Analysis: Do Stars Matter in Recruiting and Where Does Iowa Fit In?

[hawkeyebob62]

I just don't remember it being this bad for any one year. On a big team, no way they don't have a couple of guys who can bring it.

Agreed. And after Ron Colluzzi, did we forget how to get Grad Transfer punters?

 

[HawkGold]

Agreed. And after Ron Colluzzi, did we forget how to get Grad Transfer punters?

Oh wow I forgot those days.

 

[revkev73]

Don't doubt the staff works hard with recruiting. I know a lot of sales people that worked hard also but that didn't mean they achieved above average results.......have to have the people skills. I believe Kirk recognized the need for more resources to give to recruiting a few years ago and made some good moves with a couple of the people he brought in. Those people seem to have brought with them some new ideas and better relationship building skills to the staff.

It's my belief that Iowa can do better and should set the bar a little higher at times. Enjoyed the article.

If this is true, which I would guess, it is.

Then we have hit two grand slams with our head coaches this year.

#1 Kirk has realized that recruiting needs to be a priority.

#2 Fran has realized that coaching and playing defense helps wins games.

Damn, we are blessed at the University of Iowa

 

[deanvogs]

The teams and fans that say stars don't matter are the ones that can't recruit top talent. If the Ferentz clan could recruit well, then we would be making a big deal about how they can get 4 star players. Since they can't, well stars don't matter here at Iowa. Look no further than our MAC level wide receiver group and you can see stars matter.

Recruiting rankings are not the end all beat all. From '13-'17 recruiting class rankings here is top 11 best average recruiting rankings. In parenthesis is the total wins from '13-now

1) Bama (78)
2) Ohio St. (74)
3) Florida St. (59)
4) LSU (54)
5) Georgia (60)
6) USC (53)
7) Auburn (53)
8) Notre Dame (53)
9) Texas A&M (49)
10) Florida (44)
11) Clemson (76)

Lets look at the next tier

12) Tennessee (39)
13) Oklahoma (65)
14) UCLA (41)
15) Miami (49)
16) Ole Miss (43)
16) Texas (41)
18) Michigan (50)
18) S. Carolina (43)
20) Oregon (53)
21) Penn St. (52)
22) Nebraska (41)
23) Miss. St. (49)
24) Stanford (58)
25) Arkansas (31)
25 Kentucky (36)

I don't see a super high correlation with winning and recruiting rankings in the teens and twenties. As a matter of fact only OU, Standford and Oregon have more wins over the last 5 years than Iowa does in the teams ranked from #12-#26.

Iowa comes in at #49 in these average ratings from '13-17. Yet from '13-now Iowa has 52 wins and that is the same or more than 14 of the top 25 recruiting teams.

Sure we all know that the top, top classes of the blue bloods rankings means a whole lot. You aren't going to win a national title unless you consistently rank in the top 15 in the recruiting rankings. That said, you can have an average recruiting ranking of #49 and you can still out produce over 1/2 of the teams that are recruiting at a top 25 level.

So while you continue to bash away at our recruiting, you just keep sticking your dumb ass head in the sand when looking at what Iowa is actually doing on the field compared to the rest of college football programs.

Rankings for the classes comes from Rivals: https://n.rivals.com/news/rivals-top-50-recruiting-teams-of-the-past-five-years

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

The teams and fans that say stars don't matter are the ones that can't recruit top talent. If the Ferentz clan could recruit well, then we would be making a big deal about how they can get 4 star players. Since they can't, well stars don't matter here at Iowa. Look no further than our MAC level wide receiver group and you can see stars matter.

Stars matter. But your crap is insufferable.

 

[CP87]

Agree on the excitement of Hawks in the NFL. Its getting to the point where you even have to be selective in which games to watch there are so many. Definitely a fan!

As to the quality of recruits, its simply the offer. Its a kicking of the tires to see if any interest is shown back. Invest a little more manpower into the efforts to mail, email or call a recruit in hopes of a response. Obviously the large majority wont be interested. We will still put most of our resources in the kids that show interest back. Possibly a few more of the big star kids will show interest. We arent talking a ton more i wouldnt think, but a handful? You tell me. How big of a difference would 3 Epenesa's make instead of just 1? Ill take 3 please. And a coke. Yes, id like those players super sized as well.

I think they do kick a lot of tires, the just don't make an official offer if the individual does not reciprocate at all, so you don't hear about it. Would it make a difference if instead of just reaching out to say, "What do you think about Iowa?" they instead reached out and said, "Here is an offer." I doubt it, if the kid isn't interest, he isn't interested.

I think the only way you are going to make more headway on those individuals is to go all out and bombard them with love. But doing that has to come at the expense of your other recruiting efforts. Of course we would all love 3 AJs, but what if that meant we dropped to lower-level talent at 75% of the other positions? Is it worth the tradeoff?

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Oh wow I forgot those days.

Sadly, just two seasons ago

 

[proudhawkfan21]

I think they do kick a lot of tires, the just don't make an official offer if the individual does not reciprocate at all, so you don't hear about it. Would it make a difference if instead of just reaching out to say, "What do you think about Iowa?" they instead reached out and said, "Here is an offer." I doubt it, if the kid isn't interest, he isn't interested.

I think the only way you are going to make more headway on those individuals is to go all out and bombard them with love. But doing that has to come at the expense of your other recruiting efforts. Of course we would all love 3 AJs, but what if that meant we dropped to lower-level talent at 75% of the other positions? Is it worth the tradeoff?

I dont think that they do....in everything they have ever said in interviews they tell you they recruit a certain type of kid and they dont go toe to toe with the big boys if they dont have to.

 

[westender]

No worries. I think we all agree that schedule matters.

Iowa misses Ohio State, Michigan State and Michigan next year and gets Nebraska and Northwestern at home.

Wisconsin plays at Iowa, Northwestern, Penn State and Michigan.

That should be an advantage for the Hawkeyes.

BTW, you guys all are five starts in my book. Well, most of you.

Some on here are 6 stars cause their Mommas told them so.

 

[oldhawk12]

The elephant in the room is why Iowa cannot land, doesn’t try to land or whatever...skill position 4-star talent. Wideouts, running backs, qb’s. Iowa has proven over and over they can develop no stars at nearly all other positions but it’s the skill position players that win the intersectional games, big bowl games and would help set things up more for a more national competing program. Finding answers to the skill position dilemma is the million dollar riddle of kf.

 

[Ree4]

The elephant in the room is why Iowa cannot land, doesn’t try to land or whatever...skill position 4-star talent. Wideouts, running backs, qb’s. Iowa has proven over and over they can develop no stars at nearly all other positions but it’s the skill position players that win the intersectional games, big bowl games and would help set things up more for a more national competing program. Finding answers to the skill position dilemma is the million dollar riddle of kf.

Didn't we just get a 4 star RB last weekend?

 

[Hawkfnntn]

I would blindly take the top 20 4 stars over the class Kirk gets every time and we would have a better team almost every time. That means stars matter. But if you offered me the bottom 20 4 stars over the class Kirk signs, I would probably still take them but it would be a tougher decision. That means stars aren't the only thing that matter. The people who are at the extreme end of either side of this debate are both wrong. That's true with most debates tho.

Yeah it's just so situational. When players like Jewel go from 2 star nobody to performing like a 5 star it just skews things. Or when you get a top 4 or 5 star kid that turns into a bust. And of course QB play that's always huge. A guy like Stanley probably wasn't even ranked what he would have been if he'd have put himself out there more. So much of that can be just going to those camps and letting coaches see you. His recruitment was really under the radar and unique for a QB.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

The elephant in the room is why Iowa cannot land, doesn’t try to land or whatever...skill position 4-star talent. Wideouts, running backs, qb’s. Iowa has proven over and over they can develop no stars at nearly all other positions but it’s the skill position players that win the intersectional games, big bowl games and would help set things up more for a more national competing program. Finding answers to the skill position dilemma is the million dollar riddle of kf.

This is a really recent thing if you want to say WR and RB play is down. We've had some darn good complimentary play in the past. If you go to DJK, McNutt, Davis, Even Tevaun Smith was pretty good. Vandeberg played way above his star count. We've had guys like KMM play better than his stars. Style of play/play calling has a lot to do with things too. We probably won't ever have a superstar WR because even if we got one we wouldn't use him in that way enough to find out if he could be one. TEs and RBs on the other hand...