2016 Recruiting Is Actually Going Worse Than 2014 and 2015?

There is a new nuance to 2016 recruiting and that is the increased NCAA academic standards. Three things can happen with 2016 freshmen, they are qualified to practice and play in games, they are only able to practice or they are not allowed to even practice. This is going to shrink the size of the pool of freshmen who can practice and play. There are going to be quite a few players with more than two stars that will be going the juco route or just saying the heck with going to college. I am assuming the coaching staff is identifying players that will meet the new criteria.
 
iowalaw said:
I'm all for getting fired up over solid commits, but expectations by hawk fans are hitting record lows this year. The numbers are the numbers. The new recruiting coordinator and the sparkling new facilities might have got a slew of commits over the past few weeks (a few of them had a couple of BCS offers), but the objective facts state that our recent recruiting has been quantity over quality.

Avg stars in 2016: 2.71
Avg stars in 2015: 2.71 (ranked 58th in the country...nearly last in conference)
Avg stars in 2014: 2.79 (ranked 59th in the country...nearly last in conference)
Avg stars in 2013: 2.81 (ranked 53rd in the country...nearly last in conference)
Avg stars in 2012: 2.96 (ranked 43rd in the country...8th in the conference)
Avg stars in 2011: 3.0 (ranked 30th in the country...4th in the conference)
Avg stars in 2010: 3.0 (ranked 42nd in the country...7th in the conference)

Based on the numbers, this is shaping up to tie last year for our worst recruiting year in the past 7 years. Any questions? Any trends noticed?
Click to expand...

Haha....so now you completely change your argument. Iowa is ranked #29 and #30 in rivals and 247, that is pretty freaking good. Yet all you want to do is bash all the recruits and pretend this year is going horribly....everytime you post you reveal your true troll colors.
 
deanvogs said:
Haha....so now you completely change your argument. Iowa is ranked #29 and #30 in rivals and 247, that is pretty freaking good. Yet all you want to do is bash all the recruits and pretend this year is going horribly....everytime you post you reveal your true troll colors.
Click to expand...

And #34 on Scout: http://www.scout.com/college/iowa/a.z?s=8&p=9&c=14&yr=2016

Last year: #51

What was the OP's point again? Oh, it's right there in the title.
 
Seriously, are billdo and dean children? Are they really ignorant to the fact that the number of commits dictates recruiting rankings until teams reach 20 commits?:confused: If Alabama has just two 5 star commits, but NIU has ten 2 star commits, rating services would rank NIU higher. The only criteria to rank schools early on is avg star rating per commit. Or did you really think that Iowa, with it's 15 commits averaging 2.7 stars, has a better class than:

#41 ASU (avg 3.38, including three 4 stars, but only have 8 commits)
#49 Texas (avg 3.5 stars, including three 4 stars, but only have 6 commits)
#52 Arizona (avg 3.33 stars, including two 4 stars, but only have 6 commits)
#58 Washington (avg 3.75 stars, including three 4 stars, but only have 4 commits)
 
iowalaw said:
Seriously, are billdo and dean children? Are they really ignorant to the fact that the number of commits dictates recruiting rankings until teams reach 20 commits?:confused: If Alabama has just two 5 star commits, but NIU has ten 2 star commits, rating services would rank NIU higher. The only criteria to rank schools early on is avg star rating per commit. Or did you really think that Iowa, with it's 15 commits averaging 2.7 stars, has a better class than:

#41 ASU (avg 3.38, including three 4 stars, but only have 8 commits)
#49 Texas (avg 3.5 stars, including three 4 stars, but only have 6 commits)
#52 Arizona (avg 3.33 stars, including two 4 stars, but only have 6 commits)
#58 Washington (avg 3.75 stars, including three 4 stars, but only have 4 commits)
Click to expand...

Talk about children, you are acting like one. You are the one who used recruiting rankings to begin this thread dipsh!t. I mean you talked about how Iowa was 12th, and it's verbals didn't have other P5 offers. Welp since that dipsh!t argument has fallen to crap, now you start quoting Avg. star rankings (which has never, ever been how classes are ranked).
 
Let me also add that you have to be either a complete troll, or just a complete idiot to think what the OP is saying. The recruiting so far this year is light years ahead of where it was at last year, and like I said only a Troll or an idiot can't see this (Iowalaw is probably both of these, not just one exclusively).
 
iowalaw said:
Seriously, are billdo and dean children? Are they really ignorant to the fact that the number of commits dictates recruiting rankings until teams reach 20 commits?:confused: If Alabama has just two 5 star commits, but NIU has ten 2 star commits, rating services would rank NIU higher. The only criteria to rank schools early on is avg star rating per commit. Or did you really think that Iowa, with it's 15 commits averaging 2.7 stars, has a better class than:

#41 ASU (avg 3.38, including three 4 stars, but only have 8 commits)
#49 Texas (avg 3.5 stars, including three 4 stars, but only have 6 commits)
#52 Arizona (avg 3.33 stars, including two 4 stars, but only have 6 commits)
#58 Washington (avg 3.75 stars, including three 4 stars, but only have 4 commits)
Click to expand...

Most of our recruits have been and always will be 3 star ones. That's not new and we're always going to be around 2.71 because, while we might get one or two 4 stars a class, we'll also get a few more 2 stars. Sometimes, our classes around a 2.71 average will work out and other times they won't.

So Arizona and ASU are about .6 higher than us. Does that really even offer any significant predictor of greater success? They may have 4 4-stars and we may end up with 2 and we could have about the same amount of 3-star guys and is it really a given that their classes are better than ours?
 
Stars count in how rating services go about their rankings as do the number of verbals. Iowa enjoys their degree of gain in the rankings recently primarily due to the number of verbals that have brought aboard. As the recruiting season plays out and more programs come closer to filling their allotment the number of verbals will have a lessor affect on the rankings than now.

Iowa can enjoy their position currently but will need some 4 star guys to hold #30 or better by next Feb.
 
You guys do realize the only reason we are ranked so high is that we have more recruits than most schools at this time? As those other schools fill their classes Iowa will once again drop to near the bottom of the Big 10. As pointed out earlier, the average rating per player is actually lower than in recent years - and those were poor recruiting years.
As of today, of the 11 June recruits, only 5 had another Power 5 offer and only two of those had more than 1 or 2 offers. It appears that we are just taking the low offer kids earlier than we have in the past.
 
daverhawk said:
You guys do realize the only reason we are ranked so high is that we have more recruits than most schools at this time? As those other schools fill their classes Iowa will once again drop to near the bottom of the Big 10. As pointed out earlier, the average rating per player is actually lower than in recent years - and those were poor recruiting years.
As of today, of the 11 June recruits, only 5 had another Power 5 offer and only two of those had more than 1 or 2 offers. It appears that we are just taking the low offer kids earlier than we have in the past.
Click to expand...

But...at this point, '16 recruiting is better than this point than '14 & '15. They sure seem to be filling needs, except for WR. Iowa Needs to get guys early, before they potentially go up in ratings...otherwise...we have little chance of getting them.

Stars are extremely subjective and biased, these same kids would get at least a .5 bump if they went to a higher profile school.

Again, recruiting is not where we all would love, but it sure seems better by eyeball test, just my opinion
 
HawkeyeWalker said:
But...at this point, '16 recruiting is better than this point than '14 & '15. They sure seem to be filling needs, except for WR. Iowa Needs to get guys early, before they potentially go up in ratings...otherwise...we have little chance of getting them.

Stars are extremely subjective and biased, these same kids would get at least a .5 bump if they went to a higher profile school.

Again, recruiting is not where we all would love, but it sure seems better by eyeball test, just my opinion
Click to expand...

No, it really isn't. About 50% of the commits have no other high major offers. I don't care how many commits Iowa has. I care about how many good commits Iowa has. The competition apparently doesn't seem to think that many of Iowa's commits are good enough to offer.
 
Call me crazy, but there are a lot of things we can complain about regarding Iowa football. Last season, worrying about the upcoming season, the overall fall since the fake punt against Wisconsin. But to me, recruiting for 2016 isn't something we should complaining about. Could it be better? Of course, but given the circumstances, we have gotten some solid recruits and we seem to be getting some of the staff's top targets. The buzz has been more positive than in recent history. So cheer up guys, it's okay to have a few positive things happen once in awhile.
 
Yip, just added WR Darby to the mix as well, and it sounds pretty positive about adding another couple kids next Monday, one that has a UCLA and Louisville offers
 
On the bright side, at least all of the resources we are investing in recruiting in Georgia are paying off big time. Wallace had some major connections!
 
It started off slow, but it's picking up.. we've got some solid recruits the last week or two. That's can't do anything but help. A guy would think that the recent amount of commits would make more players turn there heads and look at us more, finding maybe they didn't notice something before, and now do?
 
iowalaw said:
Seriously, are billdo and dean children? Are they really ignorant to the fact that the number of commits dictates recruiting rankings until teams reach 20 commits?
Click to expand...

Since I helped develop Scout's ranking system, I'll take a wild guess and say "no".

Quantity is a factor, but not as much as you think, since 4-stars get triple the points of 3-stars, and position ranking also matters. Rivals and 247 are a little different, but all use multiple inputs. Iowa's ranking will absolutely drop if they don't land a couple 4-stars or high 3-stars, but so far there's no evidence "2016 Recruiting is Actually Going Worse Than 2014 and 2015".

http://www.scout.com/3/about-team-rankings.html and http://www.scout.com/college/iowa/a.z?s=8&p=9&c=14&yr=2016
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top