If you're going to claim that a Knight was a typical medieval infantry instead of being elite cavalry, and that most soldiers were not poorly trained conscripts then I suggest you get your sources together and completely and totally rewrite all the relevant wikipedia articles:
Medieval warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Infantry in the Middle Ages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I do hope that Wikipedia isn't your main source for historical information.
And I'm certainly going to claim that most medieval soldiers weren't poorly trained conscripts. Most were professionals, paid and maintained at the expense of a great noble. This was preferred to a feudal levy that would serve for it's designated period (forty days, in Normandy, for example) and then start drifting off home. The English recruited by Commission of Array, the French by Ban d'Ordonnance, and in Italy mostly by Condotta. Exceptions to that general rule can be found, usually in the form of civic militias which have their own training regimes that, if not leaving them equal to professional soldiers, would make them something more than barely trained conscripts.
Knights were usually mounted cavalry, occasionally heavy infantry and had a leadership role, more comparable to officers, Rangers and Cav squadrons on the modern battlefield. There is a reason that Knight is a PC class and footman is not: superior training. Armies aren't filled with thousands of people with PC classes.
Medieval armies often have thousands of 'knights' in them. Arguably of course some of those would have been senior squires and other professional men-at-arms, rather than proper knights, but the training would hardly be different.
Also, the Spartans were something of an outlier in terms of military skill. There is a reason that thousands of years later the term is still synonymous with martial prowess. I would hardly call them typical soldiers of the era. The Roman Legions, at their peak, were indeed highly trained and in some ways are still model for modern armies, but that was only at their peak instead of the bulk of the later Empire when their quality declined sharply.
I could come up with other examples. The Ten Thousand, the Sacred Band of Thebes, Alexander's Companions, the Varangian Guard, the Bucellarii, the White Company, the Catalan Grand Company, the stradioti, the Bande Nere...
The typical medieval infantryman: a spearman or archer serving only out of feudal obligation (i.e. a conscript) with access to poor medical care and token training, is far inferior to a professionally trained, modern soldier with modern immunizations, comprehensive physical training, and a focus on small-unit tactics over large massed battles. I'll stand by my assertion that at typical medieval peasant conscript footman, would be a Warrior 1, while a typical modern soldier would be a Warrior 3 or 4 in comparison.
I think you're being very generous to the Iraqi army there. Try comparing full-time professionals from the middle ages with full-time professionals from the present day, and medieval 'conscripts' with modern conscripts.
.
