notwithstanding we are in the midst of our Iowa's most sustained success since the mid 80s, a streak that began 40 years ago and ended in 1987.
1. Population. Assuming that every state produces the same percentage of outstanding 4 and five star football players, here's where Iowa stands:
State National Rank Population
Pennsylvania 5 12,972,008
Illinois 6 12,582,032
Ohio 7 11,756,058
Michigan 9 10,077,331
New Jersey 11 9,261,699
Indiana 17 6,833,037
Maryland 19 6,164,660
Wisconsin 20 5,892,539
Minnesota 22 5,717,184
Iowa 32 3,200,517
Nebraska 38 1,967,923
Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan and New Jersey all have populations 3 times larger than Iowa. That means they are producing 3 times as many A- to A+ recruits as Iowa. I think we can safely assume that most states top recruits stay home, not always but generally. That means Pennsylvania could evenly divide between PSU and Pitt, which they don't, and each half would still outnumber Iowa by 2:1.
While population is not itself determinative, it is still the most important factor because almost everything stems from population.
2. Money. Again, size matters. Every state other than Nebraska has a much larger tax base than Iowa. That provides the public part of funding superior HS programs and more affluent and opulent university campuses. Population also means there are more donors great and small. That means the larger institutions are always ahead in the facilities race. The Pedo's raised record donations in the year they were outed and punished for the most despicable college sports scandal and cover up in history. There really are that many hardcore Pedo St donors. Does anyone think Iowa would have a record fundraising year if Iowa was implicated in the worst college football scandal ever?
3. Urbanity/mega donors. Every state in the Big Ten has larger urban areas. Urban areas are where the big corporate, and billionaire family donors reside. It's also where the suburbs build football factory schools. Like the DSM suburbs. The rest of the state is afraid to even play against the DSM suburban schools. So imagine many more and much larger such areas, in every other Big Ten state. Those are the people that can collectively create functionally unlimited AD budgets and NIL deals. Even Nebraska has Omaha. Shitty city but larger than DSM and still more money over there, although DSM is gaining fast. Iowa has one actual urban area, DSM & ex/suburbs, two and a half kind of cool but small college towns, and basically a 15 or so factory towns ranging from big ones like CR/Sioux City/Davenport to little BFE's like the land of my birth (Ottumwa). And Barta doesn't seem to make much of an effort to raise the Iowa penetration and TOMA in DSM. The lack of those urban area puts Iowa farther behind in the facilities, recruiting (scouts/analysts) and, of course NIL. Even NW can get into pockets of unfathomable wealth unavailable to Iowa.
4. Lack of BB status. Iowa hasn't been near a true BB since Evy was coaching, as in my entire life and I'm 63. Iowa is nationally perceived as a very good program, almost always ranked or close to it at the end of the year. Pull off some big upsets. But our national image is still less prestigious than those inbreeds from Nebraska. They haven't been a national program in twenty years and not really good for 10--15 years. All they have to offer is the shine on a now pretty aged trophy case yet they still have a national level recruiting reach. For example, it was vs. Bug Eaters for a 4* TE. He picked Nebraska. Every Iowa starting TE, actually going back to the 90s has had an NFL career.
5. Media market. A lot more people are watching/streaming/listening to tOSU, the Pedos, Ann Arbor, Bucky and probably MSU than are watching Iowa. That gives every one of those programs the ability to expand the advantages of 1-4.
6. Market penetration. With the exception of Wisconsin, tOSU, Sparty, the Whore, and the Pedos are national brands. National media showers them with attention thus creating a nearly static small number of special programs whose success is promoted for maximum broadcast value. That creates a cycle of national public awareness (e.g. recruits, their HS coaches, donors, apparel manufacturers and sales) that allows the BB schools to feed themselves ever upward..
Those are immutable factors that highly disadvantage Iowa. Other than drive ISU from the DSM suburbs in recruiting there isn't really much of a way to overcome those disadvantages. As Lenin said quantity has its own quality.
There are some things that we, indeed every school can do or not that shuffles the population stack. Indiana, Minnesota, Maryland, Rutgers don't prioritize football, although they are occasionally good. Illinois is unstable, but the end result is they have usually sucked over the last 50 years. MSU is sometimes very good and sometimes low digit wins. Purdue down to Maryland all trail Iowa.
Bucky shows you can get near the top, but, in the end, they have rarely outperformed tOSU, Pedo St., or Ann Arbor. Even Sparty might have a better record than Bucky over the Ferentz years.
So, why hasn't Iowa had a record more in keeping with it's demo? Why haven't we become an Illinois, Minnesota, Purdue, Indiana, Maryland or Rutgers; and all the head coaches that lost their jobs at each during KFs years at Iowa? Or their comps in every other conference. Everyone one of those programs have worse to incomparably worse records than Iowa's during the KF years. For example, NW is 148/143 in the Ferentz years. Pretty stable program during this century, right? KF has 195 wins, I think. During the KF years I'm guessing the only programs with more wins are Nebraska, but their advantage is declining at a pretty quick rate; tOSU; the Whore Ann Arbor, the Pedos, Bucky and Sparty. Purdue, 1 9-win, 1 8-win and two 7-win seasons (separated by several years) between 2008 and now. What's the constant at Iowa that allows us to avoid things like Sparty's 5-7 record last season?
Kirk Ferentz. All of those coaches that have failed to rise above Iowa, and there are now probably a couple dozen or more, were hired with the expectation that they would make that climb. Iowa was one play away from a division title with the worst offense in the country. That doesn't mean a weak program, that means we had a terrible offensive year but still came close and left with a convincing bowl win. I think we're about to see a substantial improvement on offense.
What did the coaches do in the off season. Went from an F QB to an A- to A QB; brought in at least one WR (A- to A) better than anyone on the roster last season, and maybe two. I cannot imagine that Parker would not be an upgrade from Plumb and maybe a better guard with Feth. Recover the loss of a great TE by adding another, TEU x 2.
Most coaching hires fail. Most coaches would not see Iowa as a destination, just a step, so even if we could find someone to take Iowa into 3 or 4 consecutive 10 win seasons, would he stay? If not, then back to the luck of the draw on the next, which will probably fail because most coaching hires fail.
