I will get crucified for this post.

[HawkAttack]

.

Well, it is one of the largest public universities. 94 out of 2,618. That's in the top 4% isn't it?

What falsehoods by the way?

How many of those universities play big-time college football though?

That's like saying we should be able to recruit as well as Alabama and Ohio State because we are bigger than UNI and North Texas. Faulty logic.

 

[tm3308]

.

All true. All I am saying is that Nebraska recruits nationally, and has for a long time.

We try. We've actually done fairly well in our efforts on the east coast, and to some degree in Florida.

I guess what I am saying, is that other midwest "undesirable, non big time" schools have managed to do this. Schools where we clearly have an advantage over. Not the Michigans, etc.

It's one thing to get recruits from all over. It's another to get good players from all over. While we get good players from the states of Ohio, and used to from Florida and Texas, we're getting the leftovers.

Nebraska, for many, many years, was doing better than that. They were getting the elite guys from Texas and Florida. Most schools like Iowa already recruit nationally (and we do plenty of it as well). But it takes more than a foothold to get in with the top dogs.

I don't think we're being outpaced by schools we shouldn't be when it comes to this.

 

[ColoradoHAWKEYE]

so golfer, did you post to get crucified? and if so, did you? seems to me the only thing of sense out of this thread is that there are a few posters on HN that are to the extreme on either side of any arguement.

oh...and the size school that the University of Iowa really is. Just remember, "perception is reality".

 

[Golfer]

How many of those universities play big-timetly above the median in enrollment college football though?



That's like saying we should be able to recruit as well as Alabama and Ohio State because we are bigger than UNI and North Texas. Faulty logic.

I cannot find a list of enrollment by FBS schools. Another poster said he found we are slightly amongst the FBS schools.

 

[racerhawk]

Is the point of this just to rant? It's fine if it is, it just doesn't need a response.

If it is more than that, and you're looking for a response - you've shot argument dead by not using reality. For example.

"Iowa is nowhere to be seen (in recruiting rankings) - at best 5th in the B1G" Out of Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska and Penn State which schools should we consistently out recruit because of the advantages that you mentioned? Would you make that argument with regard to Michigan State, Minnesota and Illinois as well?

"And we get no recruits", again an absolute that is obviously false. As you note it is one of our best recruiting classes in the last several years, and there are 30 some odd hawkeyes in the NFL including another handful likely for this upcoming draft.

"We can only get 7 wins" except last year when we had 8. Or, when we had 11 two years ago. Or 9 the year before that, or the 3 years with 10 plus wins earlier in the decade.

"Is this what's wrong with the mentality of Iowans in general? It's good enough?" If Iowans are lacking in mentality because we don't let two seasons that didn't meet expectations significantly impact us, confirms reason 8,001 I moved back to Iowa.

I can't specifically comment on the inter-workings of the program regarding Coker, but your other comments highlighted above lead me to believe that you are the type that attaches oneself to the extreme negative position regarding this program. These statements could all be true, but the remainder of your post leaves one wanting.

I think there are legitimate reasons for concern, and I don't think many reasonable fans would say that your prediction of similar results the next two years (assuming you mean that 6-8 wins per year) would be far fetched. If it bothers you that you donate money and believe that doing so entitles you to demanding results from your university on how it conducts itself and the football team on the number of qualified recruits and wins, I'd suggest you stop donating immediately. You are bound to be disenfranchised by the return on your investment.

This is a great post. I was going to write something, and then I read your post. I couldn't possibly top it.

 

[Golfer]

I cannot find a list of enrollment by FBS schools. Another poster said he found we are slightly amongst the FBS schools.

.

This is from an article in Stanford's blog, from 2010, with respects to BCS ranking, stadium capacity, and student enrollment.

Comparing Stanford's Attendance and Enrollment to the BCS Top 20 - Rule Of Tree

 

[Golfer]

Top 25 2009 College Athletic Department's Revenues:

The Twenty Five Largest College Athletic Department Budgets | Newsburglar

 

[rjbaustian]

So......it's us "farmers" that are to blame? You do know that only about 2% of Iowa is actually directly involved in agriculture right? And if that 2% probably .025% donate to Iowa. And maybe .0025? Donate to ISU..... So to be clear once again. It's the farmers fault right?

 

[DMU27]

Big Ten enrollment from Wikipedia. All students, not just undergrads. I think Michigan might be under-reported here, other places have them around 42,000. Still, this list is close enough for our purposes.

1 Ohio State 56,064
2 Minnesota 52,557
3 Penn State 44,817
4 Michigan State 43,159
5 Indiana 42,464
6 Wisconsin 42,099
7 Illinois 41,918
8 Purdue 39,637
9 Michigan 37,197
10 Iowa 30,893
11 Nebraska 24,593
12 Northwestern 14,988

Looks like we are actually outperforming what one could expect based on this.

 

[ColumbusHawk]

According to Scout.com, the number of 3* or better prospects by state for the last two years.​

1. Ohio - 176​
2. Pennsylvania - 109​
3. Michigan - 74​
4. Illinois - 73​
5. Indiana - 49​
6. Wisconsin - 18​
7. Minnesota - 12​
8. Iowa - 7​
9. Nebraska - 6​

If you don't think Iowa has over achieved under Hayden & Ferentz, your nuts.​

 

[1977Hawkeye]

Top 25 2009 College Athletic Department's Revenues:

The Twenty Five Largest College Athletic Department Budgets | Newsburglar

Granted, this is from 2007, but it should still be pretty relevant today if Barta remains the great fundraiser that everyone says he is.

I'll admit the in-state recruiting problem (and that's unfortunately not fixable), but people continually say that Iowa doesn't have the resources that other programs do. NOT TRUE. Not when basing it on athletic department budget, anyway.

 

[JHHawk]

Granted, this is from 2007, but it should still be pretty relevant today if Barta remains the great fundraiser that everyone says he is.

I'll admit the in-state recruiting problem (and that's unfortunately not fixable), but people continually say that Iowa doesn't have the resources that other programs do. NOT TRUE. Not when basing it on athletic department budget, anyway.

I rarely see Iowa fans cite lack of resources as an issue for the football program. Facilities for football have been solid,altho they do need the latest project to be completed ASAP to keep pace in the arms race.

Resources are only a factor in terms of facilities. We cannot buy recruits,unfortunately, so otherwise, recruiting comes down to some factors out of our control.
Mich.,OSU,PSU and Neb are 4 of the top 6 winningest football programs in history. Tradition is huge in college sports and recruiting. We will never catch those 4 programs in tradition...never. Wisconsin has a lot of sexy lately. So if Iowa is 5th in the league in recruiting....that is basically the best of the rest behind the legacy programs.

Delany made it clear when he split the divisions...

Tier one- Mich,OSU,PSU,Neb
tier two- Iowa, Wis, MSU
tier three- the rest.

Golfer is entitled to complain all he wants, but it does not make his observations valid...at all. Free country...bye,bye.

 

[TMH1122]

I understand some of your post. A lot of it really. I'll say this about Iowa fans, better yet I'll site an example. Sitting in Carver Hawkeye for a big game. It's a fierce game going back and forth against a conference opponent...a ranked conference opponent. You get up to cheer and get loud to try to push the home team, our Hawkeye's, when all the sudden you hear from some of the "elder" fans in the crowd, "Sit down or I'll call security, etc."...Ahhh, what?! It's a damn sporting event! If you want to sit down and watch it, then I suggest you sit in the comfy confines of your own home! That mentality may friend sums up a lot of what you see up in Iowa City.

+1... There are wayyy too many old people that don't do anything to get behind our players or support them in a competitive home game.

 

[GhostofBTT]

KF thinks he is bigger than the program and Barta is afraid to call him on it. No coach making the jack KF is can make no changes to a staff that has had circles run around it by interim coaches, first year coaches, etc. the past few years. I have no clue why so many get on Norm's case. Our D has been the only reason Iowa football is on the map today. If we had to rely on KF and KOK to win a game with offense, we would be the door mat of the big ten.

Not true. Kirk runs the program the way he wants. That doesn't mean he thinks he's "bigger than the program", it means he knows he's in charge and is does what he thinks is best.

Name one instance where Kirk put himself ahead of the team or program?

 

[Golfer]

So......it's us "farmers" that are to blame? You do know that only about 2% of Iowa is actually directly involved in agriculture right? And if that 2% probably .025% donate to Iowa. And maybe .0025? Donate to ISU..... So to be clear once again. It's the farmers fault right?

I retracted this statement somewhere in this mess. It was inappropriate.

 

[kuhntz]

You make it sounds like it's easy to win 10 football games every year. UM, OSU, PSU, MSU, NE, WI, all expect to win 9-10 games a year. they all have fans, money, good coaches, ect... ISU, PU, NW, ILL are all decent teams that expect to win 6-7 games ever year.

Sheer math says we can't all meet our expectations. Somebody has got to lose these games. We lost a few the last two years. We might lose a few the next few years. It's cyclical, it always has been, it always will be in a competitive conference.

With the team we had in 2010 and the schedule we had last year...9 wins should not have been an issue.

 

[Hawkcrush]

That post was too long, so I didn't read it. I'm prepared to crucify you just for that.

+1 If I wanted to read a novel, i'd dowload one to my kindle. More than one paragraph and my A.D.D. takes over.

 

[HawkAttack]

.

This is from an article in Stanford's blog, from 2010, with respects to BCS ranking, stadium capacity, and student enrollment.

Comparing Stanford's Attendance and Enrollment to the BCS Top 20 - Rule Of Tree

But how does that help the fact there is very little football talent in Iowa from which to recruit?

 

[sonofjim]

You make it sounds like it's easy to win 10 football games every year. UM, OSU, PSU, MSU, NE, WI, all expect to win 9-10 games a year. they all have fans, money, good coaches, ect... ISU, PU, NW, ILL are all decent teams that expect to win 6-7 games ever year.

Sheer math says we can't all meet our expectations. Somebody has got to lose these games. We lost a few the last two years. We might lose a few the next few years. It's cyclical, it always has been, it always will be in a competitive conference.

I like this post. You're exactly right. There's only so many games played in the conference each year and someone has to lose each one. Even a winless team is in every game to win. To rack up 10 or more wins you have to break a lot of wills and there are talented players on even the worst teams. The cyclical issue affects those teams who always expect 10 wins too. Just look at Michigan, Penn St., Nebraska, Texas, Florida, tOSU and Notre Dame to name a few. Iowa will cycle back and the funny thing is threads like this will be replaced by National Title talk overnight...and then it will start all over again.

 

[EyeAmHawk]

Not sure why I even want to comment on this, but there were some comments about Sally Mason that were off base. Sally Mason hires an AD to run athletics blame the AD for any shortcomings of the athletic department. She has enough to deal with running a university in the "top 4%" or whatever.. Please don't try to tell me she should prioritize the football program over 30,000 students or 10,000+ faculty and staff, and a top notch hospital.

Let's just not lose site of why there is college football or the NFL for that matter, academics.