You make some very valid points, especially like your last paragraph. Not enough attention is paid to the fact that we don't have to go to the portal much. Retention is huge. Throw out teams that lose/change the head coach. Look at Nebraska this year. Scrambling. We don't have to do that, which is a big advantage and builds consistency.
Active Iowa Seems to be playing Money Ball in the Portal
- Thread starter NorthKCHawk
- Start date
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
Spot on. Well done.
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
I did not say we did not have any success in the portal. I feel we have not done a good job of filling key needs when required.
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
Respectfully, not seeing it.
Here is a link to the portal history.
2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
247sports.com
Last edited:
From Stewart Mandel's latest mailbag: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/69...wrong-miami-recruiting-stars-mandels-mailbag/
It’s not that the recruiting analysts have gotten worse at assigning star ratings; it’s that those ratings should really come with an expiration date at this point. Once a guy goes in the portal after his first two years, what does it matter whether he was a three-star or a five-star coming out of high school? Everyone now has new, fresher data.
Take Indiana’s undersized cornerback D’Angelo Ponds, who, as Bruce Feldman wrote Tuesday, only had one P5 offer, from Syracuse, at the time he committed to Cignetti at James Madison. He immediately “proved the doubters wrong” his first year at JMU, earning Freshman All-America honors while ranking 11th nationally with 15 passes defended.
And yet, when he went in the portal, he was still ranked behind 83 other cornerbacks, well behind guys such as Denver Harris, a former five-star who was suspended for parts of his first two seasons at Texas A&M and LSU and played sparingly for them. Perhaps that should have been a red flag, because Harris has since bounced to UTSA, where he made three starts, and UNLV, where he barely played. But the people who do those transfer rankings still tend to default to potential over production.
But not Cignetti. His lineup is full of guys who had proven themselves at mid-level P4 schools (Cal’s Fernando Mendoza, Maryland’s Roman Hemby) or G5 schools (JMU’s Ponds and Elijah Sarratt, Kent State’s Stephen Daley) by the time they got to Indiana, yet they still get counted simplistically as “not four stars.”
The one nit you can pick with Iowa's strategy: we have focused a lot more on FCS schools, not G6. But I think that is the reality of not having a Mark Cuban in your corner.
It’s not that the recruiting analysts have gotten worse at assigning star ratings; it’s that those ratings should really come with an expiration date at this point. Once a guy goes in the portal after his first two years, what does it matter whether he was a three-star or a five-star coming out of high school? Everyone now has new, fresher data.
Take Indiana’s undersized cornerback D’Angelo Ponds, who, as Bruce Feldman wrote Tuesday, only had one P5 offer, from Syracuse, at the time he committed to Cignetti at James Madison. He immediately “proved the doubters wrong” his first year at JMU, earning Freshman All-America honors while ranking 11th nationally with 15 passes defended.
And yet, when he went in the portal, he was still ranked behind 83 other cornerbacks, well behind guys such as Denver Harris, a former five-star who was suspended for parts of his first two seasons at Texas A&M and LSU and played sparingly for them. Perhaps that should have been a red flag, because Harris has since bounced to UTSA, where he made three starts, and UNLV, where he barely played. But the people who do those transfer rankings still tend to default to potential over production.
But not Cignetti. His lineup is full of guys who had proven themselves at mid-level P4 schools (Cal’s Fernando Mendoza, Maryland’s Roman Hemby) or G5 schools (JMU’s Ponds and Elijah Sarratt, Kent State’s Stephen Daley) by the time they got to Indiana, yet they still get counted simplistically as “not four stars.”
The one nit you can pick with Iowa's strategy: we have focused a lot more on FCS schools, not G6. But I think that is the reality of not having a Mark Cuban in your corner.
Respectfully, not seeing it.
Here is a link to the portal history.
Reviewing this data from 2020 to-date, the in-bound transfers who made little to no impact seem to outweigh the in-bound players who stepped in and made an impact.2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
I draw a much different conclusion. Here is a list of who we got from the portal, using the 247 site, and which guys contributed vs. not.
*guys that earned at least HM all-B1G honors at Iowa
note: players from NAIA or CC not on the list as they are not on the 247 site, so this excludes players like Seth Anderson, Hayden Large, Kaden Wetjen
2019: Charlie Jones* and Michael Sleep-Dalton*
2020: Coy Cronk and Jack Heflin (Cronk started the first 2 games, and then was sidelinted by injuries)
2021: Xavior Williams (ST contributor all season, started 1 game at SS)
2022: Steven Stillianos (played in 8 games his first season, played in all games his 2nd season, starting 8, won the coaches appreciation award on O)
2023: Rusty Feth*, Nick Jackson*
2024: Brendan Sullivan, Jacob Gill
2025: Mark Gronowski, Jeremy Heckliniski (projecting), Hank Brown (projecting), Sam Phillips, Bryce Hawthorne, Jonah Pace
Guys who didn't contribute, or who outright stunk but were still put into important positions to contribute:
2019: Oliver Martin, Jack Combs (walk-on from C. Mich)
2020: Matt Lorbeck (walk-on from N. Ill)
2021: no one
2022: no one
2023: Cade McNamara, Deacon Hill, Kaleb Brown, Daijon Parker
2024: Jackson Stratton (almost inclined to count him as a win, he was added simply for QB room depth and he won both games he started for us); Cade Borud (walk-on)
2025: Bryce George, Shahid Barros, Ty Hudkins (did not play, but has 3 years of eligibility left)
My conclusions:
We have used the portal to build depth, and we have been overall successful in this regard.
When we have really needed it (e.g. QB), we are not batting a great percentage.
We have been burned by some bad injury luck (Cronk, McNamara), but those guys came in with injury history, so it was buyer beware.
P4 castoffs who left because of lack of playing time have not panned out: Oliver Martin, Cade McNamara, Deacon Hill, Kaleb Brown (jury out on Hank Brown and Jeremy Hecklinski).
Guys from lower-levels have made up most of the contributors.
Guys that came in with multiple years of eligibility were generally much more impactful AFTER their first year at Iowa.
It feels like we are using all of this experience to build the optimal portal strategy for Iowa moving forward, and they seem to be executing that strategy this off-season.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
That's not the analysis as to whether Iowa is doing well or not in the portal. First, as 87 has demonstrated, We have had some monster successes in the portal. Kids who have had huge successes at Iowa and a number of them are now in the NFL.Respectfully, not seeing it.
Here is a link to the portal history.
Reviewing this data from 2020 to-date, the in-bound transfers who made little to no impact seem to outweigh the in-bound players who stepped in and made an impact.2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
And, measuring success is not as black and white and you suggest. There are two bucket you are ignoring. Guys who came in and could not contribute because of injury. How can the coaches know who will get injured and who will stay healthy? Even if there is some injury history there, it is a total crapshoot on when a guy blows a knee. The third bucket is guys that were brought in purely for depth and bodies. We can bag on guys like Hill and Stratton as not very good, but they both started games and won games when the front line QBs were injured.
I also agree with 87 that Iowa is learning how the portal best suits them, and is seemingly moving away from the one and done guys and castoffs from larger programs, and focusing on guys from smaller schools with multiple years of eligibility. Sage strategy backed up by 6 years of experience.
@SCHawkeye2 , I take your point that we have had relatively few homeruns, but there also haven't been a lot of guys we have invested heavily in who haven't panned out. Really, it has been McNamara for sure, and then who else? Hard to know as we don't know how much someone like Kaleb Brown was given.
So, I think your argument (correct me if I am wrong) is we need to take more big swings at proven P4 talent, like Nick Marsh or Koi Perich. That might be right. But it also comes with downside risk. Getting guys like that means one of 2 things:
We aren't going to have as much money to retain current players. That would increase the risk of alienating guys on the roster, losing guys, and losing stability and culture.
OR
Instead of brining in a dozen B's, we have to bring in 2 A's and 10 C's.
Going after a couple big dogs may be worth the risk, I do not think that is a crazy argument. But it isn't a sure thing, and the Iowa staff definitely doesn't think that is the best way to make this team successful. Their approach is clearly a strategy, not a team scrambling for fallbacks after all of their big swings were whiffs.
So, I think your argument (correct me if I am wrong) is we need to take more big swings at proven P4 talent, like Nick Marsh or Koi Perich. That might be right. But it also comes with downside risk. Getting guys like that means one of 2 things:
We aren't going to have as much money to retain current players. That would increase the risk of alienating guys on the roster, losing guys, and losing stability and culture.
OR
Instead of brining in a dozen B's, we have to bring in 2 A's and 10 C's.
Going after a couple big dogs may be worth the risk, I do not think that is a crazy argument. But it isn't a sure thing, and the Iowa staff definitely doesn't think that is the best way to make this team successful. Their approach is clearly a strategy, not a team scrambling for fallbacks after all of their big swings were whiffs.
And some of those depth pieces were walk-ons, so they weren't even taking up a scholarship, let alone NIL money.
I would be curious as to how we compare with other P4 conference schools. No one is going to bat 1000% and my guess is we are at least comparable if not better than many schools.Respectfully, not seeing it.
Here is a link to the portal history.
Reviewing this data from 2020 to-date, the in-bound transfers who made little to no impact seem to outweigh the in-bound players who stepped in and made an impact.2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
2019 College Football Transfer Portal Position Rankings
Fryowa
Administrator
Also the strategy used by Cignetti.
