Any more recruits this week??

C

clim33

Well-Known Member
We have some nice prospects on the board and its been a busy week? Do you think we get any more?

I kind of hope we get the guys from Arizona......QB and DL

Be nice to get the good RB from Penn too


ANyone else have any hopes for this weekend?
 
Garmon or Lynch? I still like Garmon a bit more,but either will do.
Sheffield,the juco dlineman is much needed.
I honestly think that Iowa can be a sleeper in the league next year if they can only fill that d-line hole somehow.
 
I care less about WHO they sign than the number they sign.
If its less than 22-23, this staff just isn't trying anymore.
 
treychase said:
Not a joke, none of us know if any of these guys are going to be any good.
But I do know that the odds of having more good players increases simply by signing more.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting they oversign, or do you just have no grasp on how recruiting works? Assuming it's the former; the Big Ten (Iowa included) should be proud of their long-standing policy of not oversigning. It's snakeoil salesmanship to impressionable young men that is callous and manipulative and reserved for the likes of Msrs. Saban and Chizik. We should never do it. Besides, there are rules going into effect prohibiting it.

Assuming it's the latter, and you are under the misimpression that we can just have as many players on our team as we want, that is not the case. We are limited to 85 scholarships, and we only sign as many players as attrition allows. In this year's case, in the ballpark of 21-23.
 
wundergrape said:
Are you suggesting they oversign, or do you just have no grasp on how recruiting works? Assuming it's the former; the Big Ten (Iowa included) should be proud of their long-standing policy of not oversigning. It's snakeoil salesmanship to impressionable young men that is callous and manipulative and reserved for the likes of Msrs. Saban and Chizik. We should never do it. Besides, there are rules going into effect prohibiting it.

Assuming it's the latter, and you are under the misimpression that we can just have as many players on our team as we want, that is not the case. We are limited to 85 scholarships, and we only sign as many players as attrition allows. In this year's case, in the ballpark of 21-23.
Click to expand...

Not advocating oversigning at all.
But I am advocating signing a number that is representative of reality.
Signing 18-21 is EXACTLY why Iowa has so many freakin' walk-ons on the two deep.
You say sign 21-23. OK, how many will see senior day? History says MAYBE 18 of those.
Do that for 4 years and you have 72 scholarship players. Thats 13 short of the 85 or 15% less than what is allowed by rule!
On what freakin' planet would you PURPOSELY handicap yourself like that?

Its just stupid, there is not one single rational reason to sign less than 23-25 every single year. Its borderline incompetence in my opinion.
 
treychase said:
Not advocating oversigning at all.
But I am advocating signing a number that is representative of reality.
Signing 18-21 is EXACTLY why Iowa has so many freakin' walk-ons on the two deep.
You say sign 21-23. OK, how many will see senior day? History says MAYBE 18 of those.
Do that for 4 years and you have 72 scholarship players. Thats 13 short of the 85 or 15% less than what is allowed by rule!
On what freakin' planet would you PURPOSELY handicap yourself like that?

Its just stupid, there is not one single rational reason to sign less than 23-25 every single year. Its borderline incompetence in my opinion.
Click to expand...


You do not understand how it works. Iowa has 65 on scholly going into next year. They are limited to 85. 85-65 = 20.
They are allowed to sign 20 recruits. Its math.
 
treychase said:
Not advocating oversigning at all.
But I am advocating signing a number that is representative of reality.
Signing 18-21 is EXACTLY why Iowa has so many freakin' walk-ons on the two deep.
You say sign 21-23. OK, how many will see senior day? History says MAYBE 18 of those.
Do that for 4 years and you have 72 scholarship players. Thats 13 short of the 85 or 15% less than what is allowed by rule!
On what freakin' planet would you PURPOSELY handicap yourself like that?

Its just stupid, there is not one single rational reason to sign less than 23-25 every single year. Its borderline incompetence in my opinion.
Click to expand...


So, you really don't know what you're talking about. I suspected this might be the case. We can't just go out and sign as many players as we want. Only the number that attrition allows. Sorry, champ.
 
JHHawk said:
You do not understand how it works. Iowa has 65 on scholly going into next year. They are limited to 85. 85-65 = 20.
They are allowed to sign 20 recruits. Its math.
Click to expand...

How many of those 65 are former walk-ons, now on scholarship?
I'm not against the occasional walk-on that contributes getting a scholarship, its been a big part of Iowa's program, but when you have 10-12walk-ons on the two deep, there's a problem.

I repeat, I'm not for oversigning, but I am FOR signing a realistic number that gets you near a full roster of scholarship players. Count up the players that have left early for whatever reason over the last 4 yrs; it basically equals one class! No wonder there's no depth on this roster.

On a side note, the B1G days of standing on its pulpit are over. Three of its flagship schools have been involved in some of the most disgusting things any of us have ever seen. No one can ever say the B1G is morally above the SEC anymore, it holds ZERO water and makes you look like a fool. If the B1G wanted to regain that "moral" superiority they would have already kicked Penn St out of the B1G. What the B1G has told us is that they're going to stand by a university that enabled child rape. That's the conference Iowa is part of. You can't sugar coat it, that's what it is. So I don't want to hear anymore of the gibberish nonsense about how the B1G is morally superior or follows stricter rules because its garbage, they support a school that enabled child rape. The end.
 
wundergrape said:
So, you really don't know what you're talking about. I suspected this might be the case. We can't just go out and sign as many players as we want. Only the number that attrition allows. Sorry, champ.
Click to expand...

Boy it must be nice to live with your head in the sand.
 
treychase said:
How many of those 65 are former walk-ons, now on scholarship?
I'm not against the occasional walk-on that contributes getting a scholarship, its been a big part of Iowa's program, but when you have 10-12walk-ons on the two deep, there's a problem.

I repeat, I'm not for oversigning, but I am FOR signing a realistic number that gets you near a full roster of scholarship players. Count up the players that have left early for whatever reason over the last 4 yrs; it basically equals one class! No wonder there's no depth on this roster.

On a side note, the B1G days of standing on its pulpit are over. Three of its flagship schools have been involved in some of the most disgusting things any of us have ever seen. No one can ever say the B1G is morally above the SEC anymore, it holds ZERO water and makes you look like a fool. If the B1G wanted to regain that "moral" superiority they would have already kicked Penn St out of the B1G. What the B1G has told us is that they're going to stand by a university that enabled child rape. That's the conference Iowa is part of. You can't sugar coat it, that's what it is. So I don't want to hear anymore of the gibberish nonsense about how the B1G is morally superior or follows stricter rules because its garbage, they support a school that enabled child rape. The end.
Click to expand...


Here is the list of walkons in the two deeps.
Staggs
White
Tobin
Derby
Donatell
Nardo
Sleeper
Kreiter
Meyer
Guthrie.

How many are taking a scholarship that could be used next year?
Tobin,Sleeper and Derby? Not sure. I guess to me,if a guy has earned a starting position,he should be rewarded. Maybe not.

And as far as moral superiority of the Big Ten over the SEC...in terms of tactics used to further their football programs...sorry,but the Big Ten stands tall over the SEC in academics, cheating to obtain recruits,and oversigning. You just do not get it...it is the culture down there to cheat. In the Big Ten it is an occasional bump,but down there it is accepted as the price of doing business. They are sophisticated at it because they have been at it for so long.
The PSU scandal is not about securing football recruits or establishing an edge on the rest of college football programs thru nefarious methods.
It is an isolated case,that like the Syracuse case,does not indict a whole league or even the whole school.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top